Mars Rovers

The JPL email list has just told me how that the 50,000th image has
just been taken and also how far the two Mars rovers have travelled
with

quote Spirit racking up 3.6 kilometers (2.3 miles) of driving so
far. Opportunity has driven 1.6 kilometers (1 mile)
/quote

I'm really surprised- I thought they'd gone a hell of a lot further.
Had Beagle survived it might have got damn near as much science as
these two heavyweight sluggards.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http//:www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

"Martin Frey" wrote in message
...

quote Spirit racking up 3.6 kilometers (2.3 miles) of driving so
far. Opportunity has driven 1.6 kilometers (1 mile)
/quote

I'm really surprised- I thought they'd gone a hell of a lot further.
Had Beagle survived it might have got damn near as much science as
these two heavyweight sluggards.


Wow, I have always thought they have convered a lot more than that!!

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http//:www.hadastro.org.uk


Is the web address 'mistyped' on purpose?


--

- Tony Sutton
- http://www.hyperboard.co.uk - The Biggest Message Board!
-------------------------------------------------------------
My inner child is a sick little *******.
-------------------------------------------------------------

"Tony Sutton" wrote:

Is the web address 'mistyped' on purpose?

Gosh - thanks. I hope it's better now. Most of my typing tends not to
be 'on purpose' - gremlins inhabit my fingers.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

"Martin Frey" wrote in message
...
The JPL email list has just told me how that the 50,000th image has
just been taken and also how far the two Mars rovers have travelled
with

quote Spirit racking up 3.6 kilometers (2.3 miles) of driving so
far. Opportunity has driven 1.6 kilometers (1 mile)
/quote

I'm really surprised- I thought they'd gone a hell of a lot further.
Had Beagle survived it might have got damn near as much science as
these two heavyweight sluggards.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http//:www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

I don't think you can assess their value on the distance travelled? After
all on your basis Beagle 2 would have travelled 0 miles. The fact is they
spend weeeks at time investigating very small areas. Its not meant to be a
rally.

Oh and Beagle 2 of course never actually made it.

Martin

"Martin" wrote:

I don't think you can assess their value on the distance travelled? After
all on your basis Beagle 2 would have travelled 0 miles. The fact is they
spend weeeks at time investigating very small areas. Its not meant to be a
rally.

Oh and Beagle 2 of course never actually made it.

Beagle made it but, as the airlines say, it arrived prematurely.

My main point is that the subjective impression I got from the online
updates on the rovers progress was that they had covered loads of
ground, whipping off to study them thar hills and this re crater.

Given the weight and cost added to the rovers to make them mobile it
is conceivable that they could have sent 10 or a dozen stationary
beagle-type instruments (I nearly said rovers).

Given the possibility of extending arms from each such base, the area
available for study would much smaller but still large and potentially
far more varied.

Perhaps the rover designers couldn't resist the all pervasive desire
for SUVs, even on Mars.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

In message , Martin Frey
writes
"Martin" wrote:

I don't think you can assess their value on the distance travelled? After
all on your basis Beagle 2 would have travelled 0 miles. The fact is they
spend weeeks at time investigating very small areas. Its not meant to be a
rally.

Oh and Beagle 2 of course never actually made it.

Beagle made it but, as the airlines say, it arrived prematurely.

My main point is that the subjective impression I got from the online
updates on the rovers progress was that they had covered loads of
ground, whipping off to study them thar hills and this re crater.

Given the weight and cost added to the rovers to make them mobile it
is conceivable that they could have sent 10 or a dozen stationary
beagle-type instruments (I nearly said rovers).

Given the possibility of extending arms from each such base, the area
available for study would much smaller but still large and potentially
far more varied.

Perhaps the rover designers couldn't resist the all pervasive desire
for SUVs, even on Mars.

You're talking total nonsense, and it's only on topic for the group
because of the comparison with Beagle. The two rovers are a) quite small
and b) the most sophisticated and successful Mars probes ever. Their
slow progress is largely due to the fact that they are doing regular
time-consuming analyses of the rocks they encounter.
Future plans involve bigger rovers -nuclear powered, yet!
--
What have they got to hide? Release the ESA Beagle 2 report.
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

"Martin Frey" wrote in message
...
"Martin" wrote:

Given the weight and cost added to the rovers to make them mobile it
is conceivable that they could have sent 10 or a dozen stationary
beagle-type instruments (I nearly said rovers).

Given the possibility of extending arms from each such base, the area
available for study would much smaller but still large and potentially
far more varied.

The beauty of send a mobile device is that you can first look at the objects
you'd like to examine and then drive to them. Sending a stationary object
with data from orbit doesn't hold the same promise.

Wasn't it Martin Frey who wrote:

Given the weight and cost added to the rovers to make them mobile it
is conceivable that they could have sent 10 or a dozen stationary
beagle-type instruments (I nearly said rovers).

But then you'd probably find that 9 out of 10 of them would land just
out of reach of anything interesting.

--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

"Mike Williams" wrote in message
...
Wasn't it Martin Frey who wrote:

Given the weight and cost added to the rovers to make them mobile it
is conceivable that they could have sent 10 or a dozen stationary
beagle-type instruments (I nearly said rovers).

But then you'd probably find that 9 out of 10 of them would land just
out of reach of anything interesting.

--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

I think Mr Freys comments were more of the lets knock America type more than
anything else. When you think how long both Rovers have lasted its a
fantastic achievement. Reckon they will make it a year?

Martin

Jonathan Silverlight
wrote:

You're talking total nonsense, and it's only on topic for the group
because of the comparison with Beagle.

Hang on - doesn't Mars exploration count as astronomy, with or without
Beagle?

The two rovers are a) quite small
and b) the most sophisticated and successful Mars probes ever.

No disagreement - but the two current rovers are huge compared with
their (successful) prdecessor.

Their
slow progress is largely due to the fact that they are doing regular
time-consuming analyses of the rocks they encounter.
Future plans involve bigger rovers -nuclear powered, yet!

Yes - I know why they moved slowly but my surprise at just how little
ground they covered is reasonable and not "total nonsense" nor is the
thought that many staitonarys could be a better way for future, made
more attractive by the thought of less nuclear packages being hazarded
through our atmosphere (and Mars' atmosphere come to that).

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------