Slashdot Mirror
India To Become Aerospace Powerhouse?
jaydub99 writes: "It looks like India will continue to explore new markets for their low-cost, high-tech people. Their next arena could be deploying satellites in high-earth (geostationary) orbit. I wonder how much of the resistance from the U.S. is military-based and how much is economically motivated?"
Another player in the business of satellite launches is good for everyone. A lot of services are enabled by satellites, the failures of Iridium notwithstanding. I think that the current waiting list for satellite launches is quite long, and colored with political favoritism. More capacity would make it easier for new and innovative ideas to get their chance to shoot for the stars.
I only hope that India will not let the environment take a beating on the way up.
First off - It's expensive or impractical to do alot of things with LEO's that people do today with Geosynchronous satellites. Example - Satellite TV? Any sort of broadcast media doesn't work real well with the current LEO system (it could -but it is MUCH more expensive.)
For instance - Iridium had 60 some odd satellites to get world wide coverage. You would probably have to have a similar number to give a single location 24 hour coverage....(not cheap...)
Now to the issue of India having this technology. What if Pakistan and India decide to have an arm's race. That is just one de-stabalizing possibility.
Maybe it'll be with China?
Then there is the issue of other technologies like weapons of mass distruction that always come along with this path. Will India sell these to third world countries.
Yes - the US is probably worried - along with all of India's neighbors (that includes Russia, Pakistan, and China for starters...)
Have you compiled your kernel today??
Besides the SILLY numbers you chose to include for CA (low 60's for number killed each time in the last three major quakes in CA..) CA's infrastructure is stretched to the breaking point.
India has nearly no infrastructure in some places to break! I was talking with an Indian friend today about this very subject. He worked for a power company there before coming here. His story was that power was only on part of the day EVERY day as the rule. They had just completed a plant that would double the area's power capacity and it was insufficient for current needs.
CA has plenty of issues - but these have to do with aging infrastructure, lack of investment in same, a population that refuses to stop growing. (From 19 million in around 79 to 33 million at the end of the 90's.) (Doesn't compare to India's 1 billion though..)
Have you compiled your kernel today??
You missed MY point...
The fact that WE did it gives the unique perspective that it might be a STUPID idea to go down the same path to the logical conclusion it gets too. (3..2..1.....BOOM)
Have you compiled your kernel today??
1) Ditto everything Alien54 said.
2) An effective antimissile system would significantly reduce the value of the military hardware and technology that Russia would like to sell.
3) China's plans to invade Taiwan depend on softening up the islands defenses with a ballistic missile barrage. The missile batteries have been built, tho I suppose they could augment them. If we can build an antimissile system in Taiwan, it would make invasion considerably more difficult.
4) When piss-poor countries like North Korea are building ICBM's (they lobbed a three stage missile over northern Japan a couple of years ago), it's obvious that they consider them pretty damn useful, and America really ought to have a defense against them less drastic than turning their nation into a glass parking lot.
You really shouldn't take the word of the butchers of Tiennemen Square at face value, much less a couple of has-beens.
Still in town, send me an email? (Show yourself, o Anonymous Coward from my past! :-)
It should be obvious to everyone here, but a rocket that's big enough to launch a satellite is more than big enough to act as an ICBM. The US military doesn't like ICBM's, unless they belong to it.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
There was one, a few years ago, taken by a guy in Houston of the night sky. He pointed the camera up, opened the shutter, and left it for a couple of hours. Of course, the image was dominated by star trails; caused by the earth's rotation.
But, dramatically, there was a string of pearls across the center of the frame, which were the geosynchronous satellites which don't move with respect to the earth. While they are way to dim to see normally, integrated over a few hours on film they showed up quite brightly indeed. One of those really amazing pictures that makes AvWeek worthwhile.
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
with the kind of engineering brainpower that India has been exporting over the last few years, they'll have no problem developing their own technology fast.
Industrialization depends a lot more on having the right institutions than any other factor. Unfortunately India has a long history of stifling their private sector with a layers of inefficient bureaucracy.
