Slashdot Mirror


Indian Prime Minister Formally Announces Mars Mission

neo12 writes in with the news that India plans on being the 6th country to launch a mission to mars. "Making the first formal announcement on the country's Mars mission, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday said India will send a mission to the Red Planet that will mark a huge step in the area of science and technology. 'Recently, the Cabinet has approved the Mars Orbiter Mission. Under this Mission, our spaceship will go near Mars and collect important scientific information,' he said addressing the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on the occasion of the 66th Independence Day."

132 of 212 comments (clear)

  1. Pool ressources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am always surprised to see so many countries going at it by themselves, if we pooled resources, we would be maybe a couple of steps forward, instead of sending orbiters and robots.

    1. Re:Pool ressources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is a balance to be had between R&D, exploration, and economic development. If every country in the world waited until they solved all of their social problems, then there would be no R&D or exploration. Additionally, R&D and exploration are related to economic development.

      The fact that India is planning on being serious about a space program implies that they are becoming serious about R&D. And with R&D comes economic development which will help out their social problems.

    2. Re:Pool ressources by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Why do you think spending more money on education improved the results? It hasn't anywhere else.

    3. Re:Pool ressources by Znarl · · Score: 2

      Sure, R&D, exploration and economic development are nice things to have. But then there's this:

      http://motherchildnutrition.org/india/overview-india.html

      "38.4% of children under age three are stunted, that is too short for their age and 46% are underweight that is too thin for their age. Both indicators have slightly improved from 1998-99."

    4. Re:Pool ressources by venicebeach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And in America, one in three children are overweight or obese.

      Should we call back Curiosity?

    5. Re:Pool ressources by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If only our govenment would realize that a space program is more than a galactic pissing contest, that it is a investment ito new knowledge and technology. War isn't the only thing that brings with it new tech, space travel brings new tech because of the never before encountered situations and challenges. The tech developed there can be applied elsewhere as well and with technology comes a raised standard of living.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    6. Re:Pool ressources by neither_geek_nor_ner · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is very interesting. Nobody says this to the US or European countries or Japan or China that you solve all your problems first before going in for scientific advancement. Even the richest of countries have the homeless and the destitute. The US should not go in for the Mars or Voyager or Pioneer missions as there still are some homeless people in New York? NASA's achievements are followed all over the World as the achievement of human-kind. Moreover, India is not a tin-pot dictatorship where things are done on the whims and fancies of the dictator. The middle-class in India is larger than the population of the whole of the US. They should not have any aspirations?

    7. Re:Pool ressources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course not! You take the kids' excess food, sell it, and use the money to send another rover, Obesity.

    8. Re:Pool ressources by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      I see. Once stock market and real estate pyramid schemes failed, you are going to ride on a fat pyramid scheme until that fails too.

      1. Establish a fat-based pyramid scheme.
      2. ????
      3. Americans are no longer fat!

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    9. Re:Pool ressources by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Call me cynical, but I think government types realize the value of technology and research far more than your average citizen. Many voters seem to like NASA, but they don't get as excited as they do about the prospect of tax cuts, even ones that don't apply to them.

    10. Re:Pool ressources by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      1. Establish a fat-based pyramid scheme.
      2. ????
      3. Americans are no longer fat!

      You forgot one thing:

      4. Profit !
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    11. Re:Pool ressources by shilly · · Score: 1

      Spending more money on education isn't the be-all and end-all. But we are talking about a country where lots of children have no access to any education at all. We're not arguing about class sizes in the UK or iPads for US classrooms.

    12. Re:Pool ressources by shilly · · Score: 2

      "Simple shit like getting clean water"

      Priceless comment. I'm glad it's simple. Perhaps you can head over and teach the poor benighted heathens how to solve the issue.

    13. Re:Pool ressources by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      Not even underpants gnomes can imagine obtaining profit from a permanent solution to American obesity.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    14. Re:Pool ressources by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Yes they do. All the time.

    15. Re:Pool ressources by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      Oh my, you don't sound like American at all !

      In America, everything is worth something

      The first guy/gal who found the magical way for American to permanently lose weight is sure to be handsomely rewarded

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    16. Re:Pool ressources by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      The re-sale value drops significantly the second you drive it off the planet.

    17. Re:Pool ressources by arisvega · · Score: 2

      If only our govenment would realize that a space program is more than a galactic pissing contest

      'Galactic'?

      Slow down there, human. Get on a planet or two first.

      'Galactic'. Ha.

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
    18. Re:Pool ressources by foniksonik · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's easy. Invest hundreds of billions into infrastructure. Pay people to build roads, highways, waterways, dams, sewers, water reservoirs, water treatment plants, energy conduits, pipelines for gas and oil, bridges, railways, airports, harbors.

