> But rather than explaining all this stuff, I think there's a
> better way: build, land and operate a rover here on Earth.
Is this implying that building a rover here would provide an explanation for their technical choices? With a 2kg payload limit for a balloon-launched rover, you might be better off with the latest technology. GPS on a chip rather than separate components making up GPS circuitry. Or a tiny, power-efficient mobile chip rather than some power-hungry chip from a decade ago.
I agree, especially because many of the reasons for the older, less cutting edge technology used in space boil down to high levels of radiation. Building a small 2kg probe, launching via a weather balloon and then exploring a desert on earth would certainly be hugely educational (not to mention fun) but the constraints would be very different to those on a Mars mission and so the end result would look VERY different.
