THE ill-fated Beagle 2 Mars probe should never have been given the go-ahead by the European Space Agency, an official report claims.
Beagle 2 vanished without trace on Christmas Day 2003, while attempting to land on Mars to search for signs of life.
A peer review committee of Esa experts had originally backed the lander partly funded by the Swindon-based Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council on condition that it was fully funded at the outset.
But this did not happen so the agency's science programme committee should not have agreed to the mission, it has now been claimed.
The failure of the mission, which cost about £50 million, was a huge blow both to Esa and the research council, based at North Star.
The full report from the joint Commission Of Inquiry, set up by British science minister Lord Sainsbury and Esa director general Jean-Jacques Dordain, said: "The Commission's view is that the SPC should not have confirmed the selection of Beagle 2, given the failure of the project to comply with the recommendations."
But the inquiry report identified crucial mistakes which undermined the mission from the beginning.
The most damaging were the way Beagle 2 was treated as a scientific instrument and not a spacecraft in its own right and the lack of properly organised funding.
Both these shortcomings were highlighted in a list of recommendations released by the Commission of Inquiry in May last year.
At that stage Esa and the British Government agreed that for reasons of commercial confidentiality the full report would not be published.
But following widespread criticism of the decision the full details were released yesterday.
Beagle 2 was carried to Mars on board the Esa orbiter Mars Express and was treated as merely another of Mars Express's instruments, not as a self-contained spacecraft.
This was a fundamental error which led to many subsequent problems, said the report.
The report said: "Beagle 2 should have been recognised as a complex, innovative spacecraft requiring management by an organisation with relevant experience .
"This was likely to be beyond the capability of a university-led group."
The research council did not wish to comment on the report's findings.
Gareth Bethell
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article