This is precisely what I've been saying about Beagle all along. From the beginning it was more pipe dream than science. Frankly, I think a lot of folks got hoodwinked into tilting at windmills by a less than plausible project. Perhaps Barry should sned me my $100 back:

The aftermath of Beagle

By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor

Beagle 2's plan to sift the sands of Mars for signs of life was one of the most audacious and risky space missions ever conceived.

Had it succeeded it would have been one of the biggest scientific achievements ever. But Beagle was high risk, a mission close to the edge, pushing the envelope on time, money, and technical feasibility.

Its prolonged silence means it is surely lost, crippled or shattered among the windblown dunes on the desolate plain of Isidis.

Questions will now be asked about what happened, and if another attempt should be made.

The project was initially the dream of Professor Colin Pillinger, from Britain's Open University, and from the robot's first design on a beer mat in 1997, the concept was turned into reality in record time.

Tall order

The plan was to get it to Mars by piggybacking a ride on the European Space Agency's Mars Express spacecraft.

It would separate just before it got to the Red Planet and then parachute and bounce on to the surface before opening and leaning a multi-instrumented arm against a Martian rock to look for life.

Everyone knew it was a tall order. The whole package had to be no more than 73 kilograms.

And since that mass had to include the heat shield, parachute, protective airbags and solar panels, space for science was at a premium.

More than once scientists who believed they had designed a sensor that could not be made any lighter were told they had to lose more grammes - or else the instrument could not be included.

The result was a lean and efficient probe - a tribute to the team led by Professor Pillinger; Dr Mark Sims of the National Space Centre; and Jim Clemmet of Astrium UK, the spacecraft's manufacturer.

But the risks were always there. They were called "single point failures". If any went wrong, the mission was over.

For many engineers, it was the airbags - inflated just before touchdown to cushion the landing - that were the major worry.

They failed their initial tests and, after modifications, did not go through a full testing regime because time was so tight.

Beagle's bill

Professor Pillinger led, almost single-handedly, a campaign to raise the money needed for the mission.

The project was to be funded by a combination of grants and loans from space agencies, research councils, manufacturers and the UK Government, among others.

To attract sponsors Beagle 2 was kept constantly in the public eye, publicity-friendly participants were brought on board such as the pop group Blur and artist Damien Hirst.

But despite Professor Pillinger's high public profile, sponsors could not be found.

In April 2003, two months before Beagle's launch, Professor Pillinger told BBC News Online: "The underwriters are as pleased as they can be under the circumstances. I am not giving up. No one expects me to give up and no one has asked me to give up."

But no sponsors were in evidence at the time Beagle was assembled, or indeed at its launch in June 2003, and none was obtained for the probe's separation or landing on Mars.

This leaves Beagle's backers with a problem. The loan part of the total cost of approximately £50m will have to be repaid, or written off.

This will cause some resentment among other scientists who have seen their budgets squeezed to pay for Beagle.

Beagle 3?

Engineers are hoping that the light and efficient instruments developed for Beagle will be used on future Mars missions.

Theoretically, it might be possible to put a Beagle-type craft on the side of a Mars-bound craft but at the moment that looks unlikely.

Only the US has Mars missions planned and they may not be too keen.

Beagle's legacy may be in showing that it is possible to put a piggyback payload on a spacecraft and deliver it to its destination.

Following such an approach should, sooner or later, achieve success.

It may also be remembered for raising the profile of British space science - if it survives the inevitable feeling of failure.

The Beagle probe has been unique but its loss confirms what many space engineers know: that space is unforgiving. As well as being good, you have to be lucky. In the end Beagle was not.