A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 04, 07:17 PM
Andrew Yee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council
Swindon, U.K.

Contact:

Peter Barratt
Email:

Gill Ormrod
Tel: +44 (0)1793-442012
Email:


Julia Maddock
Tel: +44 (0)1793-442094
Email:


26 January 2004

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search

No contact has been made with the Beagle 2 lander, despite repeated efforts over
the last few days to communicate via the Mars Express and Mars Odyssey
spacecraft and the Jodrell Bank radio telescope in Cheshire, UK.

At a press briefing in London this afternoon, members of the Beagle 2 team
described the latest efforts to contact their missing lander.

"We haven’t found Beagle 2, despite three days of intensive searching," said
Professor Colin Pillinger, lead scientist for Beagle 2. "Under those
circumstances, we have to begin to accept that, if Beagle 2 is on the Martian
surface, it is not active.

"That isn’t to say that we are going to give up on Beagle. There is one more
thing that we can do -- however, it is very much a last resort. We will be
asking the American Odyssey spacecraft (team) tomorrow whether they will send an
embedded command -- a hail to Beagle with a command inside it. If it gets
through, it will tell Beagle to switch off and reload the software. We are now
working on the basis that there is a corrupt system and the only way we might
resurrect is to send that command."

"We can also ask Mars Express to send that command. However, they cannot send it
probably until the 2 or 3 February," he added.

"We’ll move with the next phase in the search for Beagle 2," said Professor
Pillinger. "We have discussed on our side of the house what we intend to do in
the future. We are dedicated to trying to refly Beagle 2 in some shape or form,
therefore we need to know how far it got because we need know which parts of
this mission we don’t have to study in further detail."

Detailing the efforts to contact Beagle 2 in recent days, Mark Sims, Beagle 2
Mission Manager from the University of Leicester, explained that the lander
should have entered an emergency communication mode known as CSM2 no later than
22 January. In this mode, the spacecraft’s receiver is switched on throughout
daylight hours on Mars. The only possible explanation that no communication has
been established during the last few days is that the lander’s battery is in a
low state of charge.

Meanwhile, the academia-industry "Tiger Team" at the National Space Centre in
Leicester is beginning to concentrate on detailed analysis of the possible
causes for failure of the mission and the lessons that can be learned for future
missions.

The analysis of the mission now under way includes an assessment of the landing
site ellipse from orbital images, reanalysis of atmospheric conditions during
the entry into the Martian atmosphere on 25 December, examination of the
separation from Mars Express and of the cruise phase preceding arrival at Mars.

One extremely useful piece of evidence could be provided by an image of the
lander. The team is hoping that the High Resolution Stereo Camera on Mars
Express or the camera on board Mars Global Surveyor may eventually be able to
capture an image that reveals its location on the Martian surface.

For further details on Beagle 2 and Mars Express see the following websites:

*
http://www.beagle2.com
* http://www.pparc.ac.uk/Mars
* http://www.esa.int/mars

Timeline and Notes for Editors,
http://www.pparc.ac.uk/mars/news/nw_nfe.asp

  #2  
Old January 26th 04, 09:17 PM
RandyW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)


"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
.. .
Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council
Swindon, U.K.

Contact:

Peter Barratt
Email:

Gill Ormrod
Tel: +44 (0)1793-442012
Email:


Julia Maddock
Tel: +44 (0)1793-442094
Email:


26 January 2004

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search


A real shame. Hopefully they'll fly again someday.

--
-Randy (OF+)
'Up the stairs.
Into the fire.'


No contact has been made with the Beagle 2 lander, despite repeated

efforts over
the last few days to communicate via the Mars Express and Mars Odyssey
spacecraft and the Jodrell Bank radio telescope in Cheshire, UK.

At a press briefing in London this afternoon, members of the Beagle 2 team
described the latest efforts to contact their missing lander.

"We haven’t found Beagle 2, despite three days of intensive searching,"

said
Professor Colin Pillinger, lead scientist for Beagle 2. "Under those
circumstances, we have to begin to accept that, if Beagle 2 is on the

Martian
surface, it is not active.

