Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Beage 2: As I was saying

A Difference Overlooked
Mark Eby — (archived)

NASA learned a lesson from MPL and tested MER more thoroughly although they still cut it mighty close if you followed the news and watched the post landing specials. NASA may still need to allow slightly more time for testing. Beagle's team seems to have ignored the lessons of MPL. Making the same mistakes is not the same thing when you ignore the same mistakes made previously by others.

NASA embarked on FBC with the knowledge that failure rate might go up, but pulled back when they found the rate too high. There is nothing really wrong with that except that many people claim to have seen the failures coming and in hindsight they seem obvious. Striving for cheaper should never have crossed into the realm of obviously sloppy work like the units problem. However, any technology that is considered mature is not tested as thoroughly as that considered in development. I wonder how much of MPL's problems were application of mature technology by inexperienced or poorly trained people. The failure of the cocurrent orbiter was certainly a case of that. MPL's failure may have been more in managing people than in applying or developing technology. Perhaps someone who read the full report on MPL can comment.

Regards,
Mark

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (46 posts)