Slashdot Mirror


Planning Phase Complete For Indian Moon Mission

alphakappa writes "According to news reports, India's low-cost moon mission -- Chandrayan -- has completed its planning phase and will be deployed in 2007-2008 as planned. The interesting aspect is that the entire mission is expected to cost only around USD 88 million. How do you think space technology will change as a result of these low cost missions, satellites and space vehicles?"

14 of 391 comments (clear)

  1. Low cost by ByteSlicer · · Score: 5, Funny

    They will outsource the whole project to themselves...

    1. Re:Low cost by MarkKnopfler · · Score: 5, Informative

      Chandrayan literally translates to moon-vehicle.

  2. Re:Question by samfisher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firstly the mission is not manned. So the question of loss of life doesn't arise. Secondly, the costs are low probably for the same reasons that India can do most other tech work for lower costs (low cost of labor/manufacturing/r&d). Finally, like with any technology project, you can never be sure how much it actually costed until the project has been successfully completed. Such projects have high probability of shooting over the budget.

  3. Re:"only" USD 88 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think this quote from the President's Moon to Mars commission report sums it up your concerns (please understand the context):
    One hundred and fifty years ago, if President Lincoln had formed this board, you might have called the "The Commission on Iowa, Colorado and Beyond." And you would have faced the Very Same Questions!

    "Can we afford to explore the West?"
    "Isn't it dangerous out there?"
    "Shouldn't we solve the problems of the East Cost first?"

    And maybe even, "Is there life in California?"

    -Roger G. Gilbertson
    There has to be a balance between exploration and civil work. But the balance certainly isn't at zero exploration.
  4. Was waiting for this... by rsidd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    6 comments and already half of them are whining about why can't India spend money on education and hospitals. So the USA and Europe have no poor people, no uneducated people, no sick people who can't afford healthcare? News to me. Any number of recent stories on slashdot have talked about spinoffs from India's space programme that have helped, and are helping, the Indian people (satellite education, improved weather forecasting and cyclone alerts, remote sensing and crop monitoring, etc...) And has it occurred to you that the moon project could be a money winner in the long run, if India can do it cheaper and better than others? India is already getting a non-negligible share of the satellite launch business, as well as saving a lot of money by doing its own launches instead of depending on Ariane and others. But no, next time an India story comes, it will be another "oh look at all those poor illiterate people, why are they running a space programme" flood of comments, mainly from Americans who're hardly literate in their native language, judging by the writing samples on display.

  5. Re:Obvious comment, but I can't help it by shri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you have walked or driven past some of the streets of south side Chicago, you would be asking yourself the same question about a different country.

    I'm not making excuses for the lack of govt focus on infrastructure, I'm just pointing out that every country has problems related to poverty, bad/old infrastructure and corruption.

    Yeah, its the obvious reply, that I could not help but make.

  6. Re:What is the point? by metlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, atleast it's being used on something substantial like space travel, rather than on military funding some of the other countries.

    Or, are you too blinded by your own prejudice to notice that development is development, no matter what? People need to be motivated, and this is just a means of doing it.

    I guess you would rather spend it on conquering some poor nation for it's oil and natural resources, and brand it progress, rather than have a developing nation take steps to not merely enhance the quality of living of its people, but also it's science. FYI -- any progress is progress. NASA isn't going to give the blueprints of its flights to India tomorrow, and the only way that they are going to progress is to do it on their own.

    Do you have any suggestions? Or would you rather suggest that until all of the billion people are given television sets and fat burgers so that they can sit on their couches, there should be no progress at all? They're trying to catch up with the rest of the world, give them a break and give credit where it's due.

  7. Re:Unmanned mission by secolactico · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think US just payed for a very expensive show.

    Yes, it was a very expensive show, fueled by the cold war competition with the soviets.

    It was necesary, tho. They proved it was possible to take a human being into another celestial body and return him safely, and that's no mean feat.

    ... and the world gained Tang.

    --
    No sig
  8. Re:What is the point? by manavendra · · Score: 5, Insightful
    > But what is the point? Are they going to get any crucial new data on what the Moon rock is made of?

    Maybe, maybe not. Consistent with the primary objective of using space technology for societal benefits, Department of Science (DOS) has implemented the satellite sytems systems that form important elements of the national infrastructure today for providing vital services in the areas of telecommunication, television broadcasting, meteorology, disaster warning and resources survey and management. The progress made in the application of space technology during the year is highlighted in the following sections. If you want to know what those application are, take a look here

    Secondly, such space missions may not directly affect the country's economy or the well-being of the people directly, but the knowledge gained is then applied to other areas. Such low-cost missions also enable the country to be self reliant so that they dont have to be dependent upon fickle, external, happy-to-go-war-for-oil powers who refused India cryogenic technology for ill-founded fearsM, which incidentally, had no long-term consequences excepting for some delays in India launching its indigenous rockets.

    > Or is this solely a demonstration of power?
    If that's what you think. We believe it is a step towards self-reliance.

    > A sort of an international dick-waving contest?
    That is the most pompous, ignorant, half-assed comment as any that I've heard. So developing countries should not try to break free from the shackles of poverty, by using technology? Or do you think such technology has just one direct application and no transferable by-products? Or that such technology is the domain of only the rich? What rubbish!

