Low-Budget Indian Satellite Launch

Geekonomical writes "On Thursday afternoon, for a mere 15 million U.S. dollars, India launched a meteorological satellite into geo-synchronous transfer orbit some 36,000 kilometres above the equator using a modified version of its highly successful space workhorse, the polar satellite launch vehicle (PSLV). The article also claims that China spends 12 times as much as this for a launch!"

Comments

First Propz

[handybundler]

to al sp0rks, me, and your mom. werd.

SP

[handybundler]

Number Two.

Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

If they're truly doing that for a twelfth (what a horrid word) of the cost that China spends, the what the hell is China doing wrong?! Or does China send up a system 12 times better?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[tanveer1979]

no, PSLV is proven and satellites work properly. The Cost reduction is primarily due to the fact that the components are indegenous with very less import content. Due to cheap labour and manufacturing in India the costs are down.

Another reason for the low price is the ISRO(Indian Space Reasearch Org) does not have unlimited funds unlike china where funding is much more liberal, so cost cutting is high on agenda.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[AtomicBomb]

The claim that PSLV is 12 times cheaper than the Chinese equivalent is basically a self-advertisement. The DF5 ICBM's manufacturing is about US$15M ($100M yuan). Long March 3 series is based on DF5 ICBM missile's technology. Who can believe a Long March satellite lanuching rocket is 12 times more expensive than DF5!!! (check some of the articles in www.kanwa.com, probably last summer).

As a side note: the Chinese space program is about 100% indegenous. DF5 was developed in early 80's. With a range that can reach US, Americans could not be the partner. Former USSR had a very bad relationship with China at that moment.

Labour cost is not high in China either. All the lanuching pads are in remote area. The salary is really low. For manufacturing cost, most agree that China is lower than India... Well, India is better in more service-oriented industry, eg IT. No one is all-rounder, right?

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

First, the figure said by the india side is unconfirmed, there are too many tricks one can play in cost estimation. Second, in any standard, I bet China still spent less money than US on a similar project, which doesn't necessarily mean US was doing something wrong or US' system was better than the Chinese one at the time when they were first built.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[(v)Jargon(v)]

I think the real question is how much America spent on satellites when it first initiated NASA. We don't need to focus on China spending more money, so what if they do. Over-time they will develop better systems if not already. I sense (as usual) an arrogance on the American side that we do everything better and the rest of the world is a bunch of idiots!

Re:Cost effectiveness

[ackthpt]

f they're truly doing that for a twelfth (what a horrid word) of the cost that China spends, the what the hell is China doing wrong?!

P.R. o' China probably isn't overrun with laid-off IT people who formerly worked in Silicon Valley, et al, and have returned home, willing to work for a check, which, when you get down to it, goes a lot futher in India than it does in California these days.

As soon as PRC has an excess of techies their costs will probably drop, too.

Re:Cost effectiveness

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Laid-of IT workers typically wouldn't have the skills profile to get employment at ISRO. ISRO mostly hires only 'real' Science and Engineering graduates, not the IT/networking crowd.

2. ISRO only recruits people who graduate from Indian universities. Exceptions are few and far between, and only for those who have at least their Master's from India. Current statistics shown that over 99% of their employees have local (Indian) education.

..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Chicane-UK]

..hell, at that price, I'll launch 3! :)

Re:..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Zork the Almighty]

Heck, if I had a billion dollars I'd launch 66 !

Re:..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! Don't be so negative. Remember that this is the brand new business-model pushed by RMS and the FSF that is going to solve all our problems!

1: Write free software.
2: ?
3: Launch small satellite.
4: Profit!

Re:..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Zork the Almighty]

Now that I've given it more thought, with the 10 million dollars I would have left over, I could get two chicks at once !

Re:..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes, the 1.something, 2.????, 3.profit! joke!! Easily as funny as `imagine a beowulf...` or `first post!`!

I think a slight mod to the lameness filter is required.

Re:..a mere 15 million U.S.

[Anonymous Coward]

Think this business-model is better?

1: Write free software.
2: ?
3: Modify the lameness filter.
4: Profit!

high-end labor in "3rd world" countries

[davejenkins]

A common argument in populist economics is that jobs go to the third world because of lower labor costs. Others counter this argument that it is unskilled labor, and that high-end technologically advanced labor stays within 'advanced' economies (US, Europe, Japan).

So-- is this a case that disproves the counterargument-- that even 'skilled' labor industries can skip to the third world, or is it an indictment against the regulatory pressures/infrastructure costs of trying to launch something under a US/EU umbrella?

There is clearly a glut of satellite launching capacity, yet prices have remained high because?

Re:high-end labor in "3rd world" countries

[cavetroll]

perhaps more interesting is the possiblities for space ttourism, at 1/12th the cost of China (and presumably Russia) then the cost to an individual to travel into space could fall drastically in the next few years. It would still be ridiculously expensive but affordable to more than the excessivly wealthy. With sufficantly quick developmet in this field (and a sufficiantly good safety record even at a lower cost) India may set themselves up as the first extra terrestial budget airline.

Re:high-end labor in "3rd world" countries

[Anonymous Coward]

So-- is this a case that disproves the counterargument-- that even 'skilled' labor industries can skip to the third world

"High tech" and "skilled" relative terms. Satellites are 1950s technology...

implications

[tps12]

While it's great to see third world nations making headway in traditionally Western scientific endeavors, I have to wonder if this story doesn't have a more sinister side to it. Recall that India shocked the global community recently when satellite data indicated that they had developed nuclear weapons, despite treaties against such activities. If they can put a weather satellite up this cheaply, then they can probably get nuclear missiles up there for not much more. Or maybe they already have. If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations, then we wouldn't have to worry about this. As it is, we're almost forced to bolster our own space weapons so we don't look like sitting ducks.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Why exactly should third world countries be dependant on first-world countries for satellite data ?

Why exactly should third world countries have to pay a stiff price to launch satellites in space when they can do it cheaper ?

Why exactly should anybody have to pay a stiffer price to launch satellites in space when a third world country can do it cheaper (provided they can prove that they can do it reliably).

BTW, India was not a signatory to any treaty prohibiting nuclear testing, but that is a whole other debate. I personally did not support the testing not because I am against it in principle, but because I think it did not serve Indian strategic interests. The problem is that a conservative right-wing party rules the federal govt. in India and they've had "we must have nukes" in their election manifesto for the last 30 years !

In anycase, the US is attempting to limit space research by forcing Russia not to deliver cryogenic engines. However, every attempt to block technology by denial only leads to a determination to develop it on your own. Once you have achieved a certain basic scientific-industrial complex, there is precious little one can do to keep the inexorable march of technology from moving forward.

So, yup .. a lot of this technology is dual use. Deal with it.

Re:implications

[davejenkins]

India has had 'the bomb' for probably 15+ years. They only recently detonated one to scare the shiat out of Pakistan, and Pakistan was obliged to respond.

India is not a concern against attacking the US (or Europe) because there is no motivation to (just like there is no motivation for France, Germany, Japan, UK, Brazil or a few others with nukes to attack the West).

Threats need three things:
* weapons
* delivery system
* motivation

Most western democracies have the first two, but lack the third. Many countries have the motivation, but lack either the weapons or the delivery. When viewed through this lens-- it is easy (albeit simplistic) to view US diplomacy as eliminating at least one of the ingredients from a percieved threat.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiiight, so India puts up a weather satelite,
and that means that the US needs to put even more
weapons in space.

You lot really are the master race aren't you.

Re:implications

[Evil-G]

If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations, then we wouldn't have to worry about this.

Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.

The US could just have easily have placed nuclear weapons in space as India could have, as it is only speculation that India has done.

And, although India is less developed than, for example, the US, why should they be forced to stay that way?

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to suffer from several misconceptions.
Maybe you are still a teenage kid.

a) India has not signed any treaties including
the big one; the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT). Other countries that have not signed
the NPT are Pakistan and Israel.

b) India shocked no-one when they tested
nuclear weapons. Their first test (conducted
quite openly) was in 1974.

c) When you say "we", you don't include
most of the US Population unless you are an
anti-semites and/or anti-Indian's. No one is
worried about India, since it's a stable
"democracy" and has been for 50 years. In
fact, several export controls were recently removed for India and China.

d) The phrase "Third-world" was invented by
India. Look up what it means.

Re:implications

[rde]

I wouldn't worry about it. The rest of the world has been living with a rogue nuclear (sorry; nukular) state that launches covert satellites for, oh, decades now.

Re:implications

[mpe]

India has not signed any treaties including the big one; the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Other countries that have not signed the NPT are Pakistan and Israel.

Israel is rumoured to have nuclear missiles capable of hitting anywhere on the planet and they have made themselves a lot more enemies than India.

Re:implications

[squaretorus]

I didn't know George Bush was a /.er!!

What a crock of shit. India is a more sophisticated and advanced society than large parts of North America, with one of the most educated populations in the world. To call it third world is insulting, to refer to it as unstable and undeveloped is offensive.

I suggest you find out a bit about the world.

The US recently shocked the global community when it announced an intention to blow the shit out of a country on the other side of the globe just because they didn't like the leaders style, they would continue to pollute the atmosphere at dangerous rates, and continue to fund the biggest damn military threat to world peace ever to have existed.

Re:implications

[JimPooley]

Fuck the US. Space does not belong to them. The Russians were there first, dammit!

Re:implications

[mpe]

I have to wonder if this story doesn't have a more sinister side to it. Recall that India shocked the global community recently when satellite data indicated that they had developed nuclear weapons, despite treaties against such activities. If they can put a weather satellite up this cheaply, then they can probably get nuclear missiles up there for not much more.

What country, other than Pakistan, would India target with nuclear weapons? Attacking Pakistan from India would not require techniques such as FRactional Orbit Bombardment.

If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations,

The attempts by the US, and other Western nations, to manipulate third world countries provide plenty of motivation for most of the world to consider the USA a danger to their national security.
As for danger to rest of the world India is far less of an issue than Israel.

Re:implications

[mpe]

Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.

The US government certainly does not accept this principle. As has frequently been the top story in TV news programmes for the last few months and weeks.

The US could just have easily have placed nuclear weapons in space as India could have, as it is only speculation that India has done.

The US could have done so a lot more easily, simply by virtue of having put far more stuff up there.

Re:implications

[sql*kitten]

Or maybe they already have. If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations, then we wouldn't have to worry about this.

Have you ever wondered why it is that the US wants to regulate (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Saddam Hussein, but hasn't tried to do the same to (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Musharraf? It's because Musharraf already has nuclear weapons, and Saddam doesn't.

The point is: there is a limit to how proactive even the US can be in today's world. I don't think that India would permit itself to be regulated - they have always been fiercely independant people (one of the reasons the British Empire, proportionally stronger in the world back then than the US is now, couldn't hold on to them).

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, of course we have to do something about places that have unstable, posssibly insane, unelected leaders, maintain massive nuclear stockpiles, regularly violate international treaties, actively block biological and chemical weapons monitoring, fund active space programs and have had a desire to have weapons in space for years (as long as no-one else can have them).