China is going to land men on the Moon. Suppose India will get in a race?
I agree that national missile defense (due to technological restrictions) is a massive waste of money at this time, but you have a lousy way of making your case.
Could it be officials here are disturbed because India could jeapordize the US' intentions of getting their Star Wars program back on the map?
It could be more probable that President George W Bush & co. want to push through on their campaign pledge, and reward the defense industry with a multibillion dollar contract. I doubt that a missile capacity that we've known India to be developing for the past decade really sets our schedules.
"The officials, speaking on condition they not be identified, said test preparations are going ahead in the absence of orders to the contrary from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld."
So Mr. Rumsfeld has himself denounced this but they are still going ahead with it.
If you bothered to read the sentence you noticed more carefully, DefSec Rumsfeld allowed the BMDO to proceed with more testing by not ordering it to stop. The BMDO, because it hasn't received orders to stop, assumes that everything's A-OK and continues with its schedule. No conspiracy here.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi warned that American missile defense "will have a far-reaching and extensive negative impact on the global and regional strategic balance and stability."
Duh! Why would Beijing not list 20 million bad reasons against a missile defense? Any successful national missile defense, no matter how small, would in all probability negate China's small (20 count) intercontinental nuclear arsenal, forcing them to spend tens of billions of dollars to modernize / expand it. I'll let you put 2 + 2 together.
In Moscow, Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev asserted that a U.S. missile defense could easily be defeated by technologies the former Soviet Union developed in the 1980s in response to President Reagan's Star Wars plan that was a more ambitious attempt to defend against all-out missile attacks.
"We had three mighty programs to asymmetrically counteract U.S. national missile defenses during Reagan's 'Star Wars,"' Sergeyev was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. He gave no details. Although the programs were halted, "We still have them and can take them up again," he said.
This is the same Igor Sergeyev that predicted the Kosovo War would start World War III, and said that Chechnya would be cleared of terrorists in a bloodless, precision campaign. And now he says 1) we have ways to neutralize the missile defense (aside from the 6,000 warheads they now have) and 2) but we're not going to tell you anything. O-kay. If you believe anything he says at face value, I've got some nice oceanfront property in Oklahoma you might be interested in.
On one hand, yes, the threat of a suitcase nuke is hundreds of times more likely than a nation being stupid enough to lob one at us via ICBM, and yes, kinetic kill interceptor technology is just too unreliable to be workable right now. But making hysterical arguments (or worse, just repeating those hysterical arguments) against it isn't helping the anti-NMD position.
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Most of the search-engine hits on my rocket engine patent disclosure page have been from SIFYSEARCH -- a web portal in India.
Seastead this.
I am no specialist, but are you sure it is so crowded out there? It is so much bigger in high-orbit than on Earth and there are not billions of satellites, are there?
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
Does this mean they'll be assuming responsibility for the 7-11 module on the International Space Station?
}
resp {
It's not just 7-11, you forgeting about (taxi-drivers, circle-k, and 70% of contract programmers
, a good deal of which work at MS}
sig {
-Jon
}
Streamripper
this is my sig.
- Coming up with a cheap and re-usable method to go to the International Space Station
- building a space elevator
Seriously, we need to expand and not by simply sending probes. The first step to any advancement beyond the level we reached with the Manned Moon landings was the shuttle program but it was just a miniscule step along the path to riches. It makes far more sense for a miniscule amount of money to be spent on rockets and the vast bulk to be spent on R&D work to come up with a way to lower the dry/wet ratio of a "shuttle", preferably losing the disposable rockets. Then when we can start thinking about housing a few thousand people in space (first station, then craft, then moon, then planet, once the first is broken I cannot imagine the others will take any significant amount of time and that each will fuel and develop the next) we can really start to exploit it (both commercially so the R&D guys can recoup and scientifically/socialogically etc.).Anyone working on the first "non-atmospheric" space craft i.e. one that flys from spacestation to space station?
