UK: Spirit 'Far More Complex' Than Beagle 2

http://www.news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2370867 ^

[medscribe]

Is this a good time to tell the Brits "you get what you pay for?"

[farmfriend]

space ping

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
11	Tennessee	255.00	7	36.43	317	0.80	81.00	9

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[Orbital Velocity]

Obviously this is an embarassement to the Europeans, as their failure has been highly publicized.

[FreedomCalls]

And to remind them that their £140 million is money down the drain with absolutely nothing to show for it, whereas our $820 million will actually accomplish something.

[Clara Lou]

I'd go with thumper's mom's advice: If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. [RE your comment: Obviously, they've figured that out all by themselves.]

[sd-joe]

The disparity in the price tags alone is enough to raise a few eyebrows.

Yeah, when we tried to do it cheap, we lost two landers also. Cheap buys you absolutely nothing.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Nothing to show for it? They put an orbiter around mars that is loaded with scientific equipment. In fact, they will glean much more data from the orbiter than Beagle was going to give. Not bad for a first mission. All this idiotic taunting and acting like this is a football game is silly, its science, there is room for everyone.

[Orbital Velocity]

And to think we have another lander going in on the 24th!

[Johnny_Cipher]

The apparent loss of Beagle 2 and its science is not a happy thing for anyone. And, I consider myself as patriotic an American as anybody else.

Having said that, the tone of this article certainly smacks of defensiveness and a smattering of envy. There's a very good reason why Joe Schmo can't fly his converted pickup truck to the Moon or Mars to catch the view whenever he feels like it - its hard work to get there and to design and build a suitable craft for the job. Heck, even NASA and the JPL have had their share of failure in this endeavor - its an occupational hazard.

In terms of GNP and national wealth, the countries of the European Union (which Britain is a part) certainly have the wherewithal to come together and do great things in space. Lack of vision, not of money, must certainly be examined as the root cause for Beagle 2's failure.

If the views in this article truly represent the thinking of the British government, then my advice to them is to stop whining and start uniting, organizing, and building.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Yup! Some folks think science is a zero sum game, I'd be happy as hell if any nation sent a craft to mars.

[bolobaby]

Let's not count that chicken until it hatches, eh?

[e_engineer]

And to remind them that their £140 million is money down the drain with absolutely nothing to show for it, whereas our $820 million will actually accomplish something.

Their orbiter is still in orbit, and will return valuable data, so it's not a total loss. In addition, there may be some way to route communications from the 2 NASA rovers through their orbiter to increase the overall bandwidth back to Earth.

[Orbital Velocity]

Don't we have two orbiters already in orbit? MGS and Odeyssey? It's my understanding Spirit is in contact with both of them already. Not sure what their orbiter would provide in terms of technical data.

[MarkeyD]

The problem is that throwing more money at a problem doesn't always solve it. e.g. Welfare

[ChadGore]

Re: But the cash-strapped Brits spent a paltry £140 million on the Mars Express package overall. . . . and they got an MP3 player in th bottom of a Mars crater. You get what you pay for.

[seowulf]

They knew what their budget was. They knew what the mission was. The first principle of engineering is to make sure it works. If they needed to scale back the mission to ensure it succeeded within the given budget, then scale it back. If the mission is more important, pony up the dough.

My favorite sign at work is "A. Good B. Fast C. Cheap - Pick any two!"

[FreedomCalls]

Nothing to show for it? They put an orbiter around mars that is loaded with scientific equipment. In fact, they will glean much more data from the orbiter than Beagle was going to give. Not bad for a first mission. All this idiotic taunting and acting like this is a football game is silly, its science, there is room for everyone.

Who's leading the rah rah cheers? Sounds like you are. I'll revise my statement then and concentrate on the landers only.

And to remind them that their £140 million £45 million for Beagle is money down the drain with absolutely nothing to show for it, whereas our $820 million $400 million for Spirit will actually accomplish something.

I don't think £45 million is pocket change and it is clearly £45 million totally wasted for the simple want of a fully tested airbag.