Re:implications

[doctor_oktagon]

just like there is no motivation for France, Germany, Japan, UK, Brazil or a few others with nukes to attack the West).

At which point did these fine European nations drop out of "The West". Before the USA we were "The West".

Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one?

Re:implications

[KH]

I don't have any position on whether US should intervene in weapons of mass destruction programs of other countries, but a bit of clarification:

India is not a concern against attacking the US (or Europe) because there is no motivation to (just like there is no motivation for France, Germany, Japan, UK, Brazil or a few others with nukes to attack the West).

Threats need three things:
* weapons
* delivery system
* motivation

Most western democracies have the first two, but lack the third.

The only countries that demonstrably have nuke capabilities (weapon and delivery system) are: US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel. Check out the Federation of American Scientists for further info on matters concerning the weapons of mass destruction.

Re:implications

[KH]

If they can put a weather satellite up this cheaply, then they can probably get nuclear missiles up there for not much more. Or maybe they already have.

They already have.

Re:implications

[miffo.swe]

Maybe the US should spend some amount of efforts in being good world citizens and stop meddling about just to get cheap oil? The US have also been very efficient in alienating countries on account of other partner countries they like to protect.

If there are threats against the US its not only because muslims and other non wealthy countries are evil by nature. Something has brought them to this conclusion and its not just the koran or lack of money that is to blame here.

The US is working hard to have a reason to fight Iraq when most other countries dont want war in that region.

Whos the warmonger now?

Re:implications

[tanveer1979]

Call is a flaimbait ifyouwant,ut I cant understand the GLUt in peoples minds. If a developing nation puts up satellite they can use it to put missiles, on the otherhand if a developed nation does a nuclear test then its for development of science. India is the worlds largest democracy and people there are not sadists that they want to nuke all the countries of the world.

You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation.

As for nuclear weapon development look at this way, supposed USA didnt have nuclear weapons but canada and mexico did and were hostile to US, how would you feel, scared.. right. So when you have two nulcear armed dictatorships sitting at your borders you cannot expect otherwise.

It is real funny a developed nation has a moral right to have nuclear weapons but an underdeveloped dosent.

As far as space reasearch is concerened satellite launches came much after nuclear weapons. India achieved nuclear capability in 1971. Satellite lauches are for an economic reason. Already france and other european and african contries are looking at ISRO as a launchpad for their satellite and this will bring in much needed cash.

Re:implications

[mpe]

India is a more sophisticated and advanced society than large parts of North America, with one of the most educated populations in the world. To call it third world is insulting, to refer to it as unstable and undeveloped is offensive.

"Third world" orginally ment not alligned with either the "first world", NATO or the "second world", USSR and Warsaw Pact. IIRC the term originally came from India as a way of indicating their non alignment. Only later did it come to mean "poor".

Re:implications

[phunhippy]

At which point did these fine European nations drop out of "The West". Before the USA we were "The West".

Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one?

Hey Stuck Up british boy! Hows your "empire" ?? OH wait!! ITS AN ISLAND, A TINY ISLAND!

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

India 3rd world?? WOW, I would hate to see where you would rate Montana

Re:implications

[mpe]

Have you ever wondered why it is that the US wants to regulate (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Saddam Hussein,

Thing is that Saddam Hussein is more of a secular socialist than a radical Moslem.

but hasn't tried to do the same to (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Musharraf? It's because Musharraf already has nuclear weapons, and Saddam doesn't.

More likely the real reason is that Hussein will no longer allow himself to be pushed around the US. The whole "terrorism" thing is a smokescreen. The US is quite happy to let all sorts of terrorists operate in the US, the British government is quite happy to let all sorts of terrorists operate in the UK. Both governments also give some of their tax payers money to supporting terrorists. So it would hardly be suprising if Iraq was prepared to harbourer any terrorists not considering attacking Iraq.

Re:implications

[khuber]

Hey Stuck Up british boy! Hows your "empire" ?? OH wait!! ITS AN ISLAND, A TINY ISLAND!

LMAO

-Kevin

Re:implications

[zeekiorage]

third world... unstable and undeveloped ...

No I disagree -- India might not be as sophisticated and wealthy as some of the other nations but the article talks about a Satellite Launch, which puts India along with a handful of other nations (USA, Russia, France, China and Japan) who can do this.

Re:implications

[gunnk]

I'm afraid that the label "third world" is sticking in the minds of many westerners even though some "third world" countries have technological accomplishments that are getting closer and closer to our own. Lumping India among nations that are "unstable and undeveloped" seems to fly in the face of the facts, but is still a common perception. India is the world's largest democracy (well more than twice the size of the U.S.) and has been quite stable for many decades. Technologically, India builds their own nuclear weapons, launches satellites into geosync orbit (a BIG challenge), and is home to more and more contract programming from U.S. firms. While it is also true that India has large numbers of horribly impoverished individuals, India is well on it's way to being a true world power. The "third world" label applied to India appears less and less accurate with each passing year. We're making a big mistake if we continue to think of them as such.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure it was India that shocked the Global Community? Was it Pakistan? China? Or maybe its just a rumour that hit you, which you're continuing to spread?

If they can put a weather satellite up this cheaply, then they can probably get nuclear missiles up there for not much more

So can America. So can Europe. So can many other countries. How do you justify it being okay for them and not for India or any third-world country?

If the US had been more proactive about limiting space research by unstable and undeveloped nations

It is probably us, in the US, who need to be proactive about limiting our own space research. We get this headstrongness about wanting to be right up there and then talk about getting all the rest down, just like your attitude about not letting undeveloped nations ever develop. Who on earth are we to make such a decision?

As it is, we're almost forced to bolster our own space weapons so we don't look like sitting ducks.

Yes, we should really make sure we don't look like sitting ducks. But then, it is definitely okay for the so-called "third-world" countries to, am I right?

Re:implications

[G. W. Bush Junior]

Your lacking understanding of politics is frightening...
The US would NEVER try to keep India from developing!

the fact is that they're already too busy keeping the middle-east from developing...
Supporting dictatorships (saudi-arabia), destabilizing large regions (israel/palestine) and waging war (iraq) is pretty expensive.
The middle-east manages to turn a profit because of the oil... India doesn't pose a threat and hasn't got enough oil.

Re:implications

[squaretorus]

and...

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

I am sorry to say but ur acting blind, there is no link of pakistan being nuclear, its just that pakistan is the most strategic wrt to afghanistan post 9/11, and also pakistan is the terrorism capital ... most of the terrorists and indian underworld dons are in pakistan, so US mayb quietly spying on PAK too ... so US has all benefits from PAK and thus will remain a fair weather friend for sometime.
As for india as someone pointed out here is the most peaceful and cultural country of the world and they will always live and let live

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

for all your opinions are worth, it needs to be said that Inia is among teh only sensible nations in South Asia. Its among the best examples of a working democracy, despite its problems, and it is quite a contrast to its rabid neighbour Pakistan. America and Americans need to look at what american hunger for oil has done to the middle east. For all you know, the US is probably among the more unstable of the countries we know. Mere military prowess isnt reason enough for posturing. America as most see it lacks morals and ethics let alone stability. Heck look at the President(*The Goof*).

Re:implications

[Lars T.]

Count the errors in parent by a known troll.

Re:implications

[Lars T.]

Looks like Bush isn't an "US diplomacy" kind of guy, at least he's not at all working on the "eliminating motivation" part.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

they have made themselves a lot more enemies than India.

You can't say that! You must be a Nazi! How dare you condemn any of Israels policies...? They are immune to world critism, get with the program!

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

The Indians and Pakistani people are so pathetic. You have the most unbelivable hatred for each other, and you just can't see through it. Jeez, are you taking lessons from the Americans or what?

Re:implications

[Frank of Earth]

Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.

Well maybe he isn't but I am. When you are the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet, you can dictate any policy you want.

I don't know how near sighted you are, but having a potential nuke in space is a threat to my freedom; even if it's not pointed at the US.

It's about time we start our Space Defense Initiative. I forget who, but some dolt in govt stated that we shouldn't bother with a Space Defense system now cause we won't need it for another 20 years. Like in 20 years we can just say "Launch the space defense system!"

Personally, I'm sick and tired of these little puke nations telling us what we can and can not do. In the history of our planet, how many super powers were there that didn't seek to expand their empire. They should be thankful we're content with what we already have.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as space reasearch is concerened satellite launches came much after nuclear weapons

And surely everyone knows that the reason that space research ever existed was for warfare? What, do you think it was peaceful exploration for the benefit of mankind? Suckers!

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

So can America. So can Europe. So can many other countries. How do you justify it being okay for them and not for India or any third-world country?

I think many people don't like it because they are black. Let's face it, racism is very much alive and well, especially in the USA.

Re:implications

[davejenkins]

Okay Oktagon. I live in Surrey, you punter.

You misunderstood my point-- denoting different nouns does NOT imply opposing positions. France, Germany, Japan, UK and Brazil ARE part of "the West".

Where's a grammar teacher when you need one?

Re:implications

[guybarr]

As for danger to rest of the world India is far less of an issue than Israel

this is either blind prejudice or blind ignorance. But just in case someone doesn't know the facts, I'll bite:

size of India : 2,973,190 sq km
Area - comparative: slightly more than one-third the size of the US
# of citizens : 1,029,991,145 (July 2001 est.)
these data (unlike your prepostrous claim) are not blown out of my ass, but can be found here

size of Israel : 20,330 sq km
Area - comparative: slightly smaller than New Jersey
# of israelly citizens : 5,938,093 (yes, that's six millions, not billions ...)
again, this is from the same source

so, wether or not India should be viewed as a potential threat by the US, it is a laughable to claim a country the size of New Jersy, with 1/200 the population of india, is anywhere near the military threat that can potentially be posed by india.

(this is not to say india is a threat to the US, just that Israel and India are of completely different o.o.m. ,and that the comparison is therefore absurd)

but, I suspect mpe will not let such shaky facts stand in the way of his solid prejudices.

Re:implications

[Debillitatus]

Have you ever wondered why it is that the US wants to regulate (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Saddam Hussein, but hasn't tried to do the same to (Islamic dictator and harbourer of terrorists) Musharraf? It's because Musharraf already has nuclear weapons, and Saddam doesn't.

Extremely well said. This may very well be the entire explanation.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey Stuck Up british boy! Hows your "empire" ?? OH wait!! ITS AN ISLAND, A TINY ISLAND!/I?

And your point is? That 'tiny island' used to rule most of the world. I'm not condoning that - Each country should have the right to rule itself. But it is pretty impressive nonetheless.

By the way, you would sound more intelligent if you learnt how to punctuate and use capitals. There were plenty of the latter but you somehow neglected to capitalise the only proper noun in the entire piece. Incredible...