These damn self-serving corporate money grabbing bastards (and their political exploite[er]s) with their moral imperative to have the most money possible now instead of the best future are just making it harder and harder to dream....sigh
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
Remember that the USA and the West outspent the Soviets, bankrupting them. It certainly disrupted the Soviet block, among other things.
So just on this basis, I can see that China is not yet ready for an arms race vs the USA.
It's economy is not big enough, yet.
As far as the effectiveness of a missile defense goes, remember that it does not have to be 100% effective.
Even if the defense was 50% effective you would have to spend at LEAST twice as much to get through, and a lot more than that if you want to ensure that you hit the targets you have chosen. You might have to put in four times as much to ensure that you take out your favorite heavily defended target.
That by itself will put additional economic pressure on China. So of course, they would get nervous about this.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
I know I'm going to get slandered as a racist for this.
India is rife with corruption and TONS of bureaucracy in multiple languages (fill this out in Hindi, please fill this out in Gujarat, this in Punjabi, wait thirty years for a response, thank you, come again).
If India was such a wonderful hotbed of amazing people, it wouldn't have such a problem with collapsing buildings and starvation.
A lot of Indians are quite knowledgeable and cool, and more power to them. I don't have this strange idea that Indians are good for nothing but convenience stores and selling incredibly cheap knock-off fall-apart things.
I **DO**, however, have a problem with that kind of bureaucracy getting involved with, and screwing up, what amounts to a giant ballistic missile, especially if they use fissile materials. Haree Jamset Ram Singh O-gasket merchants and hair oil, Inc. might have the lowest price on a bid for technology, but what's to stop them from passing off a gasket from a Ford Pinto as same? In a bureaucracy and "very cheap, sir, very cheap" emphasis, NOTHING. And when high explosives are involved, it makes me very nervous.
Again: there is nothing to say that Gujarati buildings COULDN'T have withstood earthquakes: but due to *ahem* cost-cutting and corruption and people on the take, the buildings were slapped together as cheap as possible, risking human lives. This should not be allowed with respect to Space.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
You know, right now India has one of the worst poverty situations in the world, the second largest population in the world, and was just hit by a tremoundous earthquake. They should really try to build up their infrastructure. I mean, 5 km outside of Delhi and it doesn't look like a civilised city!! I realize other countries also have issues, but India should really handle those before going to space.
They just want to be able to say, look at us go we went to space, don't look at our bad side though, which we hid when Clinton came to visit (Delhi's streets were never that good as that day).
-"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
I look forward to going to space through a country which prioritizes space as something truly vital for its future. Maybe countries which are not in the "forefront" of the world economy, such as India, have more incentive in planning for the long term, and investing in things such as a space program.
That said, I would like to hope that India, which claims self-sufficiency, would look over all its expenditures, including space, and see what it can divert to emergency aid for the earthquake and for general poverty.
While space and tech development is a tide that lifts all boats, the poverty in India is a humanitarian catastrophe and should be addressed, first, before considering development investment. Otherwise, development in the long run becomes a greater priority than the alleviation of human suffering.
Goat sex free since 2001
India is a both a democracy and a player in World Free Trade, a concept which is close to the hearts of many in the US. No-one will sell them UTD rocket technology, so they have to develop their own. US rocket development was kick started by captured Nazi technology post WWII, so it doesn't seem fair to criticise them for using existing technology as a base. Given their progress in other fields, I don't think it will be a rocket-backwater for long. If they can develop a space-economy, then there will be much more money to spend on rebuilding Gujarat. I wish them luck in modernising a nation of nearly 1bn souls.
Don't bother, he's not worth it...
I have only ONE question for people whose knee-jerk reaction is to put India down :
WHAT HAS INDIA EVER DONE TO YOU?
We have no history of slavery or foreign invasion. We have never harmed Americans or US interests -- rather we have actively sought friendship and offered to co-operate in matters of terrorism of which we too are targets. So what's your beef? And don't give me that "take care of your poor people first" -- we have made tremendous strides in that department which you clearly don't know about.
