Correction, Mars mission is from EC and not a British one.
true | 28.12.2003 17:49
Some British media - like some reports from BBC - speak always from the "British" Mars mission. This is incorrect. It has been a common mission of the EC and different countries supplied parts to the mission.
The British part has been Beagle2 - this reports are correct, but experts mean - Beagle2 has been only 10% of the Mars mission.
The British part has been Beagle2 - this reports are correct, but experts mean - Beagle2 has been only 10% of the Mars mission.
true
Comments
Hide the following 17 comments
ah, such deligthful precision
28.12.2003 20:30
And the rocket that launched the two vehilces to Mars was Russian.
scpetic
so it was the British bit that effed up then?
28.12.2003 20:38
ipsi
Not hard to get the wrong impression
29.12.2003 06:55
Check their website:
"The British led exploration of Mars". Well, yeah, the ground-based part is. But you have to dig pretty deep to find any mention of the rest of the Mars Express team who actually ferried the lander to Mars orbit, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Russian space agency Rosaviakosmos who provided the rockets and launch.
Google site search of the Beagle 2 site for mentions of "ESA" returns 19 hits, mostly boring committee stuff and noting financial contributions:
Same again for "european" brings back 13 hits, mentioning the ESA in passing:
Same again for "Rosaviakosmos" returns nothing at all:
Same again for "Russian" is pretty sparse:
Mars Express site is rather more informative:
Mars Express is a pretty amazing project, yet it's been largely ignored here. If Beagle 2 turns out to be dead on the ground, we'll probably hear that it was somehow the fault of the French.
hazel
Mars Mission
29.12.2003 12:39
Dave
Ariane
29.12.2003 14:06
sceptic
Give me the research cash and I'll build ya an armpit better than that shite.
30.12.2003 00:14
And, why might the British or EU be interested in developing space technology, you may ask? Is it out of pure fascination with the unknown? The desire to communicate with alien races? Or, could it be that these sorts of little experiments might just help the development of some sordid methods of mass control?
Surely, they must just be driven by the same curiosity that drove America, Russia and Nazi Germany to experiment with space technology before them.
It can't have anything to do with the European desire to develop space technologies to rival Americas global positioning software (which Europes nations currently have to pay the US military for the use of.) Nothing of the sort.
Still, just think what the money we've all spent on this shoddy christmas toy could have been used for. All those extra nurses, tax credits, profits for capita.
Shame the damned thing's broke!
cynik
EGNOS
30.12.2003 08:18
And if you're worried about mind control, just put some tin foil over your head next time you venture outdoors. No one will notice the difference. Oh, and if you think you can do better than Colin Pillinger - please have a go.
sceptic
Better space than arms.
30.12.2003 17:00
Whilst I have reservations about the reasons why 'we' explore space it's far better than spending the money on arms and defense (USA $400 bn a year/UK £30+ bn a year).
Yes,the 'race' to the moon was cos of the cold war and much of the rocket development&
satellite tech was/is to assist the military.
There is also the environment problems: Chemicals rockets punch a hole thru the
atmosphere,leave aluminum clouds raining down. Most satellites have been/are powered by
nuclear fission (plutonium pellets).
BUT. if even a quarter to the money currently spent on arms where switched to space,
eco-friendly ways of getting off planet and powering satellites could be further
developed. (Ground to space 'planes'/ ion drives/solar sails.)
Yes,we also need a non exploitative/military ethos for space exploration aswell.
Beagle 2 may not have gone awry had a few more millions been spent on it instead of
building another cruise missile or invading Iraq.
The other 3/4 currently spent on arms etc being diverted to ending the 'majority'
worlds poverty (and our own), thus -largely- eliminating the need for conflict etc.
GL.
Environmental problems??
30.12.2003 20:05
Punching a hole in the atmosphere?? I think not.
Raining aluminium down? In places like ...?
And space planes to orbit are still Hollywood.
sceptic
if an alien came down from space...
30.12.2003 21:24
25% of the worlds population on a dollar a day or less
or
a peice of junk propelled into space be it by british, russian or european money?
translator
Do your research sceptic.
31.12.2003 15:33
You really haven't been watching your Horizon progs etc have you sceptic. They,and many other,sources have repeatedly informed us that ALL rocket and shuttle launches punch holes thru the atmosphere. V basically: displacement of air.
Rocket exhausts leave clouds of aluminium and other chemicals raining down over the launch sites and neighbouring areas, some gets blown further afield. I've seen it happen
at the Florida launch site cos i've been there (some time ago) and talked to locals too.
I'm sure an alien would notice both the way we treat each other- billions in poverty
and the space launches. She,he or it may also notice the amounts we waste on arms too.
GL
hole in the atmosphere
31.12.2003 17:08
There is aluminium in the solid fuel boosters of the shuttle, tho not in any liquid fuelled rockets. This gets oxidised to aluminium oxide. It's not exactly poisonous - after all, saucepans are made of aluminium.
sceptic
Saucepans = non-toxic is not really a good argument.
02.01.2004 09:25
There's plenty of things that are non-toxic when they're in a solid, inert lump but which would really not be pleasant if vapourised and spread across a wide area in the atmosphere.
Afinkawan
aluminium
02.01.2004 17:56
sceptic
aluminium
03.01.2004 13:40
Saucepans do allow aluminium into your food every time you cook, however the amount is so small that your body can handle it.
The amount of Aluminium Oxide that is 'showered' down on us is not likely to have a massive effect. It is likely to be dispersed by the wind.
fredrico
e-mail:
musteatvegan@yahoo.co.uk
toxic
03.01.2004 16:17
sceptic
did you know?
03.01.2004 21:21
The damage to peoples health from space launches is minimal compared with walking down the street. The amounts of these chemicals (such as those mentioned by sceptic) might well be large. However, we are not exactly just pumping it out continuously. Launches are quite rare. The wind deals with the high concentrations by dispersing them.
Anyway, why are we discussing such a pointless issue? Every day thousands of people die of hunger. If you feel that money has been pointlessly wasted on the Mars mission, write to you MP and complain. Most of the money didn't actually come from the UK tax payer though.
manarchist