Re:implications

[mpe]

this is either blind prejudice or blind ignorance. But just in case someone doesn't know the facts, I'll bite:
size of India : 2,973,190 sq km Area - comparative: slightly more than one-third the size of the US # of citizens : 1,029,991,145 (July 2001 est.) these data (unlike your prepostrous claim) are not blown out of my ass, but can be found here [cia.gov]
size of Israel : 20,330 sq km Area - comparative: slightly smaller than New Jersey # of israelly citizens : 5,938,093 (yes, that's six millions, not billions ...) again, this is from the same source [cia.gov]

The size of a country has little to do with how many enemies they have. The only country India is in conflict with is Pakistan, which is also a nuclear power. So MAD applies.
Israel is currently in conflict with Lebanon and Syria, who have no nuclear deterance. Also Israel has effectivly been in a state of civil war for over half a century.
Only one of these countries makes a habit of invading it's neighbours, ignoring UN resolutions and even tried to sink a US navy ship.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Just be careful, the US might stand for 40% of the whole worlds military budget all by themselves, but after all the rest of the world stands for the other 60% don't piss of the rest of the world. Also, there's still enough nukes in the rest of the world to bomb the US back into stoneage several times over if you're not nice

Re:implications

[pipsqueak]

> Well maybe he isn't but I am. When you are the
> strongest and most powerful nation on the
> planet, you can dictate any policy you want.

"dictate"... so America should be the worlds "Dictator" for our benefit... I like it. Very liberal of you. Thank you for looking after us and listening to our own countries beliefs and ideals (I live in the UK).

> Personally, I'm sick and tired of these little
> puke nations telling us what we can and can not
> do.

What an idiot.... the US spends all it's time talking about a global economy & politics and it's "responsibility on the world stage" but makes the assumption that the global economy & politics will be made up of western (read US) ideals and that the US is the only one to have a say.

Then when the realisation that through sheer weight of population numbers, land mass & available resources other nations outside of the US are capable of the same achievements (sometimes a lot more effeciently) they get all insular and over-protective (ref: Agricultural, Steel & manufacturing subsidies) to f&ck up those developing nations.

Who says a global community will reflect only US ideals? It's foolish and ultimately dangerous to think like that. Be a bit more open minded about congratulating other countries on their achievements.

> In the history of our planet, how many super
> powers were there that didn't seek to expand
> their empire. They should be thankful we're
> content with what we already have.

What you already have is a highly unbalanced, global, political make up where one nations population is using up far more resources than it has at it's disposal and one nations beliefs over represented to the rest of the world. This is at the cost of the rest of the world and every move the US makes is designed to protect that situation.

You may be content with what you already have but the rest of the world isn't, cos you're f&cking us over to keep it.

Re:implications

[mpe]

Maybe the US should spend some amount of efforts in being good world citizens and stop meddling about just to get cheap oil?

Even though the US has plenty of its own oil.

The US have also been very efficient in alienating countries on account of other partner countries they like to protect.

Usually what the US is interested in protecting are the interests of US corporations operating abroad. From this POV the "best" government is something along the lines of a dictator friendly to the corporate interests in question.

If there are threats against the US its not only because muslims and other non wealthy countries are evil by nature. Something has brought them to this conclusion and its not just the koran or lack of money that is to blame here.

Lack of money is more likely to be an effect of US intereference. Maximising the profits of US corporates dosn't do much to help the economies of the countries they operate in.

The US is working hard to have a reason to fight Iraq when most other countries dont want war in that region.

The US wants a war for reasons more to do with domestic US politics. Virtually none of the rest of the planet is interested in a war with Iraq. Apart from the US only the UK and Israeli governments appear to think there is cause.

Re:implications

[Luyseyal]

finders, keepers! ...come and take it!

-l

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Although some may dismiss your post as the rant of some ill educated spotty teenager, your thinking is pretty much in tune with the current administration:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?Sect io nID=40&ItemID=2352

There is a problem with imposing ones dominance on others though. Eventually you irritate people whose thinking is as immature as your own. Then you end up with a 9/11 or something worse. In case you havent noticed, effective weapons are getting smaller. SDI would offer little protection against a fed-ex package containing ebola. In the long run your freedom to continue living, let alone anything else, depends upon mutual consent.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Israel did not sink the USS Cole.

Re:implications

[G. W. Bush Junior]

I'm glad you look at it that way...
if only more americans were aware of their own role maybe I wouldn't have to listen to people sobbing about 9-11...

heard this jerk saying something like:

"I don't know why anyone would wan't to do something like this to us... I guess some people are just evil"

comments like that makes me sick to my stomach

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

The USS Cole wasn't sunk, chump.

Re:implications

[guybarr]

The size of a country has little to do with how many enemies they have.

it has to do with its danger to the rest of the world, which was your original claim.

can a mouse, no matter how many enemies it has, realisticly pose more of a threat than an grisly ? get real.

Also Israel has effectivly been in a state of civil war for over half a century.

so is Israel weak or strong ? if it cannot control a 'civil-war' for half a century, how can it be a danger to other nations ? make up your mind.

The facts, as usual with your posts in this thread, are different. Israel has had civil war ONCE. and that is in 1948. It had clashes with arab citizens, and an uprising in the west-bank and gaza, which were occupied, but never joined to the state of israel.
In all of these, it is true there was a certain threat (mainly terror, not anihilation) from arab-citizens of israel, but never anything remotely like a civil-war (for examples of real civil wars, lookup spain, or the US, to get the concept ).
read a history book, it will do you good.

Only one of these countries makes a habit of invading it's neighbours

Hello ? does the name Kashmir ring any bells ? I repeat my advice, read some history.

ignoring UN resolutions

Ahh, that unbiassed, appolitical body, the UN, some of its soldiers actively helped abduct israelly soldiers from within it's border. Ignoring its resolutions is really raving lunacy. Only the antichrist can ignore the words of such a holy, pristine, uncorrupt entity.

and even tried to sink a US navy ship.

This I don't know much about, so, surprize, surprize, will not respond on.

But even if this were true, to project from such an incident on the relative threat to human-kind, is really quite an impressive logical leap. Or should I say, a leap of faith ...

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh...!! is war all the nerds here can think of? 70% of the indian population earns a living from agriculture. This satellite will help predict weather more accurately. Offering launch capabilities commercially will help ISRO recover the developement costs. India is still a poor third world country.

Re:implications

[a7244270]

Ebola is a pretty crappy biological weapon - it kills too fast so it doesn't spread well - why do you think there are still people alive in Africa ?

Re:implications

[jesco]

India is not a concern against attacking the US (or Europe) because there is no motivation to (just like there is no motivation for France, Germany, Japan, UK, Brazil or a few others with nukes to attack the West).

I didn't know that Germany, Japan or Brazil have nuclear bombs. The first two may have the technical know-how, the radioactive materials and the necessary money, but they decided against building nukes.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

And you completely clueless but that hasn't stopped your babbling.

Re:implications

[fault0]

> Israel is rumoured to have nuclear missiles capable of hitting anywhere on the planet and they have made themselves a lot more enemies than India.

And at the same time, Israel gets sold many missle defense technologies from the US, which they consequently sell to other countries (India being one of them).

Re:implications

[fault0]

Yeah, jeez. Indians=Pakistani until just 50 years ago. The British should have never partitioned India (they did, over Gandhi and other's objections.)

Re:implications

[fault0]

Of course India is 3rd world. In fact, it was India who coined the term during the non-aligned movement.

And, currently, Montana's per capita income is roughly ten times higher than India's. Also, it's literacy rate is about 30-40% (depending on the census year) higher.

Re:implications

[smithmc]

Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one?

Typical European my-turds-don't-stink syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one?

Re:implications

[mikeee]

At which point did these fine European nations drop out of "The West".

Sometime in the 60's, give or take a decade, as best I can figure. :)/2

Re:implications

[Knife_Edge]

"You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation."

Which is not to say India has never ever engaged in war. I guess attacking another nation during war is ok. Another thing that makes war completely ok is to not recognize the entity that you are fighting as a nation. I like the rest of your comment. Unfortunately I believe all nations are guilty of engaging in violence at sometime in their history, and not always for moral reasons. Saying that a nation never started a fight is at worst lying, and at best a glib attempt to justify violence.

Although India does not seem to be interested in building a world empire, things would be better if they could just leave Pakistan and Kashmir alone. I have heard too much rhetoric justifying violence in those regions.

Re:implications

[fungus]

Albert Einstein once said something like:

"I dont know with what weapons will be fought the third world war, but I know the fourth will be fought with sticks and rocks".

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, it was a big mistake.

Re:implications

[aengblom]

Typical American assh*le syndrome. Where's a moderator when you need one

Ack. Just because one guy is an idiot here don't call it typical "american"

I live in the county and I should know. That's not typical.

(Most American's havn't heard of those other countries ;-) )

P.S. in defense of that guy, read more carefully. Brazil and "a few others" are the ones with nukes to attack the west. Of course, technically Brazil doesn't HAVE nuclear weapons capability. Just the capability to have the capability ;-)

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree-- relations between Hindus and Muslims were quite good before partition happened. In 1947, by most neutral accounts (mostly British), both most Hindu and Muslims were against splitting India.

It was mostly pushed through by rich marchants represented by Jinnah (who was actually a very good and charitable human being by the way.. he was just wrong in doing this.)

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

haha this is extremely amusing

Re:implications

[ErikZ]

Ooo. Yes, and the world quakes under the thumb of that rouge terrorist nation "Israel".

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

>> You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation.

One name: Asoka

Re:implications

[ZigMonty]

The US wants a war for reasons more to do with domestic US politics. Virtually none of the rest of the planet is interested in a war with Iraq. Apart from the US only the UK and Israeli governments appear to think there is cause.

And the Australian Government. But we are basically the 51st state of the US under our current government.

Re:implications

[Frank of Earth]

Who you calling a teenager? ;-)

Re:implications

[Frank of Earth]

pipsqueak.. sounds like something the US can easily overtake in about 2 minutes. ;-)

Then when the realisation that through sheer weight of population numbers, land mass & available resources other nations outside of the US are capable of the same achievements (sometimes a lot more effeciently) they get all insular and over-protective (ref: Agricultural, Steel & manufacturing subsidies) to f&ck up those developing nations.

That's just a cop out. The US is world power, partly because of it's location, a good ocean away from it's potential enemies [although Canada has been pissing me off lately], it's mostly because of our freedom and pride which make us a great country. If it was just a case of natural resources making a great country, then Russia should have been a world power 10x the US. I think you feel a little disgruntled because the UK is so small and *does* lack natural resources and is probably limited by it's lack of those natural resources. Absolutely no offense to the UK too. I consider your country to be our greatest ally and respect your ideals and culture immensely.

What you already have is a highly unbalanced, global, political make up where one nations population is using up far more resources than it has at it's disposal and one nations beliefs over represented to the rest of the world. This is at the cost of the rest of the world and every move the US makes is designed to protect that situation.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, but someone must have cause you have a score of 3. I think you're telling me that because of America's growth and natural resource consumption, we'll eventually have to seek an expansionist policy, which will lead to US initiated attacks. Personaly, I don't see this happening with the potential advances in science; which hopefully one day will free us from our strangle hold on the need for oil.

Cheers and we'll see you in Iraq.