It seems that every time someone posts something about India, everyone wants to join in and put India down. Pretty easy to do, huh? An easy target to vent your pent up anger.
We gave the world Yoga, Buddhism (yes!) and Gandhi's doctrine of non-violence. Ever heard of a Hindu terrorist? Indians in America are one of the wealthiest immigrant groups -- we have VERY low levels of violent crime. Yet we are stereotyped by every movie and TV series that depicts an Indian. I'm sorry but this is MY breaking point.
It is one thing to be un-appreciated but another matter entirely to be put down when you clearly don't deserve it!!
Considering that any true advances into space for mankind, beyond one international space station, will have to be achieved by the budgets and manpower of multiple nations, I cannot see why you wouldn't want another nation to become experienced in space based operations.
It increases the global experience base, it increases the chances for technological breakthroughs, it increases the potential, numbers & extent for space based experiments.
If america thinks only it has the right to push into the cosmos, on the tiny budget allotted to NASA by its government, then I would say it is mistaken, and we will be earth bound for longer if it puts up a fight.
Sure India faces many domestic crisis, but every country does at one point, and given a new round of fuel crisis on the horizon, I might make the assumption that soon we might all have domestic crisis to deal with as nations.
We don't need a space race, what we need is an ounce of cooperation across nations, more then ISS, a global effort mounted by as many nations as possible. It shouldn't be an indian space programme, or a US space programme, it should be a human space programme.
Last I heard American military cargo planes touched down on monday to distribute goods. And the US isn't alone in that aid.
Does this mean they'll be assuming responsibility for the 7-11 module on the International Space Station?
As much as I like to see people putting more energy into the exploration and exploitation of space, doesn't California have a lot of infrastructure to work toward building up before worrying about the cosmos? They've just had an earthquake that killed thousands and thousands of people. How many of those people could have been saved by importing American building standards and restrictions and adding more support to the current buildings?
It just seems that California has constant problems with nature as well as their difficulty in even maintaining basic power for their population makes me wary that they may best be spending their money elsewhere.
cpeterso
I'm not saying India is right or wrong or that our policies are, either; I just think that this is a major problem nowadays. Everyone wants the easy solution in geosync, instead of going with arrays. Of course, room in space wouldn't be as much of a problem if companies would just de-orbit their spacecraft after their designed life cycle (or when they are no longer useful, whichever is first).
Other than maybe this reason of non-cooperation, I can't think of any other valid reason we should get upset with them finally joining the space industry. I would love to go over there and work if I got a typical US salary. Good food... mmmm...
IANAL, but I play one on
if you look for racism and bigotry with too much vigor, you will find it everywhere.
thanks for contributing to a world so PC, we're not even allowed to laugh at ourselves.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Ever since I read Shadow of the Hegemon reviewed here on slashdot, it's been hard for me not to see the world as a giant Risk game waiting to happen
-- and America, mighty as some of us are used to thinking of it -- not quite as powerful relative to some other nations as we think. Articles (and posts) like this one keep bringing that thought back.
What I've wondered about, tho', as far as missile defense systems go, is why the United States doesn't simply develop the system and offer to share the technology. Alleviates politcal pressure, solves the "rogue state" problem that's our ostensible reaspon for developin it, and makes us all safer from nukes.
Yeah, I know, it's really quite a naive idea. But I thought I'd mention it.
--
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
I dont see your point. Do you mean to say that if a country is not on the cutting edge, it shouldn't start?
When a society invests in science and technology it invests in its own future. India has been successful in using its satellites for long distance education, storm relief, weather forecasting, and resource mapping. I think this is commendable.
The common attitude here seems to be, "How dare India invest in sci & tech when it isn't half as perfect as the US? Meanwhile, make way there for Uncle Sam to continue to rape nature"
Washington has, over the years, restricted access to technology that might have military applications and slapped significant sanctions on India after its nuclear tests in 1998.
