Posted on 05/22/2004 6:56:27 PM PDT by blam
Beagle 2 mission was doomed long before take-off, claims inquiry
By Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent
(Filed: 23/05/2004)
The Beagle 2 mission to Mars was a disaster waiting to happen, according to the official inquiry into the debacle, whose findings will be made public tomorrow.
Hailed as Britain's first probe to another planet, Beagle 2 was supposed to have touched down on the Red Planet on Christmas Day last year and perform experiments to detect signs of alien life.
Critics of Prof Pillinger warned that Beagle 2 had not been adequately tested
Instead, all contact was lost with the probe just before it was due to land. It is now presumed to have been destroyed on impact.
A commission of inquiry was set up by the European Space Agency (Esa) and the British National Space Centre (BNSC) following the failure of the £50 million project.
The commission's report is believed to criticise the management of the project and blame a lack of testing, time and money for its failure.
While he is not named directly, the report is likely to be seen as critical of Professor Colin Pillinger of the Open University, the mastermind of the Beagle 2 project.
Even before the probe left for Mars aboard Esa's Mars Express a year ago, critics of Prof Pillinger warned that Beagle 2 had not been adequately tested.
Most concern centred on the crucial landing system, which consisted of just a single parachute plus an air-bag system to cushion Beagle 2 on impact.
The air bags burst during tests, and concerns about the probe's landing speed forced a complete re-design of the parachute just months before launch. The problems were so severe that Esa officials considered dumping Beagle 2.
The Sunday Telegraph understands that the lack of testing of the landing system will be a key criticism levelled at the team tomorrow.
According to the report, the absence of any data from the probe has prevented the precise cause of its failure from being identified.
However, evidence from the Mars Express probe that accompanied Beagle 2, suggests that the Martian upper atmosphere is thinner than scientists believed.
This would have led to higher landing speeds than expected, which may have exceeded Beagle 2's slim safety margin.
In contrast, America's successful Mars Rovers, which both reached the planet successfully within days of Beagle 2's demise, used retro-rockets as well as air bags and parachutes to ensure a soft landing.
The commission makes 19 recommendations, which focus chiefly on what it calls "programmatic and organisational reasons that significantly increased the risk of Beagle 2 failure".
These are understood to have been accepted by Esa and the BNSC, and look likely to spell the end of Prof Pillinger's plans for a Beagle 3 mission, for launch in 2007.
One leading British space scientist said: "He's obviously very keen to get something of his on Mars, but too many risks were taken with Beagle 2."
Professor Ken Pounds of the University of Leicester, one of Britain's most successful space scientists, said: "Colin Pillinger deserves great credit for raising awareness of Britain's role in space, but it is important that the next one has a good chance of working."
Prof Pillinger himself declined to comment on the report's recommendations prior to their publication. However, he said yesterday: "It isn't over with Beagle by any means."
Ping.
Well...it isn't over because my Martian friends have given it new life by using it as spare parts for their Pac Man machines, which they use in their religious ceremonies...since they actually look like that.
So, Shaggy and I feel partially responsible for this, since we traded the machines for our freedom when our Disco Arcade there went bust in the 1970's.
As long as the engineers were using the best data available at the time, I don't think this should be pushed onto the engineers.
Considering that this was done on a very tight budget, and much cheaper than the sucessful NASA landings, I would hope the report would be evaluating the program based on what the team wanted to build in the first place, and what they compromised on for budget reasons. This may have been a case, even for this conservative, where a little bit more money spent would have made the difference.
so, does the insurance company pay off?
what, no insurance? I always buy insurance on my space probes/
Looks like my remark caused me to be kicked off the Internet altogether. So, let's just say this article is not a surprise.
Maybe, maybe not.
If the atosphere density isn't known accuratly then you design a machine that can land safely over a wide enough range that it will likely cover what is known about it.
"These are understood to have been accepted by Esa and the BNSC, and look likely to spell the end of Prof Pillinger's plans for a Beagle 3 mission, for launch in 2007."
It is much easier to waste other peoples money...
Don't know what you're talking about.
Which is . . . . . . what?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.