Re:implications

[Anonymous Coward]

And your point is? That 'tiny island' used to rule most of the world. I'm not condoning that - Each country should have the right to rule itself. But it is pretty impressive nonetheless.

Yah it used too ya bloody savage! go cry for your damn queen!

Re:implications

[Kintanon]

And... India is STILL Third World by the original definition as they are not considered Allies to the US or to Russia/Former Soviet Bloc countries. Making them still a part of the Third World politically. Economically I would consider them on par with the former Second World countries, but not quite up to First world status simply due to having SO MUCH population that it drags down their average.

Kintanon

Re:implications

[barath_s]

> Only one of these countries [India/Israel] makes a habit of invading it's neighbours >> Hello ? does the name Kashmir ring any bells ? I repeat my advice, read some history. Young grasshopper: be not strident, take your own advice, give every man thy ear but few thy voice and so on. Bad example. India invade Kashmir? The case for this is marginal, to slim at best. The only time India may conceivably have 'invaded' Kashmir, in 1947, in response to a request by the legal ruler of the state [admittedly under pressure], and under the guidance of a former colonial governor [Mountbatten], sent troops in to counteract an irregular army which had already been sent in. My personal opinion is that to call this an invasion would be a stretch, especially in the context of (magical, sleight of hand) nation formation that was taking place at the time, when oodles of princely states, (podunk and larger) became the [ relatively] modern state of India. Little grasshopper, just because you heard the word on CNN, does not mean that you should run out and quote it. No, the example you are looking for is ... Goa. Go ahead, follow your own advice. Read. -- *Incidentally, both these examples seem tied to the concept of self and nation formation. A slippery slope, especially when Saddam claims Kuwait as a province (But think about it - what if the US had not responded - would the native population have a similar self-identity by now ?). IMO opinion again, though, Goa is a far cry from Kuwait, and must be seen against the context of : * Colonial history - How did Goa become Portuguese * Similar nation building elsewhere - west and east * General non-violent nature of the building of a Governement of India from Bristish rule [A strange bird] -- Due disclosure: am Indian. ObLinks: http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/define77.htm [No links on Kashmir as I would prefer not to bias a true reader]

Re:implications

[khuber]

Yes that was off topic. Now will the great and wise moderator of my post please blow me?

Re:implications

[guybarr]

Bad example. India invade Kashmir? The case for this is marginal, to slim at best. My personal opinion is that to call this an invasion would be a stretch . The case for this is marginal, to slim at best. The only time India may conceivably have 'invaded' Kashmir, in 1947, in response to a request by the legal ruler of the state [admittedly under pressure]..

OK, viewed in that context, I wrote something too extreme, I clarify: I did not mean (though it can be interpreted that way) india is making a habit of invading either it's neighbours or Kashmir, but for rebuttal, I showed a case of invasion. (BTW, when a leader under duress invites foreign forces in, that constitutes an invasion, AFAIK.)

Due disclosure: am Indian

have no quarrel with you, or your country. notice that in my original post I specificly did NOT claim India was an active threat to the rest of the world, only that it is larger and more powerful by several o.o.m. than Israel, thus being a larger potential threat than Israel can ever conceivably be.

SIR, YOUR PENIS IS IN MY SOUP

[Anonymous Coward]

I swear by the six arms of Vishnu...

[Anonymous Coward]

That this is not an Indian satellite!

How to spend a billion dollars?

[MoobY]

Make an order for 66 satellites

This should be added to the HOWTO story

[joeykiller]

This fits very vell with the "HOWTO spend a billion dollars" story further down on the Slashdot front page today. Imagine how many satelites a billion dollars could get into orbit at this price!

Indian Billionnaire Launches 66 Satellites

[forged]

So, whoever with one billion dollar to spend could launch 66 indian weather satellites ! Very neat, I like that =)

Re:Indian Billionnaire Launches 66 Satellites

[Anonymous Coward]

All the satelites in the world won't stop the increasing monsoon severity. Maybe they should lift something else into space to persuade Bush to pay attention to climate change.

Re:Indian Billionnaire Launches 66 Satellites

[Hassan79]

Maybe you could set up Iridium II!

Or GPS II!

Probably used the good

[oval_pants]

ol' Indian rope trick .

Very Cost effective.

I am sick and tired of this debate

[abhikhurana]

I am sick and tired of this debate. Everytime there is a news item about Inidia, we go into this debate of first world, second worlk and third world. Tell me something guys, is this really important?? I mean the fact is that India launched a satellite, why not just concentrate on that??
I will tell you the truth about Infratstructure in Indian universities. Its pathetic. But this is also a fact that when U have 1 billion ppl and so few unis, the competition to get into a decent university is intense. Infact for admission into IIT( India Institute of Technology) about 300,000 ppl appear in the test and only the top 1000 or so make it. So to get admission into a decnt university in India, you have to be in top 0.33% of the population. Now atleast some of such guys( those who are not lured away bu US companies) join organisations like ISRO. They are already intelligent enough and soon they get grip of whats going on. Thats the story of India.
But always remember, behind every thousand who made it, there are 299,000 who din't.

META: Slashdot styleguide? (choosing anchortext)

[RobotWisdom]

I've recently started a lowkey campaign to make Slashdot blurbs more user-friendly (click my user-info link above for recent examples, all flagged 'META').

In this blurb, "for a mere 15 million U.S. dollars" is completely random, chosen simply to be near the start of the blurb. My preference is to highlight a word that describes the type of content so I'd favor using "article" in the last sentence.

W3C-doctrine is that the highlighted text should be self-explanatory when it's pulled out of context, as in Slashdot's marginal winnowing of links. I see the argument, but I don't believe it's really workable. (How often do those marginal links get clicked, anyway?)

The most common Slashdot style is to include extra links to the publication, etc-- I hate this because it requires me to look closely at the various choices to be sure I'm getting the right one. Even though the article is at SpaceDaily, there just isn't any reason to include an extra link to their main page, and I'd like to see Slashdot start a styleguide that deprecates that approach.

My previous METAs have all been flagged offtopic, but Slashdot ought to be sophisticated enough to appreciate when METAs need a forum, too...

NASA Waste

[xidix]

Just goes to show how the NASA bureaucracy is wasting tax payer dollars. Don't misunderstand me, I think the idea of a government-funded space program for the purposes of non-commercial research is a necessary thing. But the agency running it so wasteful.

They throw millions/billions of dollars to contractors to produce shoddy equipment (anyone remember the Hubble?). They plan important scientific missions to Mars and then forget to convert from imperial to metric?? They remotely turn off a probe, and then (surprise) they can't turn it back on.

I guess no one there was ever a network administrator. Anyone who's ever run a server farm can tell you it's generally not a good idea to reboot a vital server from remote (because it might not come back up again). It's bad when you are 10 miles across town, it's really bad when you are a couple million miles away.

And after all of this, you don't hear about the director of operations getting fired, or resigning in shame. They just shrug. Oh, well. Lost another one. Only 350 million dollars. No big deal.

The Italians successfully put a satellite in space for what amounts to government pocket change. Maybe this sort of thing will be wave of the future. Built for cheap, launched for cheap. Shoestring everything. We shouldn't make fun of Italy for being cost-conscious. If it works, we should be applauding them, and trying to follow their example. If we could have built the ISS for 1/12 the cost, maybe it would have been completed 5 years ago and we'd be on our way to building a station on the moon.

Re:NASA Waste

[GooberToo]

Everyone loves to bang on the ISS problems but seem to forget that a number of major technology and/or cash commitments that were supposed to be provided by other coutries were never delivered. This means that the US had to cover other coutries expenses.

In other cases where technology was actually provided, extra US funds had to be paid to verify it because of minor communication issues. In fact, to date, I think Canada is one of the few coutries that actually completed what they committed to doing.

I'm simply bringing this up because ISS is probably not the best example to site when to comes to US funds and space research.

Re:NASA Waste

[xidix]

Duly noted.

Re:NASA Waste

[Anonymous Coward]

you are not too far off...

Why doesnt nasa use off the shelf Intel or Arm based Pc's and a free OS? Why doesnt NASA save money by using 2 year old consumer computer technology? It will do everything they need (and at 10 time the performance of what they have now!)

and finally... why the hell dont they settle on realistic launch vehicle plans instead of that crap that they finally abandoned? spent billinos on something that will never be finished and probably wouldn't work. while ignoring a working prototype that was 1/2 the price?

Simple... Idiots running the place.

Re:NASA Waste

[Anonymous Coward]

Hubble is a success. It sends amazing pictures, which cannot be taken with any other telescope. This is quite sufficient for making it a success.

Re:NASA Waste

[dhanav]

The Italians successfully put a satellite in space for what amounts to government pocket change. Maybe this sort of thing will be wave of the future. Built for cheap, launched for cheap. Shoestring everything. We shouldn't make fun of Italy for being cost-conscious.

It is the Indians not the Italians....

Re:NASA Waste

[xidix]

The Hubble space telescope cost around $2 BILLION and took almost a decade to design and construct. Hubble launched with a faulty mirror that NASA paid an enormous amount of money for (don't know the exact amount, but it was in the 9 digit range). It then cost quite a few more millions to send follow-up missions to Hubble to install corrective devices to compensate for the faulty mirror. And even with the corrective measures, the image quality and range are not what the original design would have produced with true optics.

BUT, the contractor still got paid in full for the mirror, and not only did they not have to foot the bill for the expenses to repair Hubble, but got sourced for the repair parts.

And this is a NASA "success".

Re:NASA Waste

[xidix]

Read the first reply, timestamped 6 minutes after my post. It was a typo. I was thinking about having italian for lunch when I wrote it. And four hours later, I had italian for lunch. I must be psychoti-- I mean psychic!

Re: Oops

[xidix]

Wrong nationality. I was thinking Indians and wrote Italians. I must have fettuccini on my mind or something. Red Warrior needs pizza badly.

India has an advanced tech infrastructure ...

[vu2lid]

"Traditional Western scientific endeavors ..." ?

You are completely out of touch with reality.

India has an advanced tech R&D and maufacturing infrastructure (Looks like you have seen only indian software personall working ...) limited only by the amout of funding availabe for such activities. I don't see any scientific / tech activity in India, which can be killed by US or anyone outside by putting restrictions (of course unless Indians themselves choose to do so - which I doubt.). This has origins in the early days of Indian republic, when they invested heavily on establishing a scientific/tech research infrastructure, and supporting industries (mostly government controlled). In recent years a lot of similar stuff has come in the private sector also. These industries reange from chip maufacturing / design to biotech,aerospace, pharmaceutical / drug-design, ...

Strange...

[evilviper]

for a mere 15 million U.S. dollars, India launched a meteorological satellite

That's strange, I would have figured they'd have spent their local currency on the project, not American Dollars.

If you don't get it, just let it go, and move on

Re:Strange...

[Max von H.]

That would be 726,750,000 Indian Rupees (INR). But US$15 Million is more understandable by the international community than the rupee amount.

cheers,
max

PSLV = ICBM

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, they're testing their nuke platform.
Beware Pakistan, China, Russia, USA.
It's time to slap some sanctions on these chumps!

