Beagle 2 Failure Theories

Dan East writes "New Scientist has an article discussing the failure of ESA's Beagle 2 Lander. Theories as to why the landing failed include thinner than expected upper atmosphere, extreme atmospheric temperature fluctuations, and possible physical damage to Beagle 2 seen in an image acquired immediately after it separated from Mars Express. Recent data acquired by Mars Express, as well as NASA's Mars Rovers, are helping direct investigations into the failure. So far only around half of Beagle 2's landing ellipse has been imaged in an attempt to locate remnants of the lander. USA Today is also running an AP story on these latest theories."

Comments

Re:Unrelated Question

[LostCluster]

It's not that easy to dust with a windshield wiper. We're talking about mostly dirt here, not water.

So, while it seems simple to just brush it off, they'd need something more complex than a simple windshield wiper... and a moist cloth is just too tall an order for Mars :)

Conversions...

[PeaceTank]

The most likely candidate as an explaination of failure is simply human error. There are rarely errors in electronics that are not caused by humans that could cause such a massive loss. Usually, errors in hardware do not exist, as the hardware is top of the line and checked and re-checked for defects. (Granted, however, that sometimes faulty hardware may slip through the cracks) It is most likely something simpler than "it landed in a crater full of quicksand and sank." However entertaining it may be to picture a multi-million dollar rover sinking into the martian soil, it simply is impossible. To create quicksand one needs water. Even though the Spirit and Opportunity rovers found evidence of water on Mars, it was a long time ago, not today, that Mars was wet. So that simply is not feasible. Space debris, while a popular theory, is so unlikely (the chances of a meteor hitting something in the middle of space are *chuckle* ASTRONOMICAL) So this leaves us with simple human error. Something as simple as a single line of code can destroy an entire project (programmers know what I'm talking about). If you will remember, a few years back NASA lost a multi-million dollar spacecraft because of an error converting from the English system to the Metric system, so it is usually something tiny like that. If you asked me, it's most likely that someone typed an extra "0" somewhere in the code for orbital data and/or surface descent for the capsule. Even though it is just one "0", over that long of a distance it would make a huge difference. Remember that each decimal place is a factor of 10! Telling a spacecraft to orbit at "100,000" miles above the surface is a whole lot different than telling the spacecraft to orbit at "1,000,000" miles above the surface. Such an error would just send the poor Beagle 2 hurtling into the vast reaches of space or crashing to the surface. So it is most likely something like this that has caused all the trouble with the Beagle 2 and given those poor Brits such a hard time.

Re:Conversions...

[addaon]

Hardware in space is NOT the same as hardware inside a box on your desk. Ignoring nasty things like radiation flipping bits (we can reduce that to negligable), you have beautiful stuff like heat stress on structural parts, vibrations at both launch and atmospheric entry, and, of course, an inevitable collision with a big, hard planet. Hardware fails. Perhaps this is a subcase of "human error" (the humans, after all, chose what hardware to send), but in that case there's no such thing as something that's not human error.

for want of...

[sssmashy]

"It may be nothing, it may be everything" said Sims. The object could be one of the explosive bolts used to secure the probe to its host during take-off. More worryingly, it could be something that broke off Beagle 2, or a wrinkle in the insulation wrapping the probe.

• The Shoe was lost for want of a Nail;
• The Horse was lost for want of a Shoe;
• The Rider was lost for want of a Horse;
• The Battle was lost for want of a Rider;
• The Challenger was lost for want of an O-ring;
• The Columbia was lost for want of a Ceramic Tile;
• The Beagle was lost (probably) for want of Undamaged Insulation;

And on and on it goes. Kingdoms and spacecraft get lost on a dime, these days.

the 'eggheads forgot' meme

[gad_zuki!]

A wiper on the panels is like a spare wheel for a car with a bad transmission.

The dust will settle on the panels in x amount of time, but by then the batteries won't be able to recharge and there will be other mechanical problems.

I find these memes a little interesting. There's always something the 'eggheads forgot' according to the common man and its easy to believe. A related meme is how Einstein was a terrible math student when he was young. In reality, he did fine in math when he was young. I guess believing in this kind of stuff makes you feel better knowing that you're "better" than "smart people" and that life is very simple and requires simple solutions.

