Mark Tapley wrote: I take it that all the data returned uses well docmented formats on paper? I got thinking that some data was lost from early 1970's because nobody could un-encode the mag tapes. It is a good thing this about computers, I was expecting D&D type dwarfs. Ben alias woodelf. PS. I still have to grumble at the US and the captive politics that don't permit free access to space. Is the project pluto project classified? The whole purpose of knowlage is that is you can learn from mistakes. The biggest mistake I see off hand is this is *NOT* a long range plan. Send me all the design data I am sure to honest comments about the design. I am no egg-head but even I can see that the problem still stems from the fact the *EARTH* has no re-usable (unmanned) cargo shuttle to space. The launch 'rocket' still I suspect limits you to '60's payloads thus I don't see much of a change in what kind of mission to the moon & planets are used. I suspect you all fight over this years budget, and nothing gets built except what the dictator of budget feels is most important for the ego of the USA. Reusable techology I belive is the way to with any space-program with a long range goal. This starts with rocket fuel and ends with electronic components since someday one must depend on something other than the earth for repair and replacement parts. Now that the probe to pluto is mostly built, why not try a design using 1970's ideas like the movie 2001 and see just where NASA has made a wrong turn in single mission projects.