Home World Forum: Circular File » The "Beagle" has landed, NOT!

Home » General Chat » Circular File » The "Beagle" has landed, NOT!

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

The "Beagle" has landed, NOT!

Sun, 28 December 2003 17:33

alexdstewart

Chief Warrant Officer 2

Messages: 164
Registered: July 2003
Location: Brisbane, QLD.

it...

I just canna stand the hypocracy of 'em people in space agencies:
I mean only 3 out of 30 missions are NOT failures to the Red Planet... Now 90, 90% failure rate just streches the limit of credebility. With the success rate of close to 90% in all other interplanetary missions, AM I to believe that 27 of 30 missions to Mars failed due to purely technical problems? Do I look like an idiot?! Mad

...eh, sorry guys Embarassed

. I just feel very strongly on the matter of those "failures". European technology is notorious for its safety AND reliability. Although sabotage is dead easy against would be Mars lander, I also realize that even the best space tech is only about 90% reliable (which makes Apollo 11-17 glitch free (xcept for 13's explosion) runs nothing short of miraculous). Sherlock

And therefore technical failure AND only technical failure is probable if unlikely.

I wager that at least some of the Landers that are due to reach the Red Planet in a month or so will be at least partial failures. Frown

Has anyone got any plausable explanations for the high failure rate of interplanetary probes to Mars? Puppy dog eyes

[Updated on: Sun, 28 December 2003 17:37]

In the Future there is only WAR...
Therefore our extinction is assured, it is just a matter of where and when.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: alexdstewart on Sun, 28 December 2003 17:33
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Staz on Sun, 28 December 2003 18:16
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: alexdstewart on Sun, 28 December 2003 18:45
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: donjon on Mon, 29 December 2003 06:07
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Staz on Sun, 28 December 2003 18:20
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Staz on Mon, 29 December 2003 09:01
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: EDog on Mon, 29 December 2003 12:05
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: donjon on Mon, 29 December 2003 16:41
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: BlueTurbit on Mon, 29 December 2003 19:18
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: PapaBear on Tue, 30 December 2003 00:55
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Staz on Mon, 29 December 2003 17:52
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: EDog on Mon, 29 December 2003 19:14
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: BlueTurbit on Mon, 29 December 2003 19:21
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: alexdstewart on Tue, 30 December 2003 05:01
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: BlueTurbit on Tue, 30 December 2003 14:24
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Hatterson on Tue, 30 December 2003 14:26
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: alexdstewart on Tue, 30 December 2003 22:49
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Hatterson on Wed, 31 December 2003 13:19
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: icebird on Tue, 13 January 2004 19:33
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: Shadow Whist on Wed, 14 January 2004 03:30
		Re: The "Beagle" has landed, NOT! By: alexdstewart on Wed, 14 January 2004 23:53

Previous Topic:	Puzzle thread Jan. 6
Next Topic:	Puzzle thread Jan. 13

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Fri May 24 22:46:08 EDT 2024