Then again, the conversion error from metric to imperial that caused another mars bound space-probe to fail fuels this fire, but is very much an exception and not the rule.

Re:And for that matter-

[Gogo Dodo]

Unfortunately, it probably wouldn't work so well outside where there is an endless supply of dust. Your desk is a semi-controlled environment where the house/office is eliminating most of the dust from the outside.

You have to wipe those "ionic breeze" things clean after awhile. Now you've got two dirty elements: the solars panels and the thing that's supposed to clean the panels. How do you clean the cleaners?

Also, the suggestion puts more load on the electrical system.

Re:Rip off strips?

[Gogo Dodo]

If an existing appendage on the rover...

That would add a lot of complexity. Right now, the arm on the two rovers and Pathfinder only had to really move from level to down to the surface. You would have to make the arm reach up and over the rover.

Additionally, the arm would have to be longer to reach the tag and pull the tear-off the full length of the panels.

For example's sake, stand up straight, take your arm and imagine pulling a tear-off from the top of your head, along your back, to your feet while remaining standing straight (no bending the knees). Watch the motion of your arm and it's a pretty complex motion. Not to mention, your arm's reach will stop somewhere around your knees.

Re:Rip off strips?

[paganizer]

Thats so obvious I bet nobody thought of it.
Fantastic idea, though.
The mechanism for pulling the strip off would be sort of a pain, but considering that you are talking very minimal force, you can probably set up a bi-metalcoil wench, a couple of gears, a pully, a pully guide, and some thin wire.
as soon as the solar collectors fall below a certain point of efficiency, the coil would be mechanically engaged (simple), and every day/night cycle it would advance a tooth on the gear, slooooowly pulling the protective strip off. when power gets to peak, it would automatically dis-engage, allowing for bad weather effects, and prolonging the life of the collector by leaving a percentage of it protected.
Damn. they would probably screw up and try to make it digital.

Re:Unrelated Question

[kingnathan]

The answer is that "designed to last for 3 months or until its solar panels become covered in Mars dust..." is inaccurate. Dust is one of the limiting factors to the Spirit and Opportunity's lifespans, but it is not the only one. The electronics and batteries have a restricted lifespan due to the significant temperature changes that occur from day to night. Imagine putting a solar powered calculator in the oven and then the feezer over and over again. The rovers were designed to last at least 90 days and dust will not be a significantly limiting factor during those 90 days. If the electronics and batteries last significantly longer than 90 days, then dust may start to become a larger problem. Assuming the electronics/batteries last indefinately, the dust will eventually kill the Rovers. When NASA launches a rover designed to have a significantly longer lifespan, you can bet that solar panel cleaners will be part of the design.

Re:Money

[Aardpig]

You know why? Because its cheap. If you want something done right, it is going to cost you money.

Your "it's more expensive, therefore it must be better" theory is wonderfully naive. Now go and read about, say, the Linux vs Microsoft battle, and leave us all in peace...

My 2c

[mark-t]

I'm quite convinced that the only real error made by the Beagle2 team was thinking that a plan involving dropping a dead weight from an astronomical height would actually work in that equipped with nothing more than the gyroscope effect and a parachute, it would actually land where and how they might predict.

In particular, the Beagle2 was released by Mars Express a heckuva long way from the planet. Even the _slightest_ deviance from the carefully calculated course at that distance could result in the Beagle missing the planet completely, to say nothing of missing the target area. When Mars Express entered Martian orbit, they announced that although it was working perfectly, it was in a slightly different orbit than what they had expected. This only furthers the premise that the Beagle2 may have been slightly off course as well. And unlike the Mars Express, the Beagle2 had no navigational equipment to help it correct any errors that could have been otherwise noticed as it drew closer to the planet.

I think that the Beagle2 would have been a brilliant success if they had been willing to spend a little more and at least equip the Beagle with it's own basic navigational equipment and propulsion. Not a lot, mind you.. just enough fuel to make minor navigation adjustments that could very well turn out to be necessary after separation, as well as maybe helping to slow the Beagle down when it got close enough.