Skip to content or view screen version

Correction, Mars mission is from EC and not a British one.

true | 28.12.2003 17:49

Some incorrect reports about the Mars mission from some British media.

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.

true

Comments

Hide the following 17 comments

ah, such deligthful precision

28.12.2003 20:30

so rarely seen on Indymedia.

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

as a European I proudly distance myself from your ineptness at technological exploitation of nearby planets.

ipsi

Not hard to get the wrong impression

29.12.2003 06:55

Corporate press can probably be forgiven for ignoring that Beagle 2 is part of a wider European effort, since the PR from Beagle 2 barely seems to mention it.

Check their website:
 http://www.beagle2.com/

"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:
 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:www.beagle2.com+esa

Same again for "european" brings back 13 hits, mentioning the ESA in passing:
 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:www.beagle2.com+"european"

Same again for "Rosaviakosmos" returns nothing at all:
 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:www.beagle2.com+rosaviakosmos

Same again for "Russian" is pretty sparse:
 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:www.beagle2.com+russian

Mars Express site is rather more informative:
 http://www.esa.int/export/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/

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

Perhaps we should consider why the French operated Ariadne launch system was not used. Wht a Russian one ? Maybe because then it had a 50-50 chance of getting off the ground without exploding ???

Dave

Ariane

29.12.2003 14:06

The Russian Soyuz rocket was used because it was cheaper. Araine 4 has had a remarkable launch success rate. Ariane 5 had a slightly shaky start but has improved enormoulsy in reliability recently.

sceptic

Give me the research cash and I'll build ya an armpit better than that shite.

30.12.2003 00:14

I thought they were calling it British because it was designed by the Open University. (Even though it's a 'European mission', luanched from err... central Asia.) mmm.

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

As it happens, the Europeans are developing a supplement to GPS known as EGNOS. The French don't being reliant on the Americans for anything. GPS has proved to be invaluable in ships and aircraft, and in that sense has probably repaid its investment [and all at the Pentagon's expense].

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

Very very few satellies are powered by anything other than solar panels -NOT plutonium pellets. The onl;y possible exceptions are those probes which go to Jupiter or beyond, when the sunlight becomes too weak.

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

if an alien came down from space what would it notice first?
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

I'd be really grateful if you could tell me what a 'hole in the atmosphere' is. The atmosphere is a fluid - it doesn't have 'holes'. A rocket will make a 'hole' as much as an aircraft does or a car does.

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

If you ground up your saucepan really finely then inhaled the dust created, you'd pretty soon find it was toxic.

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

the amount of aluminium oxide released will be smaller than your IQ.

sceptic

aluminium

03.01.2004 13:40

Aluminium has been linked with degenerative brain illnesses such as Alzheimer's. It also is linked with the deteriation of bone growth and also intestinal functions. Just have a search on google for 'Aluminium Toxic'.

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
mail e-mail: musteatvegan@yahoo.co.uk

toxic

03.01.2004 16:17

anything is toxic enough in large enough quantities. [BTW, the link between aluminium and Alzheimers has been disproved]. Did you know the shuttle main engines produce dihydrogen monoxide - and thousands of people die from that every year?

sceptic

did you know?

03.01.2004 21:21

people smoke cigarettes and thousands die from that too?

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