Isn't that the Hokey-Pokey?
Touch down for Rover!!!
- Thread starter epicstruggle
- Start date
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
RussSchultz said:
Is it? People were having a bit of fun and discussion, and you brought it right down. Great work.
RussSchultz said:
For what it's worth, if you want some schooling:
-ESA only funded a part of the Beagle2 project (IIRC, mainly involved in the launch vehicle), so the amount of money ESA have isn't relevent to what was spent on Beagle2
Here's part of a press release from the BNSC:
"1. The Beagle 2 lander is funded through a partnership arrangement involving the Open University, Astrium, the DTI, the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC), the Office of Science and Technology and the ESA, with the PPARC additionally providing part support for the mission instruments. Principal Investigators for Beagle 2 come from the Open University (Gas Analysis Package), Leicester University (Environmental Sensors and the X-Ray Spectrometer) and Mullard Space Science Laboratory (Imaging Systems)."
And while you're "imagining" I think you'll find that NASA significantly outspends ESA (approx 15.5 billion dollars compared to 11.2 billion for ESA). What with ESA not running a manned space program and all, the priorities and spending are not easily comparible.
You sure know how to take a non-partisan scientific achievement and reduce it to yet another one upsmanship contest.
Disregarding, of course, the immense amount of inter agency and international cooperation that goes on in any of these missions.
Disregarding, of course, the immense amount of inter agency and international cooperation that goes on in any of these missions.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
RussSchultz said:
Are you trying to say that healthy competition doesn't drive these sorts of scientific endeavours forwards? If you'd seen any of the documentaries on Beagle 2, you'd know that the Beagle team was obviously competative with the US team, and slightly jealous of NASA's much larger resources. Even the head of the Beagle team said he was hoping to "show the Americans how it's done".
RussSchultz said:
Did the NASA team name-check all the international co-operators in their press conference, or did they rah-rah the US flag?
You seem to think there is something wrong with scientific competition and a bit of partisan support for any given "side" in a discussion group. It doesn't appear to stop anyone having an interesting and entertaining discussion except for you.
There's nothing wrong with healthy competition, but the stupidity in this thread over completely nationalistic ideals is overwhelming--on both sides.
I've worked with ESA, I've worked for NASA. I've worked with Brits working for ESA. They're all quality groups. There's no need to tear down the other organizations with stupid shit to make youself feel better about what little you know. Quite honestly, the sense of community in the space field overwhelms any nationalistic pride, or at least it has in any dealings I had with them.
Now the Russians, on the other hand....
I've worked with ESA, I've worked for NASA. I've worked with Brits working for ESA. They're all quality groups. There's no need to tear down the other organizations with stupid shit to make youself feel better about what little you know. Quite honestly, the sense of community in the space field overwhelms any nationalistic pride, or at least it has in any dealings I had with them.
Now the Russians, on the other hand....
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
RussSchultz said:
Honestly, I think you're reading a lot more into it than most other people can see.
RussSchultz said:I've worked with ESA, I've worked for NASA. I've worked with Brits working for ESA. They're all quality groups. There's no need to tear down the other organizations with stupid shit to make youself feel better about what little you know. Quite honestly, the sense of community in the space field overwhelms any nationalistic pride, or at least it has in any dealings I had with them.
Now the Russians, on the other hand....
What about them Chinese? They kept that very quiet, though IIRC they bought a lot of their gear from Russia. Does the "sense of community in the space field" only encompass the relationships between NASA and ESA?
I really feel for NASA though - they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They have to get results to fight for their budgets, so they stay conservative, but that means they are stuck with things like aging orbiters. It would be nice if they could splurge on some of the more experimental things in order to hurry things along. I want to see new shuttles, moon bases, space stations, long term manned missions to mars, etc. Bring on the space-planes, that's what I say...
Well, I'd like to thank the Euros for deking the Martian Planetary Defense system out of position for us to sneak our rover in.
I was very pleased to hear we were sending *two* rovers, until I learned that landings would be separated enough in time to allow the Martians to react to both.
Yes, I'm kidding. Sort of. I think.
I was very pleased to hear we were sending *two* rovers, until I learned that landings would be separated enough in time to allow the Martians to react to both.
Yes, I'm kidding. Sort of. I think.
