Slashdot Mirror


Indian Moon Mission To Launch Next Month

Anil Kandangath writes with word that the Indian moon mission plans (mentioned earlier on Slashdot) are about to be put to the test. "While the spacecraft itself will not land on the Moon, it will act as an orbiter and land a rover on the surface. The spacecraft is being launched next month sometime between October 22 and October 26. The spacecraft payload includes 11 payloads (including one from NASA) and will perform remote sensing and studies of the lunar surface. The mission is estimated to cost Rs 386 crore (~ 84.3 million USD)." Update: 09/21 18:29 GMT by T : Thanks to reader Anil Gaddam for pointing out that this figure had been originally misstated as 7.7 million USD.

176 comments

  1. What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    God help the US of A!

    1. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by rhyder128k · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Delhi, we are having a problem!"

      "Space module 1, are you sure your computer is plugged in?"

      "Yes, we have already checked that."

      "You are sure?"

      "Yes, we are very sure."

      "What is the model of your router?"

      "What?!!"

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    2. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by networkconsultant · · Score: 1

      Well they found that the liliputions there were cheper, and 7.7 Million is a pittance compared to the standard let's make a new radio antenna budget.

    3. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That will be 1 keyboard sir.

      "Would you like to speak to a supervisor?"

    4. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That should read

      Sriharikota we have a problem.

    5. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL

    6. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but we in India got lots of problems on land to handle first...Don't people think basic education, health , security and safety , the fundamental right of all people be secured first and then think of going to moon. Dr. Singh solve the terrestrial issues before the extra-terrestrial ones....

    7. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Delhi, we are having a problem!" "Thank you for calling the help desk. Please hold" -- Indian accent

    8. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The blogger obviously mixed up Chandrayan 1 and 2. Chandrayan 1 has no lander on it, and is the one launch between October and December 2008.

    9. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet the module will have the best sound system though - lol

    10. Re:What! Even NASA is outsourcing to India? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same joke for 10 years begins to get a little stale, dont you think so?

  2. 88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=386+crore+inr+in+usd&btnG=Search

    1. Re:88 million USD by cyanid3 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Majority of Indians prefer to use lakhs/lacs instead of hundred thousand and one crore instead of ten million. Summary is written by an Indian.

      --
      loldongs dongslol
    2. Re:88 million USD by brianjlowry · · Score: 2, Informative

      I followed your link and it says 85 million.

    3. Re:88 million USD by agm1101 · · Score: 2

      84.96632 million and going down!

    4. Re:88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Why do Americans still use Imperial measures when Metric is the international standard?

      Disclaimer: I am American and I frankly don't understand it.

    5. Re:88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      reagan screwed us. We were ready to convert and he could not understand it so he stopped the nation. What a dolt he was.

    6. Re:88 million USD by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      They are part of English language. "srore" or whatever is not.

      I wonder if there are any /. could see beyond the idiocy of PC-obcessed blithering dummies who call themselves moderators and understand that it's about readability, not about "culture" or whatever crap is more important to you than the whole purpose of the language: which is efficient communication.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    7. Re:88 million USD by dogdick · · Score: 0

      Why do everyoneelses use Metric measures when Imperial is the American Standard (just like the toilet)?

    8. Re:88 million USD by hackingbear · · Score: 1

      After accounting adjustment, the summary is right: the Indian officials receiving the $85m just deposit $77.3m of which into their Barclay accounts and, on behalf of them, Barclay promptly invests the proceeds in the remaining assets of Lehman Brothers.

    9. Re:88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The google search in the posted story uses 36 crores instead of 386 crores. It should be closer to 88 million USD.

    10. Re:88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans actually use metrics for science and engineering all the time. We can handle both systems :-)

    11. Re:88 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why do Americans still use Imperial measures when Metric is the international standard?"

      Because they're imperialists of course!

  3. Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not quite so good but still cheap.

    Perhaps we should outsource NASA?

    1. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by shank001 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The mission is estimated to cost Rs 386 crore (~ 84 million USD)."

      Fixed.

    2. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by kipman725 · · Score: 1

      that seems unreasonably cheap considering it costs more than that just to get to orbit in a Soyuz capsule. 700 million seems more probable.

    3. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by RaceProUK · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yoda is Indian?

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    4. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, didn't know Indians were Jedis! I should travel to India more often... Bump master Yoda somewhere in Delhi, you know?