"That isn’t to say that we are going to give up on Beagle. There is one

more
thing that we can do -- however, it is very much a last resort. We will be
asking the American Odyssey spacecraft (team) tomorrow whether they will

send an
embedded command -- a hail to Beagle with a command inside it. If it gets
through, it will tell Beagle to switch off and reload the software. We are

now
working on the basis that there is a corrupt system and the only way we

might
resurrect is to send that command."

"We can also ask Mars Express to send that command. However, they cannot

send it
probably until the 2 or 3 February," he added.

"We’ll move with the next phase in the search for Beagle 2," said

Professor
Pillinger. "We have discussed on our side of the house what we intend to

do in
the future. We are dedicated to trying to refly Beagle 2 in some shape or

form,
therefore we need to know how far it got because we need know which parts

of
this mission we don’t have to study in further detail."

Detailing the efforts to contact Beagle 2 in recent days, Mark Sims,

Beagle 2
Mission Manager from the University of Leicester, explained that the

lander
should have entered an emergency communication mode known as CSM2 no later

than
22 January. In this mode, the spacecraft’s receiver is switched on

throughout
daylight hours on Mars. The only possible explanation that no

communication has
been established during the last few days is that the lander’s battery is

in a
low state of charge.

Meanwhile, the academia-industry "Tiger Team" at the National Space Centre

in
Leicester is beginning to concentrate on detailed analysis of the possible
causes for failure of the mission and the lessons that can be learned for

future
missions.

The analysis of the mission now under way includes an assessment of the

landing
site ellipse from orbital images, reanalysis of atmospheric conditions

during
the entry into the Martian atmosphere on 25 December, examination of the
separation from Mars Express and of the cruise phase preceding arrival at

Mars.

One extremely useful piece of evidence could be provided by an image of

the
lander. The team is hoping that the High Resolution Stereo Camera on Mars
Express or the camera on board Mars Global Surveyor may eventually be able

to
capture an image that reveals its location on the Martian surface.

For further details on Beagle 2 and Mars Express see the following

websites:

*
http://www.beagle2.com
* http://www.pparc.ac.uk/Mars
* http://www.esa.int/mars

Timeline and Notes for Editors,
http://www.pparc.ac.uk/mars/news/nw_nfe.asp



  #3  
Old January 27th 04, 04:05 PM
mlm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

"RandyW" wrote in news:0CeRb.236
$Qy4.34444@typhoon01:

"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
.. .
26 January 2004

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search


A real shame. Hopefully they'll fly again someday.


The engineers for this flight were overconfident. When NASA lost MPL a
few years ago, they listened to widespread criticism that telemetry was
not available all the way down. The change was made for the MER program
and we have seen, with great fanfare, how effective that was. Engineers
in California were able to track every step taken by the vehicle as it
approached the surface. MGS was right over the landing site to attempt
to photograph it, and succeeded in seeing the parachute, backshell,
heatshield and lander (reflecting brilliantly).

Why on earth did the Beagle 2 team not take their cue from NASA's MPL
disaster and provide some means of finding out what went wrong. Instead
now the despondent engineers have been working for over a month to talk
to a spacecraft that may be no more than vapour in the Martian
atmosphere. They just can't tell what happened to it and that is very
bad engineering.

Landing on Mars is still extremely experimental so if soem science must
be sacrificed to provide reliable telemetry to the ground, that must be
done. Otherwise the attempt to land becomes nothing more than a pot-
shot.

Anyway, NASA has recovered well from its previous Mars fiascos and has
proved the system used to land the twin MERs is effective. All future
Mars landings will need to integrate this or similar technology, or risk
being cut from the budget.

Mark
  #4  
Old January 27th 04, 04:25 PM
Volker Hetzer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)


"mlm" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ...
"RandyW" wrote in news:0CeRb.236
$Qy4.34444@typhoon01:

"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
.. .
26 January 2004

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search


A real shame. Hopefully they'll fly again someday.


