New Mars Forums

borrowma

InActive

From: St. Louis, MO

Registered: 2003-12-19

Posts: 1

Re: Horrible reporting on Beagle 2 - Rueters article is wrong, wrong, wrong

Just wanted everyone to see how inaccurate the mass media reporting was today.

British Spacecraft Starts Final Leg of Mars Probe

The first sign scientists will have of the success or failure of their project will be when either Mars Express or the U.S. Mars mission rocket Mars Odyssey -- both carrying powerful radios -- enters Mars orbit, antennae straining for the Blur tune.

Mars Odyssey is not a rocket and it's been in orbit for over 2 years.

Beagle 2 parted from the Mars Express rocket

Mars Express is not a rocket.

It will be far cheaper and contain far more science than either of the two U.S. Martian rovers that will be landed from Mars Odyssey in January.

This one is the worst.  Beagle 2 is a capable lander, but to say it will "contain far more science" than two golf cart sized rovers is ridiculous.  (I will admit Beagle is much cheaper.)  Finally, the rovers launched on two rockets on a direct path to Mars on June and July.

Shaun Barrett

Member

From: Cairns, Queensland, Australia

Registered: 2001-12-28

Posts: 2,843

Re: Horrible reporting on Beagle 2 - Rueters article is wrong, wrong, wrong

What's really galling is the fact that the vast majority of the small minority of people who would've taken the trouble to read this 'news' article, wouldn't even have noticed the glaring errors!
                                         

[Incidentally, welcome to New Mars, Borrowma!     ]

---

The word 'aerobics' came about when the gym instructors got together and said: If we're going to charge $10 an hour, we can't call it Jumping Up and Down.   - Rita Rudner

Rxke

Member

From: Belgium

Registered: 2003-11-03

Posts: 3,669

Re: Horrible reporting on Beagle 2 - Rueters article is wrong, wrong, wrong

Hi, Borrowma, thanks for pointing this out, and of course: welcome to New Mars!

Weird, Reuters making all these obvious mistakes... I guess Reuters misinterpreted the fact that Beagle 2 has the highest mass/science ratio compared to other probes...

As explained here

That 'rocket' nonsense is a bit harder to defend, though... What were they thinking?