You are correct, color images should arrive shortly. The point of the b/w was for diagnostics. Im sure the images are able to be compressed much more and so we get lots of images instead of a few black and white.Razor04 said:
What is quite interesting is that it will take 9 days (is that earth or martian days) for the it to get off the petal. Seems long doesnt it?
later,
epic
hmm, just read that a martian day is 40 minutes longer than here on earth.epicstruggle said:
Also the high gain antenna has succesfully unlocked, pointed up, and is sending a strong signal towards earth and is also able to receive commands through the high gain antenna. The cameras were pointed up to find the sun which it did. Looks like everything is going great. Looks like color pics will be here very shortly.
later,
epic
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
So with only 25% more money, they manage to do more science than the ESA, plus run an uber-expensive shuttle program and international space station? Seems NASA's achievements are even more remarkable given the drain that the space shuttle and station take from the budget. Only $11 billion of NASA's budget makes it into space science. A full $4+ billion goes to the shuttle/station program.
You think the Beagle is the first probe to run with parts designed by universities, other government labs, or private industry? If so, you need some schooling.
It seems the beagle2 fell prey to the "space is cheap" engineering syndrome that many modern geeks fall into, who think that because they can built a PC for under $3k, somehow, building a space faring robot should only be a little harder.
The only way the "faster/cheaper" attitude works is if you produce many many disposable copies of probes to get economies of scale. If there had been 5 Beagle 2s launched, or even sitting in storage, then a high probability of failure would be irrelevent. But putting all your eggs into one risky basket is just gambling.
I have no problem with making $50 million micro-probes, just make dozens of them, not 1.
The people who think these things are 'exact' science, are kinda fooling themselves.
A lot of this stuff is trial and error, under circumstances that are controlled and far different than a real martian surface/atmosphere.
I don't think there is a soul alive who can honestly say whether spending more money on safety precautions would result in even 1% more survivability.
Me? I think its mostly luck, and I have some deal of knowledge about the inners of some of these things.
I should say, the above applies only once you get past the basics of course, which is pretty common knowledge to all teams, regardless of nationality. Like correcting for upside down antennas etc
A lot of this stuff is trial and error, under circumstances that are controlled and far different than a real martian surface/atmosphere.
I don't think there is a soul alive who can honestly say whether spending more money on safety precautions would result in even 1% more survivability.
Me? I think its mostly luck, and I have some deal of knowledge about the inners of some of these things.
I should say, the above applies only once you get past the basics of course, which is pretty common knowledge to all teams, regardless of nationality. Like correcting for upside down antennas etc
Tho its gonna be intesrting to see how these slew of missions turn out the actual science they will do is limited. Not like they are looking for fossils or such only evidence of water cycle activity in the past.
Short of something fascinating being discovered (imaging an earth like planet around another star or *geek orgasm* coming across some evidence of ETI) or some new race such as might happen with the chinese in 20 years I dont think the budgets will be there for probes and manned missions to do really rich and varied exploration. I hope to see man on mars before I die ...
Short of something fascinating being discovered (imaging an earth like planet around another star or *geek orgasm* coming across some evidence of ETI) or some new race such as might happen with the chinese in 20 years I dont think the budgets will be there for probes and manned missions to do really rich and varied exploration. I hope to see man on mars before I die ...
Beagle 2 (European Space Agency)
Weight: 73 pounds (33 kilograms)
Cost: Estimated $60 million
Landing site: Isidis Planitia
Instruments: Stereo cameras; weather sensors; spectrometers to analyze minerals and search for methane; X-ray detector to determine rock age, arm with rock corer and grinder, microscope and sample analyzer; mole to dig for soil samples; numerous ovens to bake samples to analyze carbon 12.
Power: Solar
Mission length: Up to 180 days
Mars Exploration Rover (NASA)
Weight: About 375 pounds (170 kilograms)
Cost: $400 million
Landing sites: Gusev Crater and Meridiani Planum
Instruments: Cameras providing 360-degree, stereoscopic views; rock abrasion tool; microscopic imager and spectrometer to study rocks and soil samples.
Power: Solar
Mission length: At least three months, roving on a six-wheeled frame up to 40 meters each day.
Dang the science from beagle wouldve been nice. 40 m a day so about 4 clicks for rover on a b line I wonder if it could ride up to the side of the craters cliff wall... Image maybe some sedimentary rocks? Yeah I know its a crater but I was just wondering if water had been there long enough to create sedimentary layers...
Of course, there is an argument (depending on which scientist you ask), that Mars landings have not given us any new insight into Mars over and above the science that already existed from analyzing Meteors, and the satellite spectrograph results from the 1970s-1990s
That all this is just a waste of money, blah blah blah.
That all this is just a waste of money, blah blah blah.
Actually ive read 2 or 3 nasa descritiptions saying that the rover will get at least 6 months. So it will perform as long as the beagle would.PC-Engine said:
later,
epic