How typical of our country (USA), to place restrictions on others. Cuba, India, Iraq, etc., surely I can see some reasons for our countries motivations (terrorism), but if our politicians and enforcement agencies got it together they could save possibly billions farming out launches to India.
Who knows maybe they won't be so unfortunate to lose "their" rockets when they send them to Mars. Its a nice thought to hear about space exploration, satellites, and how it can improve our lives in the long run however, its sad to see buearucrats feel the need to flaunt their political muscles for nonsense at times.
"When I was a Buddhist, it drove my parents and friends crazy, but when I am buddha, nobody is upset at all"
The US developed and droped nuclear weapons because of a things called the Second World War. Might want to look that up. And remeber that dropping the Bomb saved lives there.
The US, UK, China, Soviet Union, France, South Africa, Israel, and India have all done above ground testing. Not just the US.
The US had an Arms Race with the Soviet Union...you can't race by yourself. French and Brits did pretty good there too. Let's not forget that Pakistan and India have also had a nice little arms race too. Again...not just the US.
India has been launching satilites for years...since the 70s...this is nothing new. But it's not really far to do a US-Bash here.
As much as I like to see people putting more energy into the exploration and exploitation of space, doesn't India have a lot of infrastructure to work toward building up before worrying about the cosmos? They've just had an earthquake that killed thousands and thousands of people. How many of those people could have been saved by importing American building standards and restrictions and adding more support to the current buildings?
It just seems that a country that has constant problems with nature as well as their difficulty in even maintaining basic power for their population makes me wary that they may best be spending their money elsewhere.
And yes yes, I realize that these claims might also be applicable to the United States, that we could best be spending the space money elsewhere, but at least we're theoretically on the cutting edge and any of our space development leads into new territory, whereas India is merely exploring territory that is twenty or even thirty years old.
Do with this what you will.
--
RumorsDaily
The Pentagon's Ballistic Missile Defense Organization also is planning another attempt to shoot down a mock nuclear missile in space, probably in May or June, using the same technologies that produced a spectacular failure last July, the officials said. Two of the last three attempted missile intercepts failed.
;)
Could it be officials here are disturbed because India could jeapordize the US' intentions of getting their Star Wars program back on the map?
The officials, speaking on condition they not be identified, said test preparations are going ahead in the absence of orders to the contrary from Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
So Mr. Rumsfeld has himself denounced this but they are still going ahead with it.
Rumsfeld has been briefed in recent days by Ronald Kadish, the Air Force general who runs the missile defense project office.
Aside from the technical issues yet to be resolved, Russian and Chinese officials offered reminders Tuesday that whatever the design of a U.S. national missile defense, it will be controversial.
In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi warned that American missile defense "will have a far-reaching and extensive negative impact on the global and regional strategic balance and stability."
In Moscow, Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev asserted that a U.S. missile defense could easily be defeated by technologies the former Soviet Union developed in the 1980s in response to President Reagan's Star Wars plan that was a more ambitious attempt to defend against all-out missile attacks.
"We had three mighty programs to asymmetrically counteract U.S. national missile defenses during Reagan's 'Star Wars,"' Sergeyev was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. He gave no details. Although the programs were halted, "We still have them and can take them up again," he said.
Just think about that for a second. Russia which has in reality little leadership, they'd have nothing to lose. See: Electro Magnetic Pulse. Russians have been using it for some time on a very low key basis.
At a European security conference in Germany last Saturday, Rumsfeld said President Bush intends to deploy a national missile defense. But first Rumsfeld is reviewing the status of the project the Bush administration inherited from the Clinton administration and is considering how to fulfill Bush's pledge to provide a missile shield that would cover not only the United States but also its allies.
This is a sham in order to make those who disapprove to think the US would actually give a rats ass in the event of a nuclear war. Its a way for politicians to waste tax dollars in order to get kickbacks. Old old old news.
I could go on but its redundant isn't it
Oh well here are some hot chicks aren't you glad you read the whole thing through?
"When I was a Buddhist, it drove my parents and friends crazy, but when I am buddha, nobody is upset at all"