Re:PSLV = ICBM

[Anonymous Coward]

hehe., i ve got to hand it to u. Some slashdotters are morons...how simplistic can u get? lol.. someone stop me from laffing at the likes of u......haaaaaaaaaaaahaaaha :-D

Slightly OT, but informational

[Quixote]

(how's that for moderating my own comments? :-)
Just FYI: SpaceImaging is the world's biggest supplier of hi-res satellite imagery. It would surprise many on this forum to know that 4 of the 7 satellites SpaceImaging uses are Indian (the IRS series of satellites are Indian satellites).

India has a decent history (20+ years) of building and launching satellites. They have been helped along the way by the Russians to some extent, because the US refuses to sell them some of the advanced propulsion technology (like Cryo engines), which then they have to develop on their own.

All in all, more competition is good, I say.

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[Anonymous Coward]

I could be wrong about this but i dont think the IRS series was launched from India. They were launched by the european space agency.

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[LordNimon]

Is more competition still good if it costs some American engineers their jobs?

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it (more competition) isn't good, that'd be anti-capitalistic (if you define capitalism the American consumer way ;).

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[Spunk]

how's that for moderating my own comments?

(-1, Redundant)

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[fockewulf]

1-A, 1-B and 1-C were launched from Russia and 1-D was launched from India using a PSLV.

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[PD]

The question of American vs. Indian is one of moral neutrality, therefore, it is irrelevant to a moral decision. If a particular launch gives some jobs, and somewhere else there are jobs lost, that must be weight on its own merits, independant of the nationality where the jobs were lost.

Concern over American jobs in particular is also morally neutral. Americans perceive it to be good to be concerned about American jobs. Does it therefore mean that Indians being concerned about Indian jobs is bad? That is the implication when nationality is included.

The conclusion is that slogans such "buy American" (or "buy North American" if you're Canadian) are just evidence of jingoism. Truthfully, a judgement such as "good" or "bad" cannot be made here on a rational basis.

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[be-fan]

If American engineers can't compete and they lose their jobs, well too bad, such are the costs of capitalism. And don't tell me these are real engineers with real families, because so are they, and they need the jobs more than we do.

Re:Slightly OT, but informational

[fault0]

Welcome to capitalism. Who ever competes best wins.
In fact, in the end, it helps the US economy.

But you answer yourself...

[clark625]

Are you suggesting that the US has the right or responsibility of regulating space research? What goes on in another country shouldn't be up to the US, unless it directly affects them.

And, although India is less developed than, for example, the US, why should they be forced to stay that way?

Personally, I don't think the US needs to bully India over this. But with respect to your thoughts, the US could say that they are threatened by another nation being capable of delivering nuclear weapons to our doorstep. I don't think the US has any intention of worrying about this now.

That said, if India becomes more advanced than the US, then the US is going to have a lot to say about that. That's just the nature of the beast. Americans have an elitist complex when it comes to other nations (yes, I'm an American and yup, I've got the complex, too). Most all Americans believes that the US is the greatest nation in the world and those same individuals are willing to prove it over and over again. If India starts to compete with the US, we will be directly affected and the US won't be happy. The US will likely force India to remain comfortably beneath; or another cold war will begin.

Anyways, you're right that the US shouldn't worry about what other countries do, unless it directly affects us. The problem is that everything directly affects us. Well, at least so we always seem to think. That's just the way it goes. I can't say I'm always proud of that.

India vs China

[Anonymous Coward]

What's better?

(a) a low-cost satellite project?

or

(b) sex with a mare?

Where's a cop when you need one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dial 1-911-USAARMY. You Euro chumps
who don't have the guts to stand up to your
corrupt governments are the, as you say it,
"assh*les". Next time Russia or Germany or Iraq
goes nuts, we should sit it out and make you
do your own work.

Re:Where's a cop when you need one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dial 1-911-USAARMY. You Euro chumps who don't have the guts to stand up to your corrupt governments are the, as you say it, "assh*les". Next time Russia or Germany or Iraq goes nuts, we should sit it out and make you do your own work.

Which number do you call when the US "goes nuts"?

Re:Where's a cop when you need one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiigggghhhhttt. An American claiming Europe has corrupt goverments. Take a look at your own one, buddy. Have any companies that the President used to work for been given lucrative contracts lately? Question and answer time:

1. Which company is currently building a long-bargained for oil pipeline through Afganistan, protected by the US Army Rangers?
2. Which company was given a contract to build an expensive prison in Guantammo Bay?
3. Which is the only country doesn't want to hand over it's oil interests to the US like all it's neigbours? (Hint, the last letter is "Q" and they have nothing to do with terrorism whatsoever, despite the GWB lies)
4. Which world leader is blatantly lying to his people about the reasons behind a heinous act of terrorism because the generated propaganda suits his war mongering tendancies? (Hint, the lie involves "hating freedom and democracy")
5. Which country allows legalised bribery of goverment officials by big business, under the guise of "campain contributions"?
6. Which country does the entertainment industry have more influnce on lawmaking than the population?

So, sort your own shit out before critizising our goverments.

And to settle one last point that a lot of people don't get, WW2 was not like Saving Private Ryan. Unlike the movie, only a small portion of the allied forces were American. But you make the movies, and unfortunatly you personally are obviously too stupid to see through the flag waving nonsense.

Overthrow your corrupt regime.

[Anonymous Coward]

Then we'd both be happy.

Re:Overthrow your corrupt regime.

[fantomas]

Your comment could apply to so many countries, remind us which one you are posting from? ;-)

Indian satillites suck.

[Anonymous Coward]

1-B was obsolete the day it launched. Space
Imaging hasn't sold an image from it yet.
1C has broken sensors. 1D never made it into
proper orbit and is failing. The PAN sensors
are both 6 bit, noisy dogs. The Indian remote
sensing industry is a failure.

India has a history of satellites..

[Anonymous Coward]

India has been in satellite business since long, and currently the man who was behind all this, who has been the scientific advisor to the indian government, who has been awarded the highest civilian honour of the country, is its President. Dr A P J Abdul Kalam, President of India, has always talked about self reliance in the field of space and defence. This is one more step towards it.

You guys working in big companies must have seen vision statements for a big company, which drives the whole company, but have you heard that India too has a Vision, and working towards it ?

visit www.abdulkalam.com for details.

Also, "Wings of Fire" the autobiography of the president, is worth a read.

correction ....

[Anonymous Coward]

SI may list 1A as a "used" satillite;
but they NEVER used it.

Still 40 years behind...

[Anonymous Coward]

The PSLV technology has capabilities similar to our [Russian] Kosmos booster ( see this for details), which has the same payload costs as PSLV, but because of being a proven system, the insurance costs are much lower. Insurance costs are a considerable part of all the money spent on injecting anything into orbit. Kosmos has been around since 1962. We're still ahead of the pack when it comes to rocket science and technology.
Too bad, the Russian economy is approaching third world standards at a breathtaking pace. These democracy and capitalism things are great, indeed...

Re:Still 40 years behind...

[letxa2000]

Too bad, the Russian economy is approaching third world standards at a breathtaking pace. These democracy and capitalism things are great, indeed...

Russia is paying the real cost of their expenses under about 70 years of communism. Things weren't good before and bad now because communism works and capitalism doesn't. Things were "good" before because the real cost was hidden. Things are "bad" now because the real cost is painfully evident.

Hang in there, in the long run it'll all work out for the better. The last thing you should do is stick your head back in the sand by going back to communism and blindly thinking that'll fix everything. To the contrary, that's what got you into this mess to start with.

Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[WIAKywbfatw]

When you are the strongest and most powerful nation on the planet, you can dictate any policy you want.

Like a dictator would? Gee, how nice.

I don't know how near sighted you are, but having a potential nuke in space is a threat to my freedom; even if it's not pointed at the US.

Hmmm. The US has the potential to destroy every man, woman and child on the planet many times over. Does that mean that every man, woman and child has the right to use any means necessary to deny the US the use of these weapons and thus ensure their personal safety?

It's about time we start our Space Defense Initiative. I forget who, but some dolt in govt stated that we shouldn't bother with a Space Defense system now cause we won't need it for another 20 years. Like in 20 years we can just say "Launch the space defense system!"

There are these things called "international treaties". One of these international treaties (one of the ones that the US hasn't unilaterally reneged on - yet) outlaws the use of space-based weapons.

Personally, I'm sick and tired of these little puke nations telling us what we can and can not do.

Personally, it's clear to me that a lot of the "little puke nations" are sick of the US telling them what to do, whilst simultaneously playing by its own set of rules when it wants to.

Russia can't invade former Soviet states to take out terrorists and India can't do the same in Kashmir but the US can waltz into Iraq as and when it pleases? Nice double standards you've got there, bud.

In the history of our planet, how many super powers were there that didn't seek to expand their empire.

Where are they now? Empires are made to fall.

They should be thankful we're content with what we already have.

Right on, bro! We've got the biggest guns and all those other shitty nations, even the ones that we call friends, should be quaking in their boots. If we want something then we'll take it, simple as that. Why shouldn't we? We're the biggest and the best. Fucking, yeah!

Yeah, right. I hope you don't mind when the large family down the road comes into your house and strips you of everything that you've got. Why shouldn't they? There's more of them then there are of you, there more powerful, etc. Enjoy your TV, etc while you can and be thankful that they're content with what they already have - for now. Because, when they kick down the door, you're going to be shit out of luck, pal.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[mpe]

Personally, it's clear to me that a lot of the "little puke nations" are sick of the US telling them what to do, whilst simultaneously playing by its own set of rules when it wants to.

Also assuming that the nations the US chooses to attack will play by the expected rules. Sooner or later the US is going to want to go after a country capable of defending itself. (Or of initiating a preemptive attack against the US).

Right on, bro! We've got the biggest guns and all those other shitty nations, even the ones that we call friends, should be quaking in their boots. If we want something then we'll take it, simple as that. Why shouldn't we? We're the biggest and the best. Fucking, yeah!

History is littered with cases of the side with the biggest and best weapons failing to win.
The US probably isn't big enough to fight more than a certain number of wars at once. Especially on it's own...

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Evro]

This may be the best post ever on Slashdot. Thanks.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Anonymous Coward]

A nation that preemptively attacks the US will be a nation that shortly becomes a smoldering pile of rocks. I'm sure it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy to think of the US on its knees at the hands of some foe, but it's not going to happen. The US may take a bloody nose, but when you think of the massive potential for wartime mobiliZation in the US, the odds are against anybody else on earth. Americans may have an image of being soft, but attack us or present us with a live or die situation and see how soft we are.

Oh sure you will point out Vietnam, but really, the fault there was not American capability, but specifically the American unwillingness to fully commit to that war. If that had not been the case, the vietnamese would be happy citizens of an American protectorate at the moment.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[frp001]

This must have been the sort of conversation Romans had about barbarians...
It's rather sad to see mankind advancing in means not in thought.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[fault0]

Yes, but if a whole bunch of countries attacked the US at the same time, for a large period of time, the US would definatly lose.