    5. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by delt0r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats the price difference of insisting on *maned* spacecraft vers unmanned.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    6. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mmmm. Mood dust flavored vindaloo!

    7. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Clueless+Nick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It would be "houston, we problem have", to fix the original quote and flawed translation, ijit.

      From my travels, I have learnt that most non-native English speakers use broken English, whether they be in India, the US, UK, Far East, or Middle East. The way you treat your own language shows what respect you have for its proper form.

      --
      Chat with other atheists http://secularchat.org
    8. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yoda? Welsh he is!

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    9. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by srussia · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thats the price difference of insisting on *maned* spacecraft vers unmanned.

      Names being considered for the craft are: "Horse", "Unicorn", "Lion" (Singh)...

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
    10. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by pisto_grih · · Score: 0

      It would be "houston, problem we have", to fix the original quote

      There, for you I've fixed.

    11. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      No, Yoda is from the Hebrew "Joda" (J, as we all learned in Indiana Jones ALMOST Last Crusade doesn't exist, so it's really I, which sounds like Y if you say it fast in front of an O... but anyway...). So, Joda is apparently in the lineage of Jesus (yes, I've been bored at church, too). So I guess Lucas wanted Yoda to be the great-grandaddy of Jesus symbolically? Or he saw those huge lists of uncommonly used names, and when short on creativeness... So no,... Yoda isn't Indian, he's Jewish. Or I could just be making crap up.

    12. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be "Houston, *a* problem we have", to fix the original quote

      There, for you, *a* problem I've fixed.

    13. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? To do something that we already did in the 60s (orbiters and rovers)?

    14. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by McWilde · · Score: 1

      No, you're thinking Darth Vader.

      --
      Maybe
    15. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by pisto_grih · · Score: 0

      For you, a problem I've fixed, *there*

      There's always one person who too far takes it.

    16. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yoda is Indian?

      "Yoddah" in Sanskrit means "warrior". Maybe that's where Lucas got it from?

    17. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by ctetc007 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Avast! It's Talk Like A Pirate Day! Today's not Talk Like Yoda Day, that's May 21, ya landlubbers!

      Avast! We got a problem with the (insert discrepant part here), Cap'n!
      Cap'n pulls out his pistol and shoots the officer.

    18. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      J, as we all learned in Indiana Jones ALMOST Last Crusade doesn't exist, so it's really I, which sounds like Y if you say it fast in front of an O... but anyway...

      Actually, what bugged about that little bit was that, while it is true that Jehovah would start with an "I" in Latin, that is because there is no "J" in Latin. There should not have been a "J" for him to step on. But, I digress...

    19. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Hasmanean · · Score: 1

      No, Yoda is just the name given to a really old and green Yogi.

      --
      Hasan
    20. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Interesting though that is, miss the joke you have :P

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    21. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That attitude must be why you never got laid...

    22. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by jcwayne · · Score: 1

      He did a few times in the 60s. That was enough.

      --
      Failure to follow this advice may result in non-deterministic behavior.
    23. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no. Yoda would be: A problem we have, Houston.

    24. Re:Hmm. Maybe thats closer to 84 million USD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why limit outsourcing to NASA ? Outsource the all the jobs in USA to India, Then the Americans can go on a permanent vacation and collect welfare.

  4. Nikhil B by nikhilbelsare · · Score: 1

    That's a great news

  5. Or in UK units: by Curmudgeonlyoldbloke · · Score: 5, Funny

    0.00129 Olympicses.

    1. Re:Or in UK units: by sakdoctor · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's a freaking bargain, at only 210 "Lisa simpson giving head" logos.

    2. Re:Or in UK units: by reallyjoel · · Score: 1

      link please

    3. Re:Or in UK units: by psydeshow · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Or in UK units: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a freaking bargain, at only 210 "Lisa simpson giving head" logos.

      I think the fact that you consider that a fair deal for Lisa Simpson surprising.

  6. Not that cheap by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The cost will not come within an asses' roar of 7.7 million USD. India is cheap, but not THAT cheap. 77 million USD, maybe. Perhaps if you factor out the cost of scientists and administrative staff already employed by the ISRO, and maintenance costs of existing facilities, and basically count only the cost of the rocket and parts, then maybe you'll come up with a 7.7 million USD bill. Otherwise I think someone forgot a decimal point somewhere.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Not that cheap by RuBLed · · Score: 1

      I bet you haven't heard the news yet...

