Beagle 2...

toxic waste wrote:
After watching The Sky @ Night and seeing a computer simulation of the
Beagle 2 Mars vehicle, I'm somewhat surprised they seem to have opted
for wheels as opposed to tracks to drive it!

Any other views on this?

Tracks are not perfect.
They have problems with being articulated as far as wheels can.
A wheeled vehicle with appropriate suspension can climb larger isolated
rocks.

--
http://inquisitor.i.am/ | | Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornfull tone, "It means
Just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less." -- Lewis Carrol

(toxic waste) writes:

After watching The Sky @ Night and seeing a computer simulation of the
Beagle 2 Mars vehicle, I'm somewhat surprised they seem to have opted
for wheels as opposed to tracks to drive it!

You shouldn't be. Large diameter wheels are very simple and robust.
Tracks are complicated, subject to becoming jammed by debris,
and if a track link breaks, your vehicle is immobilized.


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

You may be thinking of NASA's two Mars rovers, which have 6 wheels each,
with flexible linkages, so that all six can remain in contact with the
soil continuously. Each of the wheels is independently driven, and the
entire rover can turn 360 degrees in place.

Beagle 2 is a clamshell-shaped lander, with no ability to move around.
It does have a "mole" that can crawl up to 3 meters using some sort of
spring-loaded device.

Here's the website:

http://www.beagle2.com/index.htm

Matt


toxic waste wrote:
After watching The Sky @ Night and seeing a computer simulation of the
Beagle 2 Mars vehicle, I'm somewhat surprised they seem to have opted
for wheels as opposed to tracks to drive it!

Any other views on this?

Cheers
tox

"toxic waste" wrote in message
om...
After watching The Sky @ Night and seeing a computer simulation of the
Beagle 2 Mars vehicle, I'm somewhat surprised they seem to have opted
for wheels as opposed to tracks to drive it!

Any other views on this?

Cheers
tox

You are confusing Beagle 2 and the Mars Exploration Rovers.

Beagle 2 is the small lander - which doesnt move at all. - It has a tiny
mole which will tap it's way across the surface to collect samples to be
reeled back in - but it doesnt move in itself.

The Mars Exploration Rovers however - are the identical rovers which were
launched after Beagle 2 - and will land next Jan/Feb. They have 6 wheels.
This is a proven mobility system tested extensively with test rovers on
earth, and the Pathfinder 'Sojourner' rover on Mars. Tracks would be very
very heavy, and could easily trap, break, snap etc.

Doug

I've personally seen this tool working in both buckets of sand, and deep
banks of volcanic ash, and while not fast, it does work.

Wonder if it'd crawl down my back if I had a bit of an itch?

Doug

"toxic waste" wrote in message
om...
After watching The Sky @ Night and seeing a computer simulation of the
Beagle 2 Mars vehicle, I'm somewhat surprised they seem to have opted
for wheels as opposed to tracks to drive it!

Any other views on this?

Cheers
tox

You are mistaken.
You appear to be confusing it with the
2 new American landers also on their way
to Mars.
There are no wheels on Beagle 2. It doesn't roll.
It is not intended to move on the surface of Mars.

Doug Ellison wrote:

Tut tut - Pluto ( the mole ) will tap it's way up to 3 metres across, or
into the martian soil. To say it's not going to move is a bit harsh

True, but implying that Beagle 2 is somehow "mobile" (my words, not
yours) because of PLUTO's ability to "move" is, in my opinion,
borderline hype.

--


Alex R. Blackwell
University of Hawaii