Of course, I don't think this will happen, because the US is a huge economic power. Most countries aren't exactly scared of the US' military power compared to it's economic powers.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Anonymous Coward]

Great Post.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Anonymous Coward]

>>Because, when they kick down the door, you're going to be shit out of luck, pal.

Well maybe in your country they have confiscated all the guns and weapons, but here I still have mine.

The big family down the road can kick my door in. They are likely to get a face full of buckshot if they do.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Frank of Earth]

Like a dictator would? Gee, how nice.

Err.. no, more like Monroe doctrine. Unless you're calling Monroe a Dictator, then I guess you're correct.

Hmmm. The US has the potential to destroy every man, woman and child on the planet many times over. Does that mean that every man, woman and child has the right to use any means necessary to deny the US the use of these weapons and thus ensure their personal safety?

My point is that a potential nuke put in space is more than enough of a reason to consider SDI.

There are these things called "international treaties".

And? I hope you realize that space *will* be colonized, regardless of world treaties. The treaty was originally created in the early 60s. Why? Cause America were scared as hell about a little satelite named Sputnik omniously beeping around the planet. We [no necessarily the US] will eventually colonize the Earth's outer orbit, the Moon, Mars, it's just a matter of time.

Damn it.. I didn't want to debate point for point..

Personally, it's clear to me that a lot of the "little puke nations" are sick of the US telling them what to do, whilst simultaneously playing by its own set of rules when it wants to.

Russia can't invade former Soviet states to take out terrorists and India can't do the same in Kashmir but the US can waltz into Iraq as and when it pleases? Nice double standards you've got there, bud.

Good point and I somewhat agree. Although, my original point was the lack of support from our NATO allies. When times get tough for our allies, I doubt the US will blink an eye in helping our allies. I'm disappointed it's not reciprocal. Nelson Mandella is just one example. The man was imprisoned for how long? He finally becomes a free man and then divorces his wife a year later. But before I go too far off topic..

Where are they now? Empires are made to fall.

Yes, they do. Several books have been written on this and although I don't want to admit it, history is a good indicator of what will happen. However, my point was that in history, how many of the super powers were as generous as the US and had no plans for expansion?

Right on, bro! We've got the biggest guns and all those other shitty nations, even the ones that we call friends, should be quaking in their boots. If we want something then we'll take it, simple as that. Why shouldn't we? We're the biggest and the best. Fucking, yeah!

Yes, they should be quaking in their boots. The next time a terrorist group decides to target the US, they should fear for their lives. The next nation that harbors terrorists and provides sanctuary will think twice. That's the point. I'm obviouslly not saying let's invade Greenland because we can. I'm saying that if anyone is thinking about an offensive against us, be it small or large, they will think twice.

Yeah, right. I hope you don't mind when the large family down the road comes into your house and strips you of everything that you've got. Why shouldn't they? There's more of them then there are of you, there more powerful, etc. Enjoy your TV, etc while you can and be thankful that they're content with what they already have - for now. Because, when they kick down the door, you're going to be shit out of luck, pal.

Not likely, but good job here on the post. Congrats on your rating of 5. I don't really disagree with what you have said, I just think you misinterperted what I was saying. I'm just a patriot that vented some of his anger about 9-11, perhaps in the wrong way. God Bless America and may god have mercy on those who seek to destroy it.

That's all I have to say. Thanks for reading this.

Re:Hello? Can you engage your brain please?

[Frank of Earth]

History is littered with cases of the side with the biggest and best weapons failing to win.

Turn off the Braveheart DVD! Trying to decide who would win a war with lets say the US vs China is like saying who is better Superman vs Batman. Of course, we all know that superman is.. er.. the one that can fly, not the paralyzed, although making good progress, superman

they could have made money

[Anonymous Coward]

by sending mr. lance bass up there with it...

Re:2nd world has high-end labor

[MickLinux]

The second world does have some high end labor, at least.

So the skipping can and does happen. Indeed, arguably most 3rd world countries have been first world or 2nd world at some time, and have simply fallen to larger nations -- and pay tribute, via the IMF, equal to most of their production.

Ummm.... America should take a lesson. At one time, the Middle East was very much the center of the world, culturally, militarily, educationally, and even (quite long ago) technologically.
There isn't a lot that corruption can't destroy, and a "taking" attitude (as opposed to a building attitude) breeds corruption like crazy.

Re:META: Slashdot styleguide? (choosing anchortext

[dmiller]

I've recently started a lowkey campaign to make Slashdot blurbs more user-friendly...

You really need to get out more.

India's Space and Missile programs are related...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's interesting that the new president of India was also the father of its space and missile programs - the PSLV is a descendant of the original Satellite Launch Vehicle, SLV-3, which was also the basis for a short-range SSM, Prithvi ("Earth"). Under Dr. Abdul Kalam's tutelage, the DRDO embarked on an ambitious program to develop a suite of missiles, many of which have either been inducted or are being tested. It's quite possible that his popularity as head of the Indian Space Research Organization, and later as DRDO chief, led to his choice as president.

The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[tig]

Everybody seems to be missing the larger point here. This capability is the stepping stone to being able to put up spy satellites. In a few years India will be able to keep tabs on Pakistans cross border infiltration and nuclear installations, and hopefully, in the case of fundamentalists taking over( which I dont think will happen, Pakistan being to a large extent a fairly sensible country), be able to make a pre-emptive strike.

If you want to learn more about the origins of this programme read Abdul Kalam's Wings of Fire. Its a very inspiring book. That Kalam is now President of India(which is a titular position without much power, unlike the Prime Minister), is
itself a testament to where self-reliance and competition in science and technology can take one.

Hopefully the programme can now be commercially self sufficient, and the pace of space exploration and missile defence research becomes faster. As you have probably realized in the last year, South Asia ia a tough neighborhood: a dictatorship to the west and east(Pak and Burma), the worlds largest communist state to the North, and ofcourse, central asia and the unstable 'stan's near by..

Lastly, such development can only serve as a long term counterpoise to scary go-it-alonists and US supremacists like some members of this administration...

Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[lliinnuuxxlover]

Hey, You missed the boat Pal. India had already put a spy satellite in space in the previous PSLV launch.A simple search at google gave a dozen stories pointing to this.

On your other points I agree. India has a long standing succesfull space program. India has always invested heavily (relative to other internal investments) and is bearing the fruits now. INSATS (communication satellites),Remote Sensing sattelites, now a weather satellile, PSLV and other launch vehicles have driven indian Space program to new hights.GSLV (GeoStationary Satellite Launch Vehicle) is next, and then maybe a mission to the moon. All this would make India stronger as it helps India earn foreign Exchange and also all the new technology trickles down to the industry.

I think putting spy satellites up there is not the main point and would not buy you much leaverage when you can buy such services on the internet!. But overall , growth of Indian Space industry would help India be stronger in other areas , including defence.

Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[Anonymous Coward]

Fundamentalists will take over India before they take over Pakistan. Over 5000 people were murdered and raped in Gujrat when Yindu Fundamentalists went on a rampage.

Pre-emptive strike? Have you ever heard of a second strike capability. Boom youre fucked. Better call mom and kiss her god buy mr h-1 holder.

Pakistan has been keeping track of Indian installations for a while now. You don't think that every spy satellite China launches it Chinese do you?

It is funny that the people in the land of 500 million hungries, think they are a super power. All pakistan has to do is bomb your country with food and your country is fucked.

Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[Anonymous Coward]

> Fundamentalists will take over India before they take over Pakistan.

Heh, fundies already have taken over parts of Pakistan (Peshawar area, especially.)

Nothing against Pakistan, but there it's probably the country that has the largest amount of terrorists from a non-"rogue" state besides Saudia Arabia. Remember that Pakistan had supported the Taliban before we made Musharraf switch sides to support our war on terrorism.

- Joey A. Rodriguez

Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[Anonymous Coward]

Fundamentalists have not taken over pakistan they have taken over the US, Cheney, RumsField, Ashcraft are all Christian Fundamentalist, There are a number of Jewish Fundamentalists in the midst like the Deputy Deputy Defence Sec Wolfowitz.

These monsters want to attack all poor defenceless people in this world and they perpetrated the Sept 11 attack as an accuse to carry out their murders.

Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop pretending to be an American, h-1 holding sand nigger just because you can write your bosses name in this post, you think someone will mistake you for an American. Jack Ass. Go stink up your work place.

BTW have you noticed your coworkers hold their noses when you walk by, Use deodorent.

US and European Launches?

[dwalsh]

For comparison, how much do US launches cost?
What about the European Arienne rocket?

Re:US and European Launches?

[jpatokal]

For comparison, how much do US launches cost?

Around $250 million for a shuttle launch, closer to $1 billion if you figure in base maintenance etc. Or $85 million for a Titan IV.

What about the European Arienne rocket?

$85 million for an Ariane 4, around $200 million for an Ariane 5.

As usual, Russians manage the cheapest launches, putting a Soyuz up in orbit is figured to be less than $20 million.

Do remember that these figures (courtesy of Encyclopedia Astronautica) are not all that comparable, because the above costs are the price of putting the entire thing in orbit, when in practice they carry multiple satellites. An Ariane 5 can also lift up a hell of a lot more stuff than the Indian PSLV.

Cheers,
-j.

Re:US and European Launches?

[florescent_beige]

Article 1The Lockheed-Martin Atlas V uses Russian engines (RD-180) certified by the US though the Boeing Delta IV uses American designed Rocketdyne RS-68's. Just an FYI.

Article 2 calls for 3 EELV's for FY 2001 for 288 million (about 95 million each). It doesnt break them out as Deltas or Titans or which model. These are medium to heavy lift vehicles not in the PSLV class. Atlas V can put up to 19,100 lbs into GTO. If that truly does cost less that 100 mil, it compares not too badly with 15 million for 1050 kg to GTO for the PSLV.

Re:2nd world has high-end labor

[Anonymous Coward]

The lesson from that area that rabid fundamentalism and government don't mix is one the U.S. could also learn.

Chinese space program 100% indegeneous - joke of t

[Anonymous Coward]

Chinese space programs 100% indegenous !!!! This should be put in Hall of Fame for the best jokes ever said in Arial Bold font with size 48.

so who was Russia selling its space technology to??? US?? hmmm.... makes me ponder

Employing all those people costs money

[hpulley]

I don't know directly about their space programme but when I worked at the Pacific Weather Centre we had a guy there from China on exchange and he couldn't believe we just had two meteorologists on duty. He said they would have had thirty to do the same thing. It wasn't just that our computers are better, they just had a lot of people to employ. If their space programme is similar then I can see where the money is going.

I don't think that is the point

[mikey504]

If you want to look at it from the "What are they trying to say to the world?" angle, Then I think it boils down to two things:

1. We can launch satellites for you at an attractive price, let's do some business.

-and-

2. We can afford to play the ICBM game, too, so don't mess with us.

It seems a shame that joining the ICBM club is kind of a prerequisite for having a voice in the global market place, but that seems to be how it is for now.