    2. Re:Not that cheap by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      Stan: This rocket will fly to the moon?
      MASA: Sí, fly.
      Stan: To the moon?
      MASA: Sí.
      Stan: We want to take something to the moon. How much would that cost?
      MASA: O-ah... Two hundred.
      Stan: Two hundred? Million?
      MASA: Two hundred... dollars.

    3. Re:Not that cheap by manoelhc · · Score: 1

      Well, this dialog in Brazil:

      Stan: This rocket will fly to the moon?
      Silva: Yes, fly.
      Stan: To the moon?
      Silva: Yep.
      Stan: We want to take something to the moon. How much would that cost?
      Silva: 50.
      Stan: 50 Million?
      Silva: 50 Billions... dollars... only for full.

      --
      -- Simon said: Die!
    4. Re:Not that cheap by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      I can't find the 386 crore figure anyway in TFA, but yes, 7.7 million USD is damn cheap. Even if it were 77 millon NASA should really start considering outsourcing their launches.

    5. Re:Not that cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps if you factor out the cost of scientists and administrative staff already employed by the ISRO

      They would've paid their scientists anyway even if they didn't build this particular spacecraft. :)

    6. Re:Not that cheap by RasputinAXP · · Score: 1

      386 crore, from http://specials.rediff.com/news/2008/sep/18sd3.htm

      "Chandrayan, which is being launched at a total cost of Rs 386 crore, is also scheduled to carry 11 payloads, which would include those from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Sweden, Japan, Germany and Bulgaria. "

    7. Re:Not that cheap by jcwayne · · Score: 1

      Give this AC a business to run!

      --
      Failure to follow this advice may result in non-deterministic behavior.
    8. Re:Not that cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 crore = 10 million
      386 crore = Rs.3860 millions
      $1 = Rs.46
      Rs.3860 millions = $83.91 US MILLION

      so, cost of mission is $83.91 MILLION and not 7.7 millions.

      btw, I am Indian.

  7. Misconversion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hmm. Summary says 386 crore, but the conversion is only for 36 crore?

    386 crore Indian rupees = 84.00518 million U.S. dollars

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=386+crore+inr+in+usd&btnG=Search

    1. Re:Misconversion? by NoisySplatter · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a space program, it's supposed to be missing decimals or digits.

      --
      In Soviet Russia meme tires of you!
    2. Re:Misconversion? by wjsteele · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, it was just an error from Metric to Imperial units.

      Bill

      --
      It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
    3. Re:Misconversion? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      They mixed up the price they say it cost, and what it really cost to fake it in a film studio.

    4. Re:Misconversion? by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

      It's why it it's so cheap. They're running it on a 386 with 4 megs of RAM. They contacted David Braben and he's going to put together a custom version of Elite 2: Fronter.

      Given their budget, I'd have gone with an Amiga A500.

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    5. Re:Misconversion? by nospam007 · · Score: 2, Informative

      >It's why it it's so cheap. They're running it on a 386 with 4 megs of RAM.

      Awesome!
      Each of the NASA space shuttle's five on-board computers has the equivalent of only 400K RAM.

    6. Re:Misconversion? by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

      That's base memory. With the right know how and some time spent massaging config.sys they could get it up to nearly 580k.

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    7. Re:Misconversion? by root777 · · Score: 1

      We all know the last time there was a problem with a metric == space conversion http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/26/120247

  8. A great step by JustOK · · Score: 1

    Forget outsourcing, now we'll be outspacing.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:A great step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget outsourcing, now we'll be outspacing.

      That's better than outgassing.

  9. Get your math correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    1 US Dollar = 47 Indian Rupees

    1 crore = 10 million

    386 crore rupees ~ 82 million USD

    Cheap, I know. But you are an order of magnitude off.

  10. Thank you, come again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    At this rate, when the first space tourists reach the moon, there'll be a Kwiki-Mart there waiting for them.

    1. Re:Thank you, come again. by NoisySplatter · · Score: 2, Funny

      My sources, netcraft mostly, have confirmed that one of the experiment modules is a Squishee machine.

      --
      In Soviet Russia meme tires of you!
    2. Re:Thank you, come again. by Spazztastic · · Score: 2, Funny

      I work at a Kwiki-Mart you insensitive clod!

