|
Socoder -> Off Topic -> Crash and Burn |
|
| Sat, 22 Oct 2016, 09:08 | |
|
GfK |
 The Europeans aren't going to be too cut up about the failed landing. Schiaparelli was only supposed to last a few days anyway Er yes, but it wasn't meant to crash and burn without sending any data back! Cracking waste of money. Again. |
| Sat, 22 Oct 2016, 09:15 | |
Jayenkai
|
Might as well have sent a modern Mobile, for all the time it lasted.
-=-=- ''Load, Next List!'' 
|
| Sat, 22 Oct 2016, 16:54 | |
|
zzoom |
On the plus side - they hit Mars, they could've missed altogether 
-=-=- Happy coding!
|
| Sat, 22 Oct 2016, 18:12 | |
therevillsgames
|
Cracking waste of money. Again. It is pretty hard to do since we are 140 million miles (225 million km) (on average) away from Mars 
|
| Fri, 28 Oct 2016, 04:19 | |
|
Jayenkai
|
Sounds like an episode of Star Trek... The Shrapnel of Schiaparelli! -=-=- ''Load, Next List!''
|
| Fri, 28 Oct 2016, 09:44 | |
Dabz
|
Shame, but no doubt, they'll learn from it I suppose... But I'll be mega honest right... Why dont they just buy Nasa's tech on getting there... They put a bloody 900 kilo vehicle on the surface, amonst many other landers... Why pay all that money to reinvent the wheel? Just buy a fucking wheel! Dabz -=-=- Intel Core i5 6400 2.7GHz, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (8GB), 8Gig DDR4 RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD, Windows 10 64bit
|
| Fri, 28 Oct 2016, 13:49 | |
|
GfK |
It is pretty hard to do since we are 140 million miles (225 million km) (on average) away from Mars |
| Fri, 28 Oct 2016, 14:49 | |
rockford
|
Yeah, I'm pretty sure nobody would fly BA if they promised to get you the airspace above your chosen destination, but actually landing there wasn't going to happen (or not in one piece). It's all teething problems though. Admittedly very expensive ones! |
| Sat, 29 Oct 2016, 04:20 | |
|
GfK |
By the time we put people on Mars you won't be able to move up there without tripping over bits of old robot. It'll be like landing in a junkyard.
|
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||