Beagle 2 Probe Spotted on Mars 210
evilduckie writes "According to this BBC article photos taken by the Mars Global Surveyor show the European Beagle 2 probe which was lost after it apparently crash-landed on Mars."
To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"
wait! (Score:5, Funny)
Willzyx & the Mexican Space Program (Score:4, Funny)
Now if only they could find Willzyx [southparkstudios.com].
Re:MOON Re:wait! (Score:3, Informative)
http://moon.google.com/ [google.com]
Uhhh (Score:3, Funny)
In other news, this evening, the Sun will set over the Western Horizon.
Re:Uhhh (Score:5, Informative)
Basically the probe was designed to impact on the surface, after being slowed by the parachutes. The underside of the probe was capable and designed to impact hard. However, what appears to have happend is that the impact was side on, hitting where the probe wasn't designed to be hit, and doing fatial damage.
NeoThermic
Re:Uhhh (Score:3, Funny)
The suggestion is that Beagle is sitting in a martian crater wondering 'where did all the humans go?'!
J.
Re:Uhhh (Score:2)
Re:Uhhh (Score:3, Informative)
Not fatal damage, just tranceiver damage. They currently believe that the Beagle was operational, but that its radio instruments were damaged, thus preventing it from calling home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uhhh (Score:2)
I think it's more likely either the parachutes failed, leading to higher landing speeds than the airbags could cushion, or the air bags themselves failed to inflact
Re:Uhhh (Score:3, Informative)
In other news, this evening, the Sun will set over the Western Horizon.
Bear in mind that impact damage was just one of many possible failure modes for Beagle 2. Transmitter failure, failure of the antenna to deploy, failure of the solar panels to produce enough power, failure of the onboard computers, and so on - there are lots and lots of reasons why it failed to transmit back to Earth. Up until now there's been an assumption catastrophic impact damag
Re:Uhhh (Score:2)
Multiple failure points? Somehow that doesn't sound very good, not when we're talking pieces of equipment meant to be thrown out in space away from any kind of servicing. Aren't these things supposed to be both sturdy and have redundant failure protections?
Also.. (Score:2)
Not cool (Score:2)
(If you live far enough North, the sun will set over the Southern Horizon today - that is if you see it at all)
Holy crap (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Holy crap (Score:2)
Re:Holy crap (Score:2)
Re:Holy crap (Score:2)
After all, aren't we more interested in searching [searchenginewatch.com] for Paris, than life on Mars?
Re:Holy crap (Score:4, Funny)
That way, you don't see the cinderblocks under it and the missing tires.
The Beagle didn't find life, life found the Beagle!
Location is not very good (Score:4, Funny)
I hope they don't have an equivalent Will Smith fighter pilot capable of flying our space ships over there. It'll make our invasion that much harder.
Re:Location is not very good (Score:2)
Re:Location is not very good (Score:3, Funny)
My best friend in college had a roomate who listened to Slim Whitman. He could sympathize with the martians.
My mech has one of these! (Score:2)
Incredible (Score:5, Funny)
This is a funny world we live in...
Re:Incredible (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Incredible (Score:4, Funny)
Your, alias, your post, and your sig... way too funny when taken together. Thanks for the belly laugh.
Re:Incredible (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Incredible (Score:2)
At least that's what I think when it happens to me
p.s. I might be wrong about the "reuse" & hoard stuff - I just think/hope it's the most likely explanation.
Re:Incredible ... Disturbance? In the Wa? (Score:2)
It must've been quite a windy day in Arizona...
But, like the other poster said: "Wow, we can't find Bin Laden on Earth, but we can find Beagle 2 on Mars."
Seems like we've got our priorities misplaced...
Re:Incredible ... Disturbance? In the Wa? (Score:2)
Yes I agree, let's re-assign those scientists studying Mars. Tell them to suck it up, go find Bin Laden and do something useful for a change.
Re:Incredible (Score:2)
Re:Incredible (Score:2)
Beagle 2 was part of the Mars Express mission (Score:5, Informative)
The Beagle 2 lander was part of the very successful European Space Agency (ESA) [esa.int] Mars Express [esa.int] mission.
Mars Express contains 7 different scientific instruments and, amongs other things, it has already:
Mars Express loses publicity war to JPL (Score:2)
The other way around (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The other way around (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The other way around (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The other way around (Score:2)
KANSAS MODE: ON
Pretty much the same. Satan would have found someone else to publish his deceits. However, Darwin himself would probably have been rescued by a bloody great fish and become a holy prophet for the LORD, so we might not be in such an appalling moral state today.
Re:The other way around (Score:2)
Evolution by Natural Selection BEFORE Darwin (Score:2)
Darwin's friends intercepted the paper, and told Darwin who nearly had a nervous breakdown. Wallace graciously allowed both papers to be presented before the Society simultaneously. Darwin fleshed his out with reams of observatio
If it's like other beagles I've known... (Score:5, Funny)
In Memoriam Charles M. Schultz (Score:5, Funny)
"Curse you, Red Baron!"