    > You are not grown up until you send some expensive junk to the moon or something?
    Just so you dont growel in your own ignorance that this is the only Indian space programme, here is the complete list to relieve you of your pain:
    There are others. But I'm too tired to respond in far more detail. Oh, and just so you understand how old Indian space programme is, have a look here

    > Those eighty million might have bought the country one more university or one more hospital - which, I believe, have a better chance of saving / educating a person which makes an important scientific discovery than that pile of junk has of making a good return on its moon trip
    Hospitals? You gotta be out of your mind. Just google about healthcare in India and the healthcare "tourists" that India attracts every year.

    Sure, despite all this, I know it's a poor land. But to trample all over it, because you have a self-formed belief that it should focus only on hospitals, is being clueless
    --
    http://efil.blogspot.com/
  9. Funny.. by manavendra · · Score: 5, Informative

    ..rather interesting to see the most highly-rated comments on /. are those who deride the Indian space programme and yelp about the poverty and the living conditions, and expound the wealth of their knowledge about how this 88 mil could be used towards creating more hospitals and so on.

    How many of you know about India's space programmes though?

    Did you know that India has been working on space programmes since the 60's?

    Or that it had a comprehensive space progamme, that included a satellite system, a remote sensing satellite system, polar satellite launch vehicle and Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle ?

    Or that when United States arm-twisted Russia in April 1992 and July 1993 not to sell the cryogenic technology know-how to India.

    Or that India's cryogenic engine came of age on April 18, 2001 when India bustled into the exclusive GSL club?

    --
    http://efil.blogspot.com/
  10. Re:What is the point? by vidarh · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So it is amoral and shortsighted to launch weather satellites to help predict cyclones and other weather conditions that kill thousands?

    So it is amoral and shortsighted to invest in developing local technology so that local industry thrive and help catch a pie of the multi-billion dollar satellite launch market by proving their capabilities, so they get foreign business, creating thousands of jobs in the process, and bringing in billions of foreign capital to grow their economy?

    So it is amoral and shortsighted to invest in communications systems to help boost education levels in poor rural areas?

    A space program isn't a pissing contest - all countries depend on space technology in one way or another. For a country with more than a sixth of the worlds population it would be lunacy to depend on other countries for things like military surveillance, communications, weather monitoring, etc. It would also be lunacy to let other nations cement their technical superiority and hold onto their grip on a market that is growing extremely rapidly, and will be a vital revenue source in a few decades.

  11. Re:What is the point? ICBM? by A+non-mouse+Cow+Herd · · Score: 5, Interesting
    India already has the capability. If you can put ~2000kg into a geosynchronous transfer oribit you can lob a sizable nuke anywhere on earth.

    GLSV wouldn't make a very good ICBM, but if they wanted to weaponize that capability, it wouldn't take much work. However, they already have missiles with enough range to deter the other regional powers (Pakistan, China) and have no real reason to worry about the US, EU or Russia.

    Developing space technology, OTOH, gives them national prestige, technical advancement, and the chance to profit from selling space services.

  12. Well done! by jandersen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well done, India, that's what I say.

    I've seen a lot of the other comments, which are all along the lines of general - and stupid - derision, asking 'why, oh why'. Yes, India has many problems with poverty etc, but so has USA, Russia and China; in fact Europe are the ones that have the best record on those issues, so perhaps only Europe should ever send things into space, don't you agree?

    No I think all these objections are more to do with the fact that India is not America and most Americans hate the fact that others are able to do these things and rely on themselves rather than the scraps the US allow them. There was the same sort of sentiment when the European equivalent of GPS was launched: 'Why, oh why'.

    Well I'll tell you why:

    1. It's not American - people in the world often prefer to do things independently of America, often because they don't trust the benevolence of America.

    2. In the case of India's space program - China and India are rivals in many areas, they are both on the verge to take the place at the top economically in the world. China has put a man in space and annouced plans to put one on the moon, and India feel they have to demonstrate that they can do it too.

  13. Apocrypha : the answer to "why?" by Kenneth+Stephen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Disclaimer : the following anecdote was not verified by me first hand, but given what I know, it sounds very reasonable.

    Circa 1978, the Morvi dam in the state of Gujarat burst. The flooding and the resultant loss of life and property was huge. The event made front-page headlines in India. One of the more curious aspects of this incident was apparently that the Indian government was clueless about the occurrence of this disaster, but the US spy satellites in orbit detected the event. The Indian government was informed by the US about the disaster.

    At that time, ISRO (the Indian space agency) had been in existence for many many years - but their funding was more of an afterthought. This incident opened the eyes of many to the strategic value of a space presence. As a result, circa 1982, India put its first satellite into space.

    People in the US may not appreciate the usefulness of a space presence. The following information was gleaned from a documentary funded by the UN :

    India went onto launch many more satellites - a lot of of them for weather forecasting. The neighbouring country of Bangladesh is located in the delta of two major rivers. Flooding is a perpetual annual problem. Subsequent to the Indian weather satellites being available, the UN sponsored the use of the weather forecasting data that was available to provide an early warning system for flooding due to cyclones (known as hurricanes in the US). The first year this was done, the loss of life was 150,000. The previous year it had been 300,000. And no, I am not making these numbers up.

    --

    There is no such thing as luck. Luck is nothing but an absence of bad luck.