The engineers for this flight were overconfident. When NASA lost MPL a
few years ago, they listened to widespread criticism that telemetry was
not available all the way down. The change was made for the MER program
and we have seen, with great fanfare, how effective that was. Engineers
in California were able to track every step taken by the vehicle as it
approached the surface. MGS was right over the landing site to attempt
to photograph it, and succeeded in seeing the parachute, backshell,
heatshield and lander (reflecting brilliantly).

Well, yes, but the problem was that the whole mission was originally
planned without any lander and then someone got ideas. So they couldn't
change mars express anymore (I mean not make it bigger or give it more
thrusters or whatever) and glued this thing on. They probably thought that
it wouldn't matter much if it crashed because the main thing is the express
orbiter. Result: Big PR desaster. They should have marketed it from the
start as a side experiment.


Lots of Greetings!
Volker
  #5  
Old January 27th 04, 06:10 PM
mlm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

"Volker Hetzer" wrote in
:

"mlm" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
"RandyW" wrote in news:0CeRb.236
$Qy4.34444@typhoon01:

"Andrew Yee" wrote in message
.. .
26 January 2004

Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search

A real shame. Hopefully they'll fly again someday.


The engineers for this flight were overconfident. When NASA lost MPL
a few years ago, they listened to widespread criticism that telemetry
was not available all the way down. The change was made for the MER


Well, yes, but the problem was that the whole mission was originally
planned without any lander and then someone got ideas. So they
couldn't change mars express anymore (I mean not make it bigger or
give it more thrusters or whatever) and glued this thing on. They
probably thought that it wouldn't matter much if it crashed because
the main thing is the express orbiter. Result: Big PR desaster. They
should have marketed it from the start as a side experiment.


Lots of Greetings!
Volker


Of course you are right, but now they will have to realize that doing
things this way does not work. NASA learned this the hard way with the
triple failure which MPL was involved in -- that cost NASA a lot of bad
press, and put the Mars program at risk.

Of course, if ESA had landed Beagle II safely, we (and I) would all be
saying they were geniuses for doing it for 1/10 the cost of the NASA
rovers.

ESA deserves great praise for putting Mars Express safely into orbit. It
will return some very interesting data.

Mark
  #6  
Old January 27th 04, 06:27 PM
BllFs6
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

Of course, if ESA had landed Beagle II safely, we (and I) would all be
saying they were geniuses for doing it for 1/10 the cost of the NASA
rovers.


Okay....this has finally bugged me enough...

The Beagle probe alone cost 80 million for just one probe....

We got TWO rovers for 800 million (PLUS the orbiter)...

So the cost advantage already is down to 4 to 1....

And lets face it....the rovers are SOOOO much more capable .......

In my opinion the rovers give you so much more science bang for the buck that
there is no comparsion....

So, the beagle is NOT a cost effective science miracle (assuming it had even
worked)......its only a miracle that anything at all could have been done for
only 80 million....

take care

Blll

  #7  
Old January 27th 04, 08:40 PM
Jonathan Silverlight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

In message , BllFs6
writes
Of course, if ESA had landed Beagle II safely, we (and I) would all be
saying they were geniuses for doing it for 1/10 the cost of the NASA
rovers.


Okay....this has finally bugged me enough...

The Beagle probe alone cost 80 million for just one probe....

We got TWO rovers for 800 million (PLUS the orbiter)...


Which orbiter? Isn't Mars Odyssey a separate mission, with a separate
budget?
--
Save the Hubble Space Telescope!
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.
  #8  
Old January 27th 04, 09:01 PM
Johnny Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)


"BllFs6" wrote in message
...
Of course, if ESA had landed Beagle II safely, we (and I) would all be
saying they were geniuses for doing it for 1/10 the cost of the NASA
rovers.


Okay....this has finally bugged me enough...

The Beagle probe alone cost 80 million for just one probe....

We got TWO rovers for 800 million (PLUS the orbiter)...


What ORBITER? Do you mean MGS - that one went separately, and cost 210 M$ +
20M$ operations/year.

