"The CO" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Emmanuel.Gustin" wrote in message
...
Stephen Harding wrote:

Wasn't the rover about to attack 'an interesting geological
feature' when it failed? So it would be legitimate self-defence,
or at worst a legitimate pre-emptive strike...

A much more likely source of failure is the lack of EEs at NASA, as
outlined
in the Shuttle crash investigation board report. Until the areo mafia
is
rooted out of NASA, there can be no forward movement. Aero's havn't
controlled a successful aerospace company since the 1970s, as it has
been
all EE since then.

Actually, it now appears highly likely that it's a problem with the
FLASH memory management software module.

Perhaps.

The FLASH hardware is apparently ok. In short, it appears to be either a
bug or something corrupted it, such as a high energy particle impact.

I know that JPL would lie, so I can't put much stock into what they say.
There is an identical module on Mars now and in a week you right be able to
make such a case. Right now, any such "cause" is unknowable.

I will give JPL credit for creating something that works at all, which is
something that has been problematic at NASA for some time.