Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Mars '96 project

How do you expect people to take your editorials seriously, if you are afraid of search engines?
alcaray — (archived)

Here you go:

"Borrowing technology from the failed Mars 96 mission..."

"ESA took the decision in principle to send a mission to Mars shortly after the loss of the Russian spacecraft Mars '96 with several European experiments on board. The Agency wanted to build on the Mars '96 payload experience..."

"Despite the fact that its entire budget is one-tenth that of NASA, ESA has managed to mount the Mars Express mission by relying heavily on the legacy of previous space missions. The main body or "bus" of the spacecraft, for example, is based on the design of ESA flagship Rosetta..."

Good (early) article here: "ESA had to make many savings by reusing available hardware..." and "Indeed the Mars Express spacecraft shares nearly 80% of its design and components with the Rosetta spacecraft and elements of the solar array structure are taken from the Globalstar satellite series." and "In addition several of the scientific instruments being fitted to Mars Express are spares or modified designs from the experiments lost aboard Mars 96."

And before you mount your soapbox, please remember that I was only refuting your statements: "re: "ESA doesn't have an economy of scale regarding Mars missions. If anything, one would think that ESA would charge more because they're new at this game.". I think that the history of Mars '96 and Express clearly show that Express took advantage of prior missions to accrue huge savings.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (26 posts)