Maybe you'll find this interesting :
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2003-12/26/conte nt_1249246.htm
"Experts at the agency detected the signal from the Beagle 2 with a radio telescope but failed to get in touch with the probe designed to land on Mars. "
If this Chinese news agency is right, it looks like the probe is not fully destroyed. At least, it can emit something.
Then, I'd like to share with you two questions I'm asking myself:
1. How do I/you call a partnership (ESA-NASA) where one of the two partners doesn't want to share his protocol specs ?
2. Can we have a true comparison between the budget sizes and ROI expectations for the current ESA-led mission, and for the previous NASA-led ones ?
I mean, if the whole gold bag had been spent on Mars Express alone, would the price have exceeded the amount of money spent by US on similar, one-part missions ?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you'll find this interesting : http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2003-12/26/conte nt_1249246.htm
"Experts at the agency detected the signal from the Beagle 2 with a radio telescope but failed to get in touch with the probe designed to land on Mars. "
If this Chinese news agency is right, it looks like the probe is not fully destroyed. At least, it can emit something.
Then, I'd like to share with you two questions I'm asking myself :
1. How do I/you call a partnership (ESA-NASA) where one of the two partners doesn't want to share his protocol specs ?
2. Can we have a true comparison between the budget sizes and ROI expectations for the current ESA-led mission, and for the previous NASA-led ones ?
I mean, if the whole gold bag had been spent on Mars Express alone, would the price have exceeded the amount of money spent by US on similar, one-part missions ?
Mmmh, maybe this mission is a success, after all.