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    3. Re:Thank you, come again. by ArcherB · · Score: 1, Troll

      I work at a Kwiki-Mart you insensitive clod!

      Have you considered applying to be an Indian Astronaut? I'm sure they are looking for "managers" to man their moon-base.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    4. Re:Thank you, come again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First they laugh at you ... then they ignore you ... then they fight you ... then you win ...

    5. Re:Thank you, come again. by s6135 · · Score: 1

      First they laugh at you ... then they ignore you ... then they fight you ... then you win ...

      I agree. We can laugh and ridicule all we want but I can see a different kind of response very soon even on Slashdot.

    6. Re:Thank you, come again. by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok. They win. I'm going home now.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    7. Re:Thank you, come again. by WindBourne · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yes, We know. We robbed you last week. We Will see you this weekend.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    8. Re:Thank you, come again. by hierophanta · · Score: 1

      First they laugh at you ... then they ignore you ... then they fight you ... then you win ...

      thank you for quoting Gandhi http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gandhi#Quotes_about_Gandhi but you really should have included the source

    9. Re:Thank you, come again. by ODiV · · Score: 1

      Why? Is it GPL'd?

      ZING!

    10. Re:Thank you, come again. by APSenG · · Score: 1

      First they laugh at you ... then they ignore you ... then they fight you ... then you win ...

      Gandhi quote. This was used to great effect in a Red Hat advert- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBUgEx_91BU

    11. Re:Thank you, come again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...?

      What the heck does that me

  11. Tin Foil Hat comment by zappepcs · · Score: 1

    They are launching just prior to the new moon http://www.astrologyoz.com/moon/2008moonphase.htm so on arrival, we won't be able to see it particularly well or at all. Wonder what the reason for that is? I think they are in collusion with the Illuminati and have Halloween evil planned for all of Earth. They didn't name their lander Kali by chance did they?

    1. Re:Tin Foil Hat comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > They didn't name their lander Kali by chance did they?

      Chandrayaan-I is the name of the program and the spacecraft. http://www.isro.org/chandrayaan/htmls/home.htm

      Chandrayaan is Sanskrit for "Moon Craft" http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Chandrayaan

      Thus if the "Moon Impact Probe" has a name at all, it's probably Sanskrit for moon impact probe. ;-)

      Chandrayaan-II has the lander/rover. The manned mission is planned for 2020. http://chandrayaan.wordpress.com/2007/04/29/manned-moon-mission-by-2020/

      It's said that India's goal is to find He-3 on the moon for fusion research. Maybe they should rename the program Shiva? (And yes, I do know that Shiva is the _destroyer of evil_ and not just a destroyer of things in general.)

    2. Re:Tin Foil Hat comment by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think they are in collusion with the Illuminati and have Halloween evil planned for all of Earth.

      I just checked, Nope. it seems that us in the illuminati dont have anything planned. In fact I believe this month is my chapter's turn at having the holy grail. I'll need to look at the great temple calender to make sure though... It might just be the boring alien communication thing again. God I hate those, the jerks from Omicron Percei 8 wont shut up.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Tin Foil Hat comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I be after giving you an internets fer yer winnings!

      Arrr!

    4. Re:Tin Foil Hat comment by zappepcs · · Score: 1

      arrrrggghhhh

      At least someone saw the humor

  12. namaste by Monkey-some · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is nice to see a nation like India, who got quite a few brilliant people, enters into the space race "as a major player".

    1. Re:namaste by Diamo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed, lets get everyone in space and start sharing knowledge. Cooperation off the planet might lead to more on it.

    2. Re:namaste by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Screw that. India is a parliamentary democracy and a long term rival of China. This ain't Star Trek. Let's talk to the Aussies and get them to ship that uranium. Maybe we can negotiate a military alliance.

      Oops, I mean namaste. Congratulations on your mostly peaceful use of rockets and nuclear technology

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:namaste by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      This is nice to see people falling in love, making happy families, birds chirping, nice mountains, fresh air and world piece.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    4. Re:namaste by networkconsultant · · Score: 1

      They are educated in Canada!

    5. Re:namaste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money well spent for a country with 41.6% of its population living below the international poverty line.

  13. Payloads... by McWilde · · Score: 1, Funny

    The spacecraft payload includes 11 payloads

    And each of those includes another 11 payloads?

