Beagle-2 has not yet successfully landed on Mars. Landing successfully on Mars is extremely difficult to do. There's a minimum amount of R&D money that must be spent for a successful Mars lander. If less than the minimum amount is spent then the hardware simply augurs into the Martian surface as so much scrap metal, returning no useful science (the Soviets demonstrated this on Mars many times). If you include the money spent on Viking-1, Viking-2, Mars Pathfinder, Mars Polar Lander, DS-2, MER-A & B then the total amount spent by the US on Mars lander technology is well over $3 billion (in current dollars). For purposes of argument, assume that NASA gold plates everything by an order-of-magnitude. That would translate to $300 million for an assumed no-fat viable Mars lander technology. Only through utter blind luck could anyone hope to successfully land on Mars after spending less than 1/6 the no-fat R&D price tag. I have looked at the Beagle-2 design. It has obvious errors in it, e.g., the aeroshell half angle is too small, the terminal velocity impact speed is too high and the design should have used rocket decellerators. British aerospace engineers are very good at what they do, e.g., they designed the Concorde and the Harrier. However it requires money, skill and luck for a successful Mars lander. The $50 million spent on Beagle-2 was squandered.

Gary