How did the European Space Agency's Mars lander meet its untimely end?

NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has obtained low-resolution photos that appear to show the wreckage of ESA's Schiaparelli lander.

Images from the landing site of the ExoMars Schiaparelli lander appears to show the craft's wreckage.

Just about a minute before it was supposed to touch down on Mars, Schiaparelli lost contact with mission control.

At first it was unclear what became of the craft, designed by the European Space Agency (ESA) and Russian space agency Roscosmos to demonstrate soft landing technologies on Mars. Then, NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter obtained low-resolution photos that appeared to show a wreckage.

On Friday, ESA officials confirmed that the lander, which began its final descent about 2.5 miles above the surface, was likely lost.

“Schiaparelli reached the ground with a velocity that was much higher than it should have been, several hundred kilometers per hour, and was then unfortunately destroyed by the impact,” ExoMars Flight Director Michel Denis told Reuters.

Schiaparelli’s landing was anything but ‘soft’ – the spacecraft failed to fire its descent-slowing thrusters as long as intended, and full fuel tanks would have exploded upon impact.

ESA has not yet determined what caused the crash, but is currently analyzing the lander’s recovered descent data for clues. Officials say the craft's descent technology, designed to slow the lander down as it careened toward Mars, deployed normally.

The Christian Science Monitor’s Weston Williams reported earlier this month:

Essentially, Schiaparelli will be launched with a traditional heat shield and parachute combo, but the thin atmosphere will not be enough to slow the [Entry, Descent and Landing Demonstrator] down enough for a safe landing with those methods. Once the parachute slows the descent as much as it can, the hydrazine rockets will slow it the rest of the way before cutting out two meters from the surface. From there, the probe will drop, with a crushable layer protecting the rest of the probe from harm.

“But somehow the parachute was released a bit too early, and after that the engine functioned, but only for a few seconds, which was too little,” Denis said.

The crash may conjure up painful memories for ESA and spaceflight enthusiasts. In 2003, the agency’s Beagle 2 lander lost contact with mission control during its final descent. For twelve years, nobody knew what became of the craft. In 2015, NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter obtained new images of the landing site: Beagle 2 had touched down successfully, but eventually lost power after it failed to deploy two of its solar panels.

Other nations have experienced similar mishaps on the Red Planet. In 1998, NASA’s Mars Polar Lander slammed into the planet’s rocky surface after prematurely terminating its engine during final descent. More than two decades earlier, a design flaw in Russia’s Mars 6 lander prevented the return of any usable data from the craft’s entry.

In many ways, Schiaparelli’s mission was failure. Without a successful test landing, ESA’s 2020 Mars rover will have a lot less to go on. But officials still consider ExoMars a tentative success: the Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO) is still operational, sniffing out methane and other bio-significant gases on its orbit around the Red Planet.

This report includes material from Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to How did the European Space Agency's Mars lander meet its untimely end?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today