    Very clever, young man. But it's payloads all the way down.

    --
    Maybe
    1. Re:Payloads... by thermian · · Score: 1

      The spacecraft payload includes 11 payloads

      And each of those includes another 11 payloads?

      Very clever, young man. But it's payloads all the way down.

      been reading Dawking have we?

      --
      A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    2. Re:Payloads... by meringuoid · · Score: 1

      The spacecraft payload includes 11 payloads

      And each of those includes another 11 payloads?

      No, that's the spaceprobe that's being launched by the St. Ives Space Agency next month.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:Payloads... by Migraineman · · Score: 1

      "All the way down" to where? I don't think I've ever gotten a satisfactory answer. On a related note, perhaps we should consider using turtle-shell filaments as the composite material for a space-elevator tether. Remarkably strong stuff.

    4. Re:Payloads... by erlando · · Score: 1

      been reading Dawking have we?

      No but he might have been reading Dawkins...

      --
      Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
    5. Re:Payloads... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Dawkings is the Readers Digest name for a mix for Hawking and Dawkins.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  14. First they take over our call centres ... by Dragged+Down+by+the · · Score: 1

    and now this. Going to the moon for 25,000,000,000 rupees. We're in big trouble.

  15. Secret mission details. by old+dr+omr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Secret mission details: Apparently invloves 240,000 Miles of rope and a very loud flute.

    1. Re:Secret mission details. by Spice+Consumer · · Score: 1

      Secret mission details: Apparently invloves 240,000 Miles of rope and a very loud flute.

      Wouldn't work. In space, no one can hear you play.

    2. Re:Secret mission details. by pluther · · Score: 1

      Dude, you use a vacuum flute.

      Duh.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    3. Re:Secret mission details. by jcwayne · · Score: 1

      One usually begets the other.

      --
      Failure to follow this advice may result in non-deterministic behavior.
  16. Finally! by MMC+Monster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The more countries (and private groups) we have performing these types of missions, the better.

    We can't expect the U.S. to do it alone, given all the poor and homeless people in the U.S., the recent financial system meltdown, and the large number of people in the penal system in the U.S.

    The U.S. has other worries. Let Europe, India and China inherit the moon.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:Finally! by thermian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We can't expect the U.S. to do it alone, given all the poor and homeless people in the U.S.

      Actually its more like we can't expect the US to do it because they have a nasty habit of only allowing major space missions to go ahead when it is politically expedient, and cutting their budgets when it isn't. That's no way to run a space exploration effort.

      Whats needed is a driving force other than political one upmanship (ooh look, China's going to the Moon, so we better say we're off to Mars.) How long have we had the technology to go to Mars? Several decades, but it takes China moving into space to kick off the US effort again.

      I feel sorry for the people at NASA and JPL, I really do. It would be nice if they could just be given the funding to do it and left alone to get the job done.

      Market forces would also be a much better driving force. As it is the way things are going the race to Mars will result not in exploration bases, but military ones, official 'stake claimers' with a mandate to keep it for whichever country gets there first with a large enough force..

      --
      A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    2. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > I feel sorry for the people at NASA and JPL,...

      Ahem, JPL is NASA.

      JPL (Pasadena, CA) does NASA's unmanned exploration.

      JSC (Houston) is Mission Control for NASA manned flights.

      KSC (Cape Canaveral) is NASA's launch facility.

      etc. http://www.nasa.gov/about/sites/index.html

    3. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1
      The tech to get to Mars does and does not exist. There are still major problems to get around such as shielding the occupants from radiation. We know how to do it but it is prohibitively expensive. The best shield we have is water but that is just too costly to ship up to space in the quantities required. There are experiments on-going into new materials but we don't *really* have the tech yet.

      http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q4856.html

    4. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      Market forces would also be a much better driving force. As it is the way things are going the race to Mars will result not in exploration bases, but military ones, official 'stake claimers' with a mandate to keep it for whichever country gets there first with a large enough force..

      Also I think you'll find that you are wrong concerning military bases on the moon. If you read the basic outline of the Outer Space Treaty and have a look at the huge numbers of countries that have ratified it you'll see that any attempt at a military operation would be met with global outrage.

      Of course that might not stop some coutries trying but unlikely really.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty

    5. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats needed is a driving force other than political one upmanship

      It worked for the Apollo program.

