Talk:Beagle 2

message: ----
I thought that the crater observed in the middle of the projected landing zone already existed before Beagle Two landed, the theory is that if it landed in this area the 'bounce and roll' landing system would be serverely compromised in it's ablity to minimse the shock to the lander. Even if succesful the shadow of the crater rim would severely reduce the ability of Beagle Two to charge up its batteries - which needed charging before the thing could broadcast its safe arrival. 
On Rick's point above - maybe it would be worthwhile mentioning the high attrition rate of martian probes historically? -- PSD (sometime user of Wikipedia)
----
Can someone please go through this article and regularize the tenses? Lee M 03:46, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I have reverted edit by user:AllanHainey in which he suggests that lack of government funding led to project seeking "external funding". I think this may paint too negative a view of government support, and reading the report of the committee of inquiry  the funding story seems much more complex, with non-government funding being thought about from very early in the project. I can't easily summarise the story in a short phrase, and so I prefer the original statement about publicity. Op. Deo 15:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funding History 

message: Is this section really needed? We can watch the Transformers trailer ourselves, thank you very much. No need to transcribe evrtyhing in the trailer into this article, just because they mention a fictional probe that happens to have the same name. If no one objects in the next 2 days, I will remove it.--Planetary 03:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did it, you're right. Way too much detail. --Guinnog 04:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: You're right.  I saw the section, and thought it needed improving, but I guess I got carried away.  Sorry.  Ackander 14:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Alright. In that case, disregard my previous message. --Planetary 06:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I really don't like the fact that they say there was a rover on board though.  I did the edit mostly because I was annoyed. --Ace-High 04:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beagle 2 in fiction 

message: "On December 20, 2005, Professor Pillinger released [2] specially-processed images from the Mars Global Surveyor which may suggest that Beagle 2 came down in a crater at the landing site on Isidis Planitia."
Well? Where are the images? The link just goes to the beagle 2 homepage, which I've scoured looking for pictures of the purported crater, finding none. Could someone change the link to go to a more specific page that actually has the pictures?
:Only found one image here, so I changed it to that for a quick fix. -- Freddy Jade 04:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not just grab images from other web sites to add them here! Most of them have a copyright that is not compatible with GFDL, and this includes images copyrighted by ESA. Awolf002 04:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

text: What are you talking about?  I didn't copy and paste an image.  I changed the link to a web page that has one of the pictures on the page.  How is that going against copyright?  I didn't add anything.  Maybe you should look before you jump on other people.  Some admin, maybe a misread? -- Freddy Jade 15:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I have "jumped" a bit fast here. But I'd rather remind people about not adding incompatible images to WP, than explaining later why they needed to be deleted. Sorry, that you felt shouted at. That was not my intention. Awolf002 18:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are the images? 

message: In May, 2004, the report from the Commission of Inquiry on Beagle 2 was submitted [...] Professor David Southwood, ESA's director of science, listed the following scenarios how the landing might have failed:
*Beagle entered an atmosphere that was not predicted by scientists and could have burnt up. It may even have "bounced off into space"; 
The report linked says that despite deviations in the atmospheric models due to experiences with Mars Express, the "entry mission design was sufficiently robust to tolerate these variations.  Hence, the Commission concludes that the deviation in the atmospheric entry conditions is not a probable failure mode for Beagle 2."
-- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 23:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That link doesn't seem to work. Beagle 2 ESA/UK Commission of inquiry has 42p report.pdf. Seems scathing. - Rod57 (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  ESA/UK Inquiry report 

message: I have never come across an explanation of how it was to clear its parachute and airbags on landing. It would seem to me highly likely that it would bounce up into its parachute canopy after impact and/or fail to have the airbags conveniently roll away after the connectors were cut. No other Mars probe rode its parachute all the way to the surface. This plus poor funding, short design time, severely constricted payload mass and failure during testing made me consider it unlikely to succeed (I guessed perhaps 30-40% chance of success the night before the landing). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.192.30.57 (talk) 06:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some Answers seem to be in the ESA/UK inquiry report. Beagle 2 ESA/UK Commission of inquiry.  It says p12 total mass of the lander package (heat shield, back shell ?, parachutes, bags etc) was 60 kg (this article says 69 kg). - Rod57 (talk) 11:38, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Design - parachutes & EDL in general 

message: eg at what speed would parachutes be deployed (opened), were they to be detached ? What was the expected vertical speed when the air bags would inflate ? Confirm that there were no retrorockets (unlike Pathfinder, MER etc). How were the parachutes and airbags selected, designed, tested ? - Rod57 (talk) 14:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Some Answers seem to be in the ESA/UK inquiry report. Beagle 2 ESA/UK Commission of inquiry.  It says p12 total mass of the lander package (heat shield, back shell ?, parachutes, bags etc) was 60 kg (this article says 69 kg). - Rod57 (talk) 11:38, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Could use more details on heatshield, parachutes, airbags

message: This was not a European Space Agency probe, it was designed and operated by UK industry separate from ESA as the rest of the article states.  In fact one of the criticisms in the report was a lack of coordination between the British team developing the probe and the ESA team working on the carrier Mars Express! ChiZeroOne (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operator 

message: Ruslik0 has edited para 1 of the Article to read  "It is not known for certain whether the lander reached the Martian surface",... and then...same para.... "The investigation revealed that Beagle 2 certainly reached the surface of Mars...".
!!!
Look...WP is the first reference people come to, when they use the search engines. Now get qualified in writing--or quit!!!
I have corrected this.
Valhalan
Note: 
Original version (Ruslik0):   Nobody knows for certain that it reached the surface; it certainly reached the surface. ( A direct contradiction).
My version: Nobody knows for certain that it reached the surface; the investigation thought that it did.
 
(204.112.71.125 (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "ground contact" has now been removed.  Thank you, John Vandenberg (chat) 00:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Oh for Goodness Sake! Low Standards A-Gain!!

message: http://mashable.com/2015/01/13/mars-probe-beagle/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.85.167.18 (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you see value in these sources in imrpoving the article, then do it.  If you need help ask, even if its "I dont know where to start", someone will help you. Don't leave work for others.  --RadioFan (talk) 18:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mars probe missing for over a decade may have just been found 

message: The coordinates  was several degrees off from the landing coordinates, more specifcally the landing ellipses, discussed in Mission Report published by the Beagle2/Mars Express team and has been updated with that report as a reference.--RadioFan (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: "Beagle 2 is named after HMS Beagle, which twice carried Charles Darwin during expeditions which would later lead to the theory of natural selection."
This is vandalism right?  Breckham101 (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops sorry guys, I misread that. I edited to make it more understandable. I thought they were saying the spaceship carried Charles Darwin and lead him to create the theory of evolution. XD Breckham101 (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Charles Darwin??(disregard this)

message: The lead mentions it was discovered January 2015 but the discovery section says 2014.   Kap 7 (talk) 01:54, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No the lead says it was announced in 2015. As the prose mentions Beagle 2 was first spotted in HIRISE images in 2014. ChiZeroOne (talk) 04:47, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It was last spotted in images from 2014, confirming it as the lander.  It was imaged in previous years as well but not confirmed until late 2014 and announced in Jan 2015.  The current working best captures that without being confusing.--RadioFan (talk) 18:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  discovery date ? 

message: My instinct is "no," but I'm going to give it awhile before making bold edits. RexSueciae (talk) 21:38, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your instincts are spot on! WP:VERIFY  Ohsin  05:23, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is a private conversation a verifiable source? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion