I would add that NASA has probably done some marketing studies on what constitutes a "minimum operating window." So long as the rover can operate effectively for at least this long, the cost of the mission would be justified. This means long enough to send back all these cool pictures and enough data to determine if water had existed on Mars.
Beyond this window, you reach a point of diminishing returns. My guess is that the solar panels without dust-cleaning gadgets already gives a "good enough" window. If so, it does not make sense to shoulder the additional risks posed by the gadgets.
- buffnerd
Slashdot Mirror
I would add that NASA has probably done some marketing studies on what constitutes a "minimum operating window." So long as the rover can operate effectively for at least this long, the cost of the mission would be justified. This means long enough to send back all these cool pictures and enough data to determine if water had existed on Mars. Beyond this window, you reach a point of diminishing returns. My guess is that the solar panels without dust-cleaning gadgets already gives a "good enough" window. If so, it does not make sense to shoulder the additional risks posed by the gadgets. - buffnerd