    6. Re:Finally! by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Um, lolwut?

      Look up Project Orion. The technology to get to Mars cost-effectively and efficiently has existed for decades.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    7. Re:Finally! by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Also I think you'll find that you are wrong concerning military bases on the moon. If you read the basic outline of the Outer Space Treaty and have a look at the huge numbers of countries that have ratified it you'll see that any attempt at a military operation would be met with global outrage.

      You mean, kinda like how we all promised not to militarize orbital space? Uh, huh. How's that working out so far? What with the Keyholes and the SDI and the shooting satellites out of orbit and all that? Nah, we'd never dream of trying to militarize Mars...

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    8. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      Project Orion is designed to go back to the Moon. It is a modular build in an attempt to future proof it. I suggest you look it up and read about the technical difficulties involved but just to get you started:

      Under Stage II, a new Block II CEV would be developed, suitable for interplanetary flight.

      -Wikipedia (emphasis mine)

    9. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      I refer you again to the Outer Space Treaty, weapons in orbit are allowed but the use of the moon or planets for anything other than peaceful purposes is expressly forbidden. I'm not saying it will never happen, just that it is very unlikely considering the agreement in place at present.

    10. Re:Finally! by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Wrong project Orion.

      I was referring to the project Orion from 1958; the version that used nuclear pulse propulsion. You know, the design that the project team felt could build an eight million tonne spacecraft- capable of making Pluto and back in a single stage in less than a year- with the materials and design processes available in 1958, let alone today.

      (Hence my statement about 'has existed for decades', as opposed to the new Orion, which is far less than a decade old)

      NASA's new Orion is nothing more than a joke.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    11. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      From the Author of Project Orion: The True Story of the Atomic Spaceship:

      "At that time we were exploding something like 100 megatons a year in the atmosphere and Orion would have added about 1 percent. And for good reason we decided even that was too much."

      http://www.space.com/spacelibrary/books/library_projectorion_020709.html

      I think that if exploding nukes underneath spaceships had been a valid and sensible idea then it would have been revisited post-cold war. It seems the amount of fallout makes this technology redundant.

    12. Re:Finally! by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Dyson's research suggests that each launch would have generated sufficient fallout to kill between 0.1 and 1 people per launch due to radiation effects. That's nothing; the fallout effect is insignificant.

      It also doesn't take into account the use of minimized-radiation weapons.

      There's no technological reason to discount the Orion design; it's probably the most efficient and cost-effective design we have by a wildly large margin and will continue to be for a long while yet.

      All the dislike is political.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    13. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      Actually, you are right. The more I read about this the more I think it is a valid idea. One of the main problems seems to be that they would have to launch from Antarctica to avoid the more deadly isotopes created from spreading but they have very short half-lives so they would not pose a problem if the launch pad was far away

      Add to that the 0.1 - 1 figure is old anyway and the technology to make cleaner bombs exists now as does the ability to make the nuclear bombs lighter and smaller. This seems like a pretty good idea actually. I stand corrected.

      It does seem a shame that the word 'nuclear' seems to have buried this idea for a rocket. However you would have to guess that NASA, ESA, Japan et al must have looked into this and discounted it for some other reason.

      I may be misguided but you would have thought the Russians at the peak of their power wouldn't have minded going into the middle of Siberia and nuclear blasting a rocket off to the moon.

    14. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      Although to be fair, the tech doesn't actually exist :)

    15. Re:Finally! by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      Which part of it?

      I mean, we have nuclear bombs. We have the pusher-plate technology. We might have to assemble it, and draw up the plans; I don't claim that they have exact schematics sitting in a drawer that they can order constructed at a moment's notice, and they'd need to get the nukes from somewhere (I believe the suggestion was that they'd come from the active weapons stockpile as part of a de-armament campaign, but that might not be viable at this point) but the design does not utilize technology we cannot construct.

      Hell, it doesn't utilize technology they couldn't make in the 60s.

      During the cold war, I could understand the hesitancy to utilize nuclear-pulse propulsion; if anything were to make the other guy antsy, it'd be that.

      But we don't really have that concern anymore.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    16. Re:Finally! by Diamo · · Score: 1

      So I went home and investigated this a little bit more and it turns out my original point still stands. Radation shielding is still a very important consideration, this time to protect the pilots from the nuclear blasts going off out back.

      There are also several other reasons this would not be a good technology such as people looking at the rocket take off would be blinded etc

      I found this video very informative on the subject and it explains some of the problems with the idea. The guy (the son of one of the project founders) also explains how he is selling the plans he has back to NASA. So all we have at present is some drawings and a few proof of concept prototypes which are in no way definitive. That does not equal a tech existing and I think there are quite a few obvious problems which when you think about it are quite considerable obstacles.

      http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/george_dyson_on_project_orion.html

  17. Anonymous Coward. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    from the ISRO site,go look it up yourselves

    The budgetary estimate for realising the proposed Indian lunar mission Chandrayaan-1 stands at Rs. 386.00 crores (about $76 million). This includes Rs. 53.00 crores (about $11 million) for Payload development, Rs. 83.00 crores (about $17 million) for Spacecraft Bus, Rs. 100.00 crores ($20 million) towards establishment of Deep Space Network, Rs. 100.00 crores ($20 million) for PSLV launch vehicle and Rs. 50.00 crores ($10 million) for scientific data centre, external network support and programme management expenses.

  18. Crore, lakh etc by shas3n · · Score: 5, Informative

    Indians use a different system of counting. After the thousand, they have a name for every second power of ten (unlike the western system of naming every third power). The system goes like this: 1000: 1e3: Thousand 100 thousands: 1e5 : Lakh 100 lakhs : 1e7 : Crore So 386 crores at about 46 INR a dollar is about 86 million USD.

    1. Re:Crore, lakh etc by prateek_t2 · · Score: 1

      1000: 1e3: Thousand 100 thousands: 1e5 : Lakh 100 lakhs : 1e7 : Crore

      correct!

      So 386 crores at about 46 INR a dollar is about 86 million USD.

      Wrong!! 1 crore is 1,00,00,000: 1e7 386 crores is 386,00,00,000. So 1 dollor = 46 Rs approx. Then 386 crore Rs is $ 83913043.47. So approx. 84 million USD.

    2. Re:Crore, lakh etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy parsing error, batman! Can you please use something between those colons and spaces to show how each "analogy" is divdided? It just looks like one big mess to me and I don't know if "Thousand 100 thousands" is a phrase that means "Lakh 100 lakhs" or what. What?

    3. Re:Crore, lakh etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After crore comes "arab", ie 1e9, and then comes kharab ,ie, 1e11. I know this because I am an Indian :-)

  19. Vindaloo Propulsion Engine by digitaldc · · Score: 1, Funny

    It has been reported that Vindaloo sauce is being used as a cheap replacement for rocket fuel- careful! that is very very HOT!

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  20. Won't anyone think of the whales? by owlnation · · Score: 1

    On behalf of the Intergalactic Whaling Commission I wish to protest!

  21. This is not news! by davidmcg · · Score: 0, Redundant

    NEXT!

  22. Am I losing my grasp of English? by tsalmark · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "While the spacecraft itself will not land on the Moon, it will act as an orbiter and land a rover on the surface." So it's going to act as a land rover on the moon, but not land on the moon???? good luck with that.

    1. Re:Am I losing my grasp of English? by Scootesti · · Score: 1

      I think you may be losing it. It won't act as a land rover, it will land a rover. I'm guessing it will orbit the moon and 'drop' the rover...

      --
      "So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet
  23. Please, it's "Native American" by objekt · · Score: 1, Funny

    Sorry to be the PC police here, but "Indian" is a derogatory term for Native Americans.

    --
    -- Boycott Shell
    1. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Notquitecajun · · Score: 4, Funny

      We're talking about dots, not feathers.

      /Dives for cover...

    2. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sorry to be the PC police here, but...

      Did you mean: Karma police ?

      --
      He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    3. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      </rotsky>

    4. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by networkconsultant · · Score: 1

      What this isn't the west indies? Aw crap I've already named the indigenous peoples! (you mean the savages sir?) No no no...

    5. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      "Fresh meat" sounded too crass.

    6. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brown Indians, not red Indians.

    7. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was "tech support, not casinos" these days.

    8. Re:Please, it's "Native American" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the comments are making fun of the Indian space mission...you should lookup how many Indian scientist work @ NASA, JPL, Lockheed before you make idiotic comments that make you look dumb.