*Polar* Satellite Launch Vehicle for ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Geostationary satellite launching ?

Clearly not traditional Western science ....

Toon Moene.

third world country

[Anonymous Coward]

70% of indians depends on agriculture for a living. Has it ever occurred to you that a meteorological satellite could be used to predict weather and help the farmers instead of launching nukes or spying or whatever.

Agriculture.

[The Cydonian]

It's not about spying or ICBM's or anything, the key factor here is, believe it or not, agriculture. I know other patriotic Indians have problems accepting this, but India is still largely an agriculture-based economy, with the population especially concentrated in rural areas. With the exploding population creating pressure on food resources, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research actively involves itself in creating better yielding food varieties .

Students of Indian history would have heard about the green revolution that created self-sustainence in food; a crucial post-independence achievement considering food scarcity situations such as the 1943 Bengal Famine (the one on which Amartya Sen did economic research and won the 1998 Nobel Prize for Economics).

Now with satellite technology, ICAR can identify which land areas are suitable for which crops and therefore goad farmers into growing those varieties (remember that India is a sub-continent; you have all sorts of terrain, from deserts to plains to plateaus to, of course, mountains.

So accurately knowing which crop goes best where is critical information for the hungry masses (over-cliched, but it's true). Methinks that this will be the biggest use, followed closely by telecommunications and satellite television AND then by urban planning (Mumbai will have 24.7 million people by 2005).

PS:- Note that I'm not saying that satellite technology wont be used for other purposes; I definitely want India to use cutting-edge technology against a couple of motherfuckers, but talking only about that would be misleading.

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[(v)Jargon(v)]

Its very easy for you to say this.

Picture of Tanveer

"You may be surprised to know that in 2000 years of indian civilisation, India has never ever attacked another nation."

India has attacked Pakistan and Muslims over and over again. During partition India slaughterd Muslims left and right. If India is such a Democracy, then why did crazed Hindus of Gujrat attack Muslims of that area just months ago. Why did Democratic Hindus, tie-up Muslim women, gang-rape them, pour gasoline on them and set them ablaze. Why did Democratic Hindus or better 'Indians' do the same to entire Muslim families.

Families Burned Alive!

Go back to school, its obvious that in over 2000 years Indians haven't advanced a single bit in terms of Democracy.
What a joke...

Very true.

[afxgrin]

At my University, there are plenty of older students from India and Pakistan who are trying to get a 'Western' education. I've sat in classes of engineers who can't get work cause their foreign education is considered worthless.

So they end up coming here, just to find out that their education is worthless, and they find out they have to go BACK to University again here. I feel really bad for these people.

So when people complain saying that immigrants are stealing their jobs in the tech industry, many times it's just not true. (or not as pervasive as some make it seem to be) The only immigrants that maybe stealing tech jobs are rich immigrants.

Re:Very true.

[be-fan]

Rich immigrants aren't willing to work for an unnaturally low cost. Thus, in this case, its not stealing the job, but taking it fairly.

Satellites, nukes and the monkeyman.

[naughtypenguin]

I still find it hard to believe that India is this advanced. Not to mention the nuclear capability. For christ's sake they as a nation are freaking out because of the monkey man! attacking people.

Nothing against Indian's or anything. I know a few personally, they are great folks. But I think the technology base in India is a little overstated. Most indian tech workers I have worked with over the past 12 years are a typically well below average when the first get over here. Where as they were some sort of technological whiz-kid in India.

I would wonder what sort of redundant systems they had on this thing. What sort of emergency procedures they had in case of a failure which sent it of course or such. I would bet minimal if any.

Re:Satellites, nukes and the monkeyman.

[The Cydonian]

For christ's sake they as a nation are freaking out because of the monkey man! [strangemag.com] attacking people.

That's no measure of anything. Last time I heard, many people in the United States were getting freaked out by a couple of baseball fields and tennis courts. (The pun here is that the picture of Area 51 is from a satellite. Not Indian, though.)

As for Indian techies, I'm sure you haven't heard the fact that the Cartosat 2 will have a panchromatic resolution of 1m; same as that of the current leader Ikonos.

Here's a gentle hint:- Science is peer-reviewable in scientific terms. Not racial.

Re:Satellites, nukes and the monkeyman.

[Anonymous Coward]

India's first satellite was launced on April 19, 1975 (27 years ago) using a russian launcher and its first successful launch of a satellite using an indigenous launch vehicle was on July 18, 1980 (22 years ago). Not really a newcomer to the space race ... I still find it hard to believe that India is this advanced
I would wonder what sort of redundant systems they had on this thing. What sort of emergency procedures they had in case of a failure which sent it of course or such. I would bet minimal if any.
The Indian made IRS remote sensing satellites are in use by several countries including the US. The latest PSLV launch also carried a korean and a german satellite. It's not some space startup as you seem to imagine. On a different note, this is precisely this kind of attitude, and an unwillingness to know about the world beyond your borders that makes the rest of the world unsympathetic to america's problems. Most indian tech workers I have worked with over the past 12 years are a typically well below average when the first get over here
Which tells me a lot about the place you work ...

Re:Satellites, nukes and the monkeyman.

[Anonymous Coward]

> For christ's sake they as a nation are freaking out because of the monkey man! [strangemag.com] attacking people.

Not as a nation. Mass hysteria has been known in numerous cultures in significant sections of the population. Take the dot-com boom, for example.

> Most indian tech workers I have worked with over the past 12 years are a typically well below average when the first get over here. Where as they were some sort of technological whiz-kid in India.

Nonsense. You probably work in the IT industry, in which case it's unlikely you have ever met an Indian technological whiz-kid. The qualifying bar for employment at ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) is way too high for the average Engineer/Scientist, leave alone an IT person.

> I would wonder what sort of redundant systems they had on this thing. What sort of emergency procedures they had in case of a failure which sent it of course or such. I would bet minimal if any.

I can assure you that the principles of sound engineering design are universal, and apply without exception across nations. The devices wouldn't work if they weren't followed.

Best News Since the Transistor!

[Baldrson]

As the person who represented the grassroots attempt to reform commercial launch policy in the US, I just want to say this commercial launch by a non-Western nation is the best news since the invention of the transistor!

Sputnik doesn't compare because it was communist grandstanding that created a communist agency within the West, NASA, that succeeded in suppressing progress in space for decades. This challenge from the Dravidian-Aryans hybrids of India is bound to light a fire under the moribund pioneering culture of the West -- particularly the nations of Canada, Australia and New Zealand and hopefully the US (assuming if the US can hold together in the face of such challenges to its pioneering heritage -- which I doubt and hope it cannot for the sake of the remnant of its pioneering subpopulations).

Re:2nd world has high-end labor

[geoswan]

This is the 2nd time this month where a slashdotter has incorrectly assumed they knew what the 2nd world or 4th world is... presumably because they misunderstood the term "3rd world".

Third world is a term from early in the Cold War. Those who coined the term saw all developed Western nations lined up against a monolithic communist bloc. In those days there was hardly any trade between Capitalist countries and Communist countries. It was like they were on two separate planets. The third world referred to technologically underdeveloped, non-aligned nations.

Nowadays third world may have lost its idealogical roots. But it still bugs me when people invent their own meanings for 2nd world, 4th world, etc.

The 2nd world would be former communist bloc nations. Don't use it for other meanings, OK?

I like MickLinux's characterization of IMF loan repayments as "tribute". In the most (formerly?) corrupt nations the west made huge loans to these countries. On paper the loans were made to aid development, but corrupt cronies the west installed, like Mobuto Sese Seko of Zaire, diverted those funds offshore to their Swiss bank accounts.

Yes, the "middle east" was more advanced than Europe for a long time. I am not sure that corruption is the explanation of Europe's rise over the "middle east". By today's standard things were pretty corrupt in Britain even 200 hundred years ago. Somewhere I have a copy of Marvin Kitman's very funny "The making of the President, 1789" and "George Washington's expense account". By today's standards Washington's corruption make the Gates, Ballmer, and the CEOs of worldcom, ENRON etc look like choir-boys.

We may think of India as a very poor country. But I had an Indian buddy, 20 years ago in University, who used to remind me that India was the 10th most industrialized nation on Earth. Kind of like that saying that inside every large person there is a skinny person screaming to get out. So the billion or so people in India includes more college grads than many smaller nations.

I don't know where India ranks now. But I read an editorial when the leaders of the G7 were thinking of letting Russia join them, to make the G8. The editorial writer said that the G7 would really have to be enlarged to be the G18 to include Russia if admission was based solely on GNP.

Concerning the term "middle east" -- this is also a new term. What we now call the "middle east" used to be referred to as the "near east".

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[sjguy_01]

Dear Sir,

whoever you are, I would like to inform you that India has never "attacked" Pakistan, it has only "defended" itself against an attack from Pakistan. I guess thats a crime too in your perspective. There is a difference between attacking someone, and defending yourself when attacked by someone. Defending yourself is even allowed under the Geneva Convention rules.

Secondly, which slaughter are you talking about during the partition. Are you not aware, or have simply decided to ignore, that trains full of slaughterd hindus and sikhs were sent FROM Pakistan to India. Look at how many muslims are there today in India and how many non-muslims are there in Pakistan. BTW, India has the SECOND largest muslim population in the world, after Indonesia.

About hindus attacking the muslims in Gujrat. Well Sir, what is your answer to the fact that these attacks happened after a train full of men, women and children hindu PILGRIMS was burnt after their doors were sealed. And this train was burnt by muslims. Pray tell, what did those poor muslims do to the hindus?

Besides, the point which Tanveer was making was that, India has been invaded in the past by Alexander, and the Afaghans and mongols besides others, but no India rules has ever invaded any other country. India(n) influence in other parts of the world is primarily cultural and socio-religious. Indian religions, and in which I include hinduism, skikhism, buddhism, jainism besides others, have always preached peace and not war ( for example "jihad") against others. Please get your facts right. thanks.

At this low price...

[bobdotorg]

... maybe we can get rid of that N'Sync guy once and for all.

Maybe OT (Re:The Main Point: Spy sattelites)

[Sanga]

I'll go with your reading that the Pakistanis are, to a large extent, a sensible people. But the leaders of their government/power centres there fail to infuse the same level of confidence in their sensibility.

Agree with your other points

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[Anonymous Coward]

> During partition India slaughterd Muslims left and right.

Actually, many more Hindus were slaughterd than Muslims during partition. There is a reason Pakistan is 99% Muslim and India is only 82% Hindu. Pakistan, being a Islamic state, has no tolerance for other religions. India is a completely secular country.

Unfortuantly, communal riots do happen in India. However, they are usually both Hindus and Muslim's fault. You can't put the blame on one side or the other.

Communal relations are also better in some places than others. I grew up in a city called Calcutta (er, Kolkata now), in Eastern India. While this city was famous for several communal riots in the first half of this century, in the last half, it's not been bad. While my family itself was Hindu, I had many Muslim friends. This is actually not that uncommon in most of eastern and southern India.

