Could Curiosity Rover Moonlight As Part of a Sample Return Mission?

1. A "retrofit package" would have huge ratio of ancillary equipment to payload, which is highly inefficient in terms of spending the agency's small and shrinking budget.

Sample return is far more efficient than any current use of NASA funds on Mars.

2. The most interesting part of Mars is (possibly wet or icy) underground, beyond the range of ultraviolet radiation, GCR and solar wind. Since Curiosity ain't fitted with a drill, this is again inefficient.

We shouldn't do interesting and valuable science on Mars because it's not the most interesting and valuable science we could do? How about you look at point 1). We either do what we can or we don't, due to budgetary constraints.

3. There are no guarantees that the "retrofit package" lands accurately within reach of the MSL.

The MSL itself tests the landing technology and its accuracy. If we can land the MSL accurately, then that's a good indication that we'll be able to land the sample return accurately as well. These problem

Source: http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdotScience/~3/SVvxR73fv9E/could-curiosity-rover-moonlight-as-part-of-a-sample-return-mission

supercross christina aguilera etta james funeral sundance film festival victoria azarenka the flintstones etta james ufc on fox