  24. We dont have tech for a manned mars mission yet by GuruBob · · Score: 0

    the national Academies Press released a report: "Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration" (2008)

      my brief reading if this was that they are actually closing down research facilities needed to do the reserach which is still largely undone that would reduce the mission risk as far as radiation is concerned to make a mission feasible.
    The technolo9gy required for economically feasible craft design incorporating an acceptable level of radiation protection to the two prevalent radiation risks.

    Don't take my word for it read it yourself at:
      http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12045

    --
    Facebook is a woodpecker tapping on the skull of Humanity, Forever.
  25. No rover on this mission. by lessgravity · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Chandrayaan-2 mission will be the first rover mission and is scheduled for 2011.
    Great info about the mission here

  26. Cheap-o mission nonetheless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's still pretty cheap compared to normal "NASA" missions... It'll either blow up on launch or be a huge ground-breaking success. And knowing the Indians, they'll kick US butt just to show them that there's more they can do cheaply than take their jobs away.

  27. I know I can't be the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...who thought of "That's one small step for man" in Apu's accent.

  28. TFS is wrong by andy1307 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    386 crores is 70.7 million $.

    1. Re:TFS is wrong by RasputinAXP · · Score: 2, Informative

      84 million US$, actually.

  29. more space exploration, the better by peter303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wish them luck

  30. Chandrayaan I is carrying 2 NASA payloads by Quetzo · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are 2 NASA payloads selected for the Chandrayaan I, not one.

    1. The MiniSAR: To detect water ice in permanently shadowed regions on the lunar poles.
    2. The M3: A mineral mapper.
  31. Don't ask stupid questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    if you don't like the replies, okay?

    1. Re:Don't ask stupid questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you shove you H1B up yours and go back to India, monkey-worshipper?

      nice. Your parents must be so proud of you.

    2. Re:Don't ask stupid questions by slarr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      well, the US is also a bunch of monkey-worshippers now...bowing down to George Bush...so let the immature bunch stfp and get on with talk about the moon !!

  32. Time for something Kosher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Wow, Yoda is Jewish, and so is Superman - Pillfered from Wikipedia "Superman's Kryptonian name, "Kal-El," resembles the Hebrew words ××oe-××oe, which can be taken to mean "voice of God".[41] [42]. The suffix "el", meaning "(of) God""

    Oh, Spock and Kirk are Jews too.

  33. Why so cheap? by shady2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1 A shuttle mission costs about $450M. If India can get to the moon for $7.7M we should outsource the whole space program 2 Question: It India rigged this for sub-orbital flight would in be able to carry a nuclear payload? Do we need to be (re)starting the cold war on THREE fronts? Russia, China (also launching) and now India.

    1. Re:Why so cheap? by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      1 A shuttle mission costs about $450M. If India can get to the moon for $7.7M we should outsource the whole space program 2 Question: It India rigged this for sub-orbital flight would in be able to carry a nuclear payload? Do we need to be (re)starting the cold war on THREE fronts? Russia, China (also launching) and now India.

      Firstly, as about a million posts have pointed out it's closer to $77 not $7.7. Secondly, India is a parliamentary democracy and long term rival of China, if anything we* should support and bolster their efforts as a counterweight to the Chinese.

      *By we I mean the West in general; also full disclosure, although I was born in the UK my ancestry is Indian, so I may have personal biases.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
  34. actual headline should read by nimbius · · Score: 3, Funny

    moon mission next month: 400 bollywood musicals about romance on the moon to follow.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  35. Impactor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Correct. This mission will carry a tiny impactor equipped with a radar altimeter, a video camera (who says science can't be fun?), and a mass spectrometer. Actually, even calling it an impactor isn't quite right, because the purpose isn't the impact, but the data it gets on the way in.

    I would be pretty impressed if they land a rover in 2011. It sounds like they currently haven't nailed down an overall architecture, and landing a rover is fairly tough business. I'd give them another 2-3 years to fill in all the details.

  36. Indian moon mission? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

    Are they planning to open a casino there, too? Darn those cagey Native Americans and their forward-thinking ways!

    --
    That is all.
  37. You'll be able to tell it's an Indian space probe. by Ross+Finlayson · · Score: 0

    ...because it will constantly be contacting Earth to ask for help :-)

  38. 7.7 million dollars will buy you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just about enough Estes rocket engines!

  39. this wont work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... I haven't read or found any reports progress on trials any major milestone out of the blues :P it cant happen :)

  40. Re:You'll be able to tell it's an Indian space pro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a gibberish comment...