This was also not so uncommon before Indian independence. Hindus and Muslims were united against the British. It's really a shame that they split India into two, which both destablized South Asia and made religious relations unstable.

Do you live in an alternate dimension ?

[unisol54]

http://www.indianembassy.org/special/president.htm The current indian president is Dr. K.R Narayanan. He's not a missile scientist nor an army man. and the bullshit thats being typed up bout Abdul Kalam being the president is pure er..well Bull Shit.. so get ur story straight. Abdul Kalam aint the current Indian president. Its Narayanan..and he isnt a missile researcher dammit. http://www.indianembassy.org/special/president.htm

Re:Do you live in an alternate dimension ?

[unisol54]

lol...i guess i am...:p sorry ...

Re:Do you live in an alternate dimension ?

[xzap]

The site is behind times. Abdul Kalam IS the president of India.

Re:META: Slashdot styleguide? (choosing anchortext

[RobotWisdom]

"You really need to get out more."

Given that the biggest barrier to popular acceptance of Linux is its user-unfriendliness, and given that Slashdot is the world's most popular forum for Linux enthusiasts, isn't the idea of a campaign to raise Slashdot's collective standards for user-friendliness actually rather significant and important?

Re:India's Space and Missile programs are related.

[Anonymous Coward]

India tends to foster personality cults - and the case of Dr. Abdul Kalam is no exception. He actually had little to do with the space program. This was a completely unrelated program and organization (ISRO, Indian Space Research Organization), the seeds of which were laid in the 50s by the late Dr. Vikram Sarabhai, one of the finest Renaissance men from India (Scientist, Businessman, Patron of the Arts, Administrator, Mentor, etc.).

Dr. Kalam was a techical administrator with good project/program management skills at DRDO (Defense Research and Development Organization), to whose credit goes the IGMDP (Integrated Guided Missile Development Program), which has developed a clutch of missiles (Prithvi, Agni, Nag, Akash and Trishul) for strategic and tactical use. It's probably not a coincidence that the missiles that leveraged some existing propulsion technology from ISRO (Prithvi, Agni) have had better success than those that tried to use entirely new DRDO technology (Akash, Nag, Trishul). Anyway, Dr. Kalam received most of the credit for the missiles, and is rather universally popular in India. Most Indians consider him a Scientist, whereas the more accurate description would be Engineering Program Manager (the distinction is important - many good Engineering Program Managers that I've seen here in Silicon Valley and elsewhere actually know very little Science).

It's worth noting that the curious case of 'Herbal Petrol' that was propagated by a charlatan and small-time fraudster named Ramar Pillai, got initial credibility and plasibility mainly due to Dr. Kalam's ringing endorsement.

Not necessarily!

[Anonymous Coward]

Read your David Hume.

India: self reliant in space?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the America is self reliant in Software!

Why India needs nuclear weapons and ICBMs

[Anonymous Coward]

What country, other than Pakistan, would India target with nuclear weapons? Attacking Pakistan from India would not require techniques such as FRactional Orbit Bombardment.

One word: CHINA.

1.1 billion with a Communist dictatorship, 90% ethnic and monolithic Han chinese population.

vs.

1.0 billion with a vibrant democracy with an extremely diverse population segmented across 3,000 languages, 12 religions, >30 ethnicities, different shades of skin color, caste, etc.

If there is ever going to be two mutually exclusive enemies, India and China are it.

Yellow vs. dark brown, communism vs. democracy, 1.1 billion vs. 1.0 billion, and monolithic vs. diverse.

Low cost sat launch == Plutonium Rain

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the things that makes me sick @ ./ers are the lack of scientific/ethical critic and common sense. Nobody think that maby at 15 millions, there's a trick? Americans can't launch a satellite properly for a G$! Imagine indians! At 15$M bucks, I call this an orbital nuclear bomb. No matter what India's intentions, it's playing with bad fire.

I really hope i'm wrong, but those low quality, low cost sats are full of plutonium. It's the only fuel thay can afford (having a few plutionum operated power plants helps a bit). The space waste falling down on our back is getting more and more of a problem each week. And most sats will fall down one day.

For those who arent' aware, we, all citizens of the world, are bearing a deadly heritage from the mid-60 American Space Program, where a sat just came back and exploded in the stratosphere. And, yes, it was full of plutonium.

Interesting fact; go to the nearest lab and grab a Geiger counter, and stick it near your head. You'll see that every human on earth now bears a highly radioactive charge. And since it was only in the 60ies, nobody now what kind of reverse effect or mutation our children will bear.

Space programs, sats launching, and gigantic power consumption projects bear their danger; rendering them useless by the force of the fact that we will all die from it.

F**k the NASA and all those clowns, and the pseudo-intellectuals who support every space project blindly without facing the facts.

Re:Low cost sat launch == Plutonium Rain

[Anonymous Coward]

>>F**k the NASA and all those clowns, and the pseudo-intellectuals who support every space project blindly without facing the facts.

Don't forget the Cydonia cover-up about the face on Mars!

F*&K em all I say.

Re:Low cost sat launch == Plutonium Rain

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I forgot about this one! ;P ;)

Re:Low cost sat launch == Plutonium Rain

[CoolNameDenied]

As someone who had some experience in the nuclear field, I can tell you that if there is plutonium orbiting the earth, it's much better out there than under your house (and even wrapping yourself in Aluminium Foil won't stop those slow moving neutrons)...

Plutonium rain is hardly a real issue here. Consider dispersion from an explosion - the majority would go to the larger surface area, which would be... space. Picture a contact lens. Tada, you have the stratosphere.

But then suddenly this pops up because India got something into space cheaper?

Does that mean Americans use higher grade plutonium? :o

In truth, I'll bet you find more intelligent use of solar electric powering - and these arrays double as sails...

If we're gonna be Luddites, why even log on here in the first place?

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[pinka]

Quote begins:

Besides, the point which Tanveer was making was that, India has been invaded in the past by Alexander, and the Afaghans and mongols besides others, but no India rules has ever invaded any other country. India(n) influence in other parts of the world is primarily cultural and socio-religious. Indian religions, and in which I include hinduism, skikhism, buddhism, jainism besides others, have always preached peace and not war ( for example "jihad") against others. Please get your facts right. thanks.

Quote ends

I don't know how far the above is true. There certainly was a greater India in South East Asia during the time of the Cholas (was it 7th Century? I forget my history.) Indian Kings had established colonies here. The colonies of course broke free of the motherland in an age when ships took ages to cross the seas ...

I would agree with the main thrust of the post though, India certainly has been less agressive even at the height of her power.

good

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice of India to do that. Hope they try it more often and make the Chinese really nervous.

some off-topic reflections

[harappa]

I have seen the most creative and advanced solutions come out of constrained environments. With the population India has - you have to be *very* smart to get into good engineering colleges. And with poverty comes a desire to innovate without depending on other market-driven economies.

I am from one of those good schools ( IIT )

[Anonymous Coward]

And yes, I had to be really good in whatever I do to get into those schools.

As far as education levels go. We can kick some serious butt from *any* university in the world.

Don't get fooled by the so called "third world" looks . Proof of the pudding is up there in space.

CORRUPTION, man !

[elegante]

You sez:

"If they're truly doing that for a twelfth (what a horrid word) of
the cost that China spends, the what the hell is China doing wrong?!
Or does China send up a system 12 times better?"

A simple answer to your question above, and in one word:

CORRUPTION !

Remember the three-gorge-dam ? The cost overrun has run into TENS OF BILLIONS OF USD !

And the cost overrun is just the CONSTRUCTION. It hasn't even include the OTHER EXPENSES that are related to the dam, such as relocation costs, environment protection/preservation costs, etc.

If you include all of these, the project overrun is OVER FIVE TIMES THE ORIGINAL BUDGET.

And where all those money gone to ?

To the Tai-Tze-Dang.

The problem is NOT only on the money side. Remember the "Tou-Fu-Cha" construction, which was coined by none other than Zhu Yong Zhi? A large portion of the dam construction can be categorized as "Tou-Fu-Cha".

The dam was supposed to last for at least 200 years, but because of the "Tou-Fu-Cha", it will be a miracle if the dam lasts 80 years !

And in China, you got a quarter of a launch !

[elegante]

Due to rampant corruption in China !

Please pardon the ostrich

[Taco Cowboy]

Them chinky ostriches will say anything to make China looks good.

They will say that China never need anything from abroad, they can invent everything. In fact, that ostrich that you replied to was implying to the world that China's space program is 100% indigenous, without parts nor ideas from abroad.

Go back several decades, near the end of WW II, it was the Germans who invented the jet engine, as well as the rocket (in modern sense), US, USSR and the rest of the world, in one way or another, got hold of the technology and add on to it.

So whichever chink who think that it was the Chinese who invented the modern rocket, please unplug your head from the sand pit.

It's but a form of CORRUPTION !

[Taco Cowboy]

Employing 30 people to do the job of 2 is not only a waste of scarce resources. It is also a form of CORRUPTION.

The problem of corruption in China is RAMPANT. And it is getting worse.

ROGUE! The Word is ROGUE.

[Kintanon]

Now I have to type a bunch of crap down here to make slashdot pass through my editorial comment.
What waste of bits and bytes.

Kintanon

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[(v)Jargon(v)]

Just as Tanveer so boldly tried to portray that Indians are so great and innocent I have every right to do the same for the other side. The fault lies in Tanveer's inital statement.
But the jist of what you say is true, both sides are to blame, but i will not have, as a Pakistani, Tanveer try to nullify the wrong that India has committed as well. Thank You, I enjoyed your comment.

Re: Easy for you to say Tanveer1979

[(v)Jargon(v)]

Are you not aware or have you simply decided to ignore the FACT that the Hindus from Ayodhya that were attacked was simply due to one reason: Ten years earlier in Ayodhya,Hindu nationalists had torn down a centuries old Mosque. And in Gujrat, 2002, Hindus again attacked the Babri Mosque.

If Hindus are so "secular", and try to claim they are over Islam, then explain to me why do they still insist to engage in attacks against world religons.

India with its sheer size has always tried to impose its rule on Pakistan and history would complement my statement in that all bigger nations have done the same.

wrong implications

[osolemirnix]

Threats need three things:
* weapons
* delivery system
* motivation

Most western democracies have the first two, but lack the third.

I would like to add that to use a nuke, you don't have to fire it. You can "use" it by threatening others quite well (worked in the cold war). A threat also implies that you are willing to fire. So I would say that countries who have the first two certainly have the third, in other words the motivation to "use" them, one way or another. And they do quite frequently, the US, China, India, Pakistan, etc. do it all the time (implicitly threatening).

Your statement is also wrong in another aspect: in fact, most "western" countries do not have nukes, even though they may have the technology to build them should they so desire. Most European countries do not have their own nukes, Germany being one particular example that you got wrong. Germany never built their own nukes, though nukes of NATO allies were stationed in Germany during the cold war (though not under direct control of the German military).

So maybe you should catch up on some history reading. I suggest you start with Sun Tsu's "The Art of War", quote: "All warfare is based on deception." So much for perceived threats.

</offtopic>