Re:In Memoriam Charles M. Schultz (Score:2)
OTOH, if "Beagle 2" was rooted in the Darwin metaphor, the crash could be construed as Creationist (or I.D.) revenge, or insufficient I.D. for Beagle 2, itself.
Re:In Memoriam Charles M. Schultz (Score:4, Funny)
No, it only assumes a sense of humor.
-Eric
It could be a crash site or a tilted smiley face:) (Score:3, Funny)
That's no space probe... (Score:2, Funny)
Thanks, I'm here all week.
Q: Where did the Beagle2 go on its vacation? (Score:2)
Wouldn't you look? (Score:4, Insightful)
If I sent a craft a few million miles, never heard from it again, and had the ability to possibly find it, I would probably do so.
---
I'm makin' waffles! They got peanuts and soap in 'em!
Re:Wouldn't you look? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bigfoot, UFOs, Beagle Probes (Score:2)
Horrible photos (usually blurry)
Oops (Score:3, Funny)
Scientists are mortified to report that the Beagle 2 did indeed find life on Mars. Unfortunately, due to its poorly controlled re-entry it crashed into and killed all the Martian lifeforms
Crash site misidentified before (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Crash site misidentified before (Score:2)
From the Article (Score:3, Funny)
The problem is, the Martian that saw it coming down mistakenly thought it was an interplanetary baseball, and gave it a good crack with his bat about 4 feet from the ground. Then it broke apart, he said "Mzck froltk!"(1) and ran off.
(1) "Mzck froltk" translates from Martian native dialect into, roughly, "Oh shit"
Truly a BSOD :-( (Score:2)
Mars Rover to the rescue? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is this site anywhere near one of the Mars Rovers? Could they possibly drive there and examine it?
How cool would that be!?!?!
Re:Mars Rover to the rescue? (Score:2)
Re:Mars Rover to the rescue? (Score:2)
Re:Mars Rover to the rescue? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Mars Rover to the rescue? (Score:2)
It was the white flag that did it... (Score:3, Funny)
Later On (Score:4, Funny)
Mars scorecard (Score:2)
Mars is winning, folks.
http://www.bio.aps.anl.gov/~dgore/fun/PSL/marssco
Space Probe? They found something else. (Score:3, Informative)
your expensive computer
to a simple stone.
- James Lopez [apparently]
I always loved the Haiku that were all the rage a few years back. /., but no more than In Russia and pWn3d. Some more I found on google [baetzler.de].
They did get a little overdone on
Re:Space Probe? They found something else. (Score:4, Funny)
Someone told me the rage goes all the way back to 19th century Japan, but I told them that's crazy talk.
Re:Space Probe? They found something else. (Score:2)
Newsmaking (Score:2, Funny)
Great story (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great story (Score:5, Funny)
You just described my love life!
Re:Great story (Score:2)
The thing looks like a suitcase (Score:2, Funny)
Beagle probe spotted on Mars (Score:3, Funny)
Canali on Mars! (Score:2)
Re:How would it search? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How would it search? (Score:3, Funny)
Sorry I couldn't stop myself from typing this
Wise in the Ways of Science (Score:2)
Re:How would it search? (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone know how it was to go about this? I assume that it may analyse soil samples, but what else from there?
Drop business cards as it went: "If you are a living Martian, or you know where evidence of past Martians may be found, please call 1-800-BEAGLE2."
Re:How would it search? (Score:3, Informative)
If i remember correctly it had a novel "mole" that could move along the surface and bury into the ground in an area a few meters away from probe.
Re:Why?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course not, that would be stupid to say.
The whole point of looking at failure is to work out *why* it happend, and *how* you can prevent it. The probe was lost as it entered the atmosphere, and never managed to send out its signal to earth. Looking at images of how it failed will give clues to any future missions.
You also must remember that a high percentage of probes sent to Mars fail. There's obviously a need to work out how these things fail and work out ways to prevent it from happning again.
NeoThermic
Re:Why?? (Score:4, Insightful)
In general I fully agree with you but in this instance I think you're a little off the mark. There's no way the Beagle 2 team will be able to determine exactly what went wrong just by analyzing images. All an image -- however high the resolution -- is going to do is confirm that yes, it did crash or yes, it landed properly but failed to communicate. To determine the why and how of their failure would require a mission to investigate the crash site.
Re:Why?? (Score:3, Interesting)
The images will generally show how it crashed, from which you can work out how it came to crash like that, which is generally the information you want.
NeoThermic
Re:Why?? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's actually a surprisingly large amount of information. Assuming this image is actually the probe, it allows us to rule out all the various catastrophic failure modes, which in turn tells us that the landing system actually worked. Had the probe failed to make it through reentry, or had the parachute or airbags not deployed, then we wouldn't be seeing this --- the probe would be scattered in lots of little pieces across the Martian surface.
In turn this allows us to validate this entire means of landing. Actually reaching the ground in one piece is possibly the hardest aspect of any extraterrestrial robotic mission, and if a low-budget approach like Beagle's actually works, then that's great news. In this case, we can tell that even though a few things went wrong and we lost the vehicle, this entire approach to getting down does, basically, work.