The cost of Beagle+ MEX is 300 M euros, including operations. So we have
something like
210 + 820 + (20*n) = 1 billion vs. 300 mil. euros (which is a bit more in $
recently..-)



So the cost advantage already is down to 4 to 1....


Well, had Beagle II worked, it would seem more like 1:2. But it is difficult
to compare
very different missions anyway. (The unsuccessfull orbiter Mars Observer,
lost in 1993, cost about 900M$)


And lets face it....the rovers are SOOOO much more capable .......


Depends on how you measure capability. Providing nice pictures - equal (but
MER can move).
Geology - MER has an advantage, since it moves.
Science results - very arguable. Depends on which one hits the sweet spot.
Remember, they share a lot of instruments - cameras, Moessbauer spectrometer
(which is actually the SAME one, built by the same company), rock abrasion
tool,
but I think Beagle has some instruments that MER doesn't have - it even has
a microphone!


In my opinion the rovers give you so much more science bang for the buck

that
there is no comparsion....

So, the beagle is NOT a cost effective science miracle (assuming it had

even
worked)......its only a miracle that anything at all could have been done

for
only 80 million....

take care

Blll


I hope there will be Beagle III.

JD



  #9  
Old January 28th 04, 11:38 AM
Volker Hetzer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)


"BllFs6" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ...
Of course, if ESA had landed Beagle II safely, we (and I) would all be
saying they were geniuses for doing it for 1/10 the cost of the NASA
rovers.


Okay....this has finally bugged me enough...

The Beagle probe alone cost 80 million for just one probe....

We got TWO rovers for 800 million (PLUS the orbiter)...

So the cost advantage already is down to 4 to 1....

And lets face it....the rovers are SOOOO much more capable .......

They analyze rocks and make pictures, right? It's still a lottery
whether they landed in an area where interesting stuff is not
more than 500m away.


In my opinion the rovers give you so much more science bang for the buck that
there is no comparsion....

They do different science. I think the drill was worth it. (But I also think it was worth
being done properly.)


So, the beagle is NOT a cost effective science miracle (assuming it had even
worked)......its only a miracle that anything at all could have been done for
only 80 million....

Right. And if it had worked it would *still* have worked only by chance and not
because of the marvellous engineering and foresight.

I found that express stuff a bit like all those balloon earth circumnavigations. Everyone
tries it, one finally manages it and suddenly it's not because he was the lucky one but
because he was the best one.


Lots of Greetings!
Volker
  #10  
Old January 28th 04, 04:36 PM
BllFs6
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Disappointment in Beagle 2 Search (Forwarded)

And lets face it....the rovers are SOOOO much more capable .......
They analyze rocks and make pictures, right? It's still a lottery
whether they landed in an area where interesting stuff is not
more than 500m away.


Yeah...but its ONE hell of a crap shoot to hope the interesting rock/soil
happens to be UNDERNEATH where you randomly landed vs within a few hundred
meters (or more)...

The rovers possible sample size is so much bigger that there is no
comparision...

The rovers should be able to analyze dozens of rocks, produce very high quality
images of hundreds and decent quality images of thousands....

And geologists can tell ALOT just from looking at rocks....so calling the
pictures just pretty is very misleading.....I'd even go so far as to say if the
geologist had a choice of just analyzing one rock or being able to quality
image a few dozen they would pick the imaging...

take care

It just bugs me that people keep talking about how cheap the Beagle
is/was....sure it was and a VW bug is cheaper than commercial dump
truck.....so what?

Blll
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Communication Strategy of the Beagle 2 "Think Tank" (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 3 January 16th 04 07:10 PM
Congratulations to NASA: Beagle 2 Team Still Hopes To Repeat MarsLanding Success (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 January 4th 04 07:45 PM
Mars Exploration and the Search for Life is a Priority Says UK ScienceMinister (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 December 29th 03 01:57 PM
Scientists Await First Call From Beagle (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 December 25th 03 04:33 PM
NASA Releases Near-Earth Object Search Report Ron Baalke Astronomy Misc 0 September 10th 03 04:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.