Why not?? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not so sure about that. The fact that Beagle has been found at all has already told the designer that it didn't burn up on in the atmosphere and if it was found in more or less the the right place the designer can also conclude that most likely there was nothing wrong with the navigation. If they ever manage to get any close-up photos of Beagle of sufficiently high resolution they can perhaps also determine whether it was damaged on landing, perhaps, due to a failiure of the landing mechanism. If Beagle is structurally intact one would conclude that it is most likely something went wrong with the electronics. While none of this will pinpoint the exact faliure it will still help to rule out at least some causes of faliure and confirm which aspects of the design were sound and which probably weren't which will in turn help with the design of Beagle II if such a mission ever sees the light of day.
Re:Why not?? (Score:2)
Beagle 3 (Score:2)
actually (Score:4, Funny)
let's face it. This is something that you would do, if a bit of alien technology came crashing down out of the skies.
Re:Why?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Prof. Pillinger is, understandably, clutching at straws. The science (and academic PR) aspects of Beagle were first class. The engineering (i.e. the expensive bit), was totally underfunded and was eventually overwhelmed. If he can prove that the concept was fine and dandy, but something small went wrong, then he can (with much greater authority) go and ask for money for a new one. However, it's unlikely after ESA's board of inquiry, that Prof. Pillinger will ever be involved at such a senior level again. http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMLKAHHZTD_index_0.html [esa.int]
Re:Why?? (Score:3, Interesting)
But in a sense that's true: provided it's big enough to slow the lander to the correct terminal velocity before the landing, the size doesn't matter... make it ten times bigger and you'll just be floating down for longer under the parachute.
On the other hand, if it's 10% too small, you're probably screwed.
Re:Why?? (Score:3)
Because when an experiment has undesired results it's often best to find out what seems to have gone wrong before you try the same experiment again... Nothing like throwing millions of Euros away on another probe in the hopes that it was "just some glitch that might not happen again".
Clearly he has spent too much time collaborating with the fine folks at NASA that kind of professional time-wasting may only be learned from an american.
Clearly you
Re:Why?? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the crash site could be found, it would be reasonable to plan a future mission to explore it. We would have the same opportunities to learn about Mars as the Beagle2 did, but we would also have an opportunity to learn some useful things about our own technology. We might not learn why the crash happened (yet then again we might), but we would certainly learn something important about how our materials weather in the martian environment.
Since there is so much potential value in doing a post mortem, it makes a lot of sense to me to devote some time now to locating the crash site, using the best equipment we've got in the area.
For similar reasons, I think our next visit to the Moon should include a detailed inspection of one of the lunar rovers that the USA has left up there. How better to learn how to build equipment for that environment than to study the degradation of equipment that was abandoned there 35 years ago?
Pro'ly should take another photo of that boot print, too. Hey, somebody is taking notes here, right? And somebody will arrange to translate these ideas into Chinese?
Re:Why?? Send a shovel? (Score:4, Funny)
Or, worse, the US & UK will advocate ignoring the Earth-based policies toward abandoned vesses and craft. Then, they'll tell the Martians (a la Columbus), "WE discovered YOU!"... There'll be mumbo jumbo about minutae in contracts and then it'll end with the Earthers saying, "Look, a DEAYUL's A DEAYUL!"..
Then, the Martians will promptly (and, rightly) zap our asses back to kingdom come...
Re:I, for one, welcome our Martian Snoopy overlord (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I, for one, welcome our Martian Snoopy overlord (Score:2)
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:2)
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:5, Insightful)
Beagle was designed to bounce along the surface, losing energy in a controlled manner and coming to a safe stop. Dropping that into a crater is akin to putting the frog in the blender and dialing in a healthy shake. The bits might end up in roughly the same spot, but not necessarily in the same order.
I feel sorry for the Prof. He fought the system to do something that should have had far greater funding, and then they blamed him for what was partly bad luck and partly their fault. If you do a little research into the techology and the experiments planned its really quite amazing stuff. He deserved much more than he got.
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:2, Interesting)
This was not designed as a cooperative test of differing landing systems. The Beagle 2 project was seriously underfunded and just too short on time to properly test all of their systems.
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:2)
Because the guy in charge of the project, Professor Pillinger, was too busy bragging about how his probe was so superior to NASA designs.
Actually, this shouldn't be labeled as flamebait.
Prof Pillinger [nasawatch.com] has been [google.com] bagging on NASA and the NASA probes for some time (esp about cost [google.com]).
This announcement may in fact be about really finding Beagle 2. It might also be a desperate attempt to regain some sort of credibility. Pillinger was damned pretty thoroughly by that ESA report on the Beagle 2 mission.
Re:Fix what problems? We already did that or no? (Score:3, Interesting)
Either you are seriously misinformed or your math skills need some work.
The cost of the Beagle 2 mission is believed to be somewhere around 70-80 million dollars. Once it went over budget they stopped talking about how much it actually cost. It failed. This is not counting its free launch and ride to Mars.
The cost of the NASA twin rovers mission was something like 600
Re:Fake (Score:2)
I think you are confusing this with reports of finding the crash site of the Mars Polar Lander that were later thought to be in doubt after more images of the same site.