      That will do it. Then you'll have clean water anywhere you want it.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    19. Re:Pool ressources by gtall · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the problem is that there is no constituency for R&D in the U.S. The Liberals and Conservatives don't give a rat's ass about R&D because it doesn't help them get re-elected. Middle-of-the-Roaders congress-peoples used to be convinced that R&D paid benefits to society and that one needed a long term perspective. Now that Congress is polarized, each group is only thinking of the next election. You can get anyone of them to parrot the right R&D two-step spiel, but when it comes down to actual votes for appropriations, the Conservatives think of it as Big Government and claim Industry can do it all the R&D necessary and wouldn't it be really neat to buy the next election with a tax cut. The Liberals start crying the blues for the blue haired and their social programs and wouldn't it be neat to buy the next election by using it to "save" the social programs from those naughty conservatives.

      It didn't help that those morons from Texas steamrolled the SSC in Texas past the sane choice at Fermilab in Illinois. Finally, Congress got fed up and put a stop to it. That wasn't so bad but it left a bad taste in everyone's mouth for Physics and Big Science which spilled over into Little Science such as NIH and NSF.

      Now, the current newest crop of alleged legislators has no history with science and technology. Paul Ryan was an Econ and Poly Sci graduate. Romney is a business tycoon, Obama is still a small-town organizer, and Biden...well, Biden is old guard and should know better but he's currently spending his time telling non-white voters that Romney will put their chains back on (yep, he said it Mississippi or Alabama recently).

      Where will the drive to succeed in S&T come from? Will it take China whipping our ass so that we get shamed into it? That's no way to run a country.

    20. Re:Pool ressources by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      As soon as you can find a way to stretch out that sentence enough to fill an entire book, and give it a catchy title.

    21. Re:Pool ressources by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Not only that. It's clear that india is a country how have not anymore any problems to solve like enegy production and distribution, rising education level in the poorest places of the country... They should spend their money to make india a place where i would love to emigrate than to spend it for the glory to be the first to send humans on mars.

      Jesus Christ will you people give it a fucking rest?

      You're responding to a post about a:

      (*) Technical innovation in a developing country
      ( ) Product shipped to a developing market
      ( ) General discussion about IT in the developing world

      The location is:

      ( ) Africa
      (*) India
      ( ) Bangladesh
      ( ) China
      ( ) Somewhere else in Asia
      ( ) South America
      ( ) Central America
      ( ) Other _unspecified_

      You're objecting to it on the basis that:

      (*) Poverty hasn't been eliminated in that country yet
      ( ) American jobs will be lost

      Your argument is bogus because:

      (*) Poverty hasn't been eliminated in the developed world either, that doesn't mean we should halt all technological research
      (*) This will not adversely affect any efforts to alleviate poverty
      (*) This will help to alleviate poverty
      ( ) Poverty in that country isn't as widespread as you say it is
      ( ) The US does not have a divine right to keep all the cool jobs

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    22. Re:Pool ressources by shilly · · Score: 1

      That's easy, is it? You have a different understanding of that word from me.

    23. Re:Pool ressources by rinka · · Score: 1

      Actually our space initiatives have paid off pretty well. Multi-band observation satellites have helped farmers significantly improve their crop yields.

      Telecommunication satellites have helped us to connect remote areas that otherwise would never have been connected. these help in providing telemedicine services to people who may not normally have access to Doctors.

      Doordarshan - Indias (Govt. owned) TV channel (Something like BBC) used to broadcast K12 lessons across the country in the 70s (I believe they still do). This has helped in improving literacy across the country.

      We definitely need to have both R&D as well as economic development. Both go together.

      Just to take one example - Agriculture research triggered the green revolution in the 60s & the 70s. The results of this research helped us become an agriculture surplus country.

      Thinking that one should focus on immediate problems alone is being extremely short-sighted.

    24. Re:Pool ressources by bhagwad · · Score: 1

      Using the phrase "moral high ground" in the same sentence as China is just...mind blowing.

  2. All for $100 million ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    India claims it can send something to orbit the Mars for $100 millions.
     
    Can anyone believe that?
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:All for $100 million ? by neither_geek_nor_ner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      India spent $90 million to send a LRO (to the moon) as detailed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-1. The US spent $583 million to do the same http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Reconnaissance_Orbiter. Why do you think jobs are being shipped overseas from the US?

    2. Re:All for $100 million ? by darkHanzz · · Score: 4, Funny

      And if I read the pages correctly, NASA's probe still works, while India's stopped working after a year. thank you, come again...

    3. Re:All for $100 million ? by guttentag · · Score: 5, Funny

      India claims it can send something to orbit the Mars for $100 millions. Can anyone believe that?

      You need to read between the lines here. They're going to build a $10 million communications satellite and hitchhike on a Russian rocket (which, based on Russia's Mars exploration history, means the rocket will die somewhere on the way to Mars... just ask China how that deal worked out for them) by offering to put $90 million toward fuel. Then they will route all call center traffic through this satellite, introducing a latency of several minutes between the caller and the call center rep, causing most callers to give up without costing the companies they called any money. So yes, I believe they will attempt it, but no, they will not succeed because all of Russia's attempts (Russia, not the USSR) have failed so far.

    4. Re:All for $100 million ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Chandrayaan-1 failed in less than one year and half of its science payload was donated by other countries. It had severe thermal issues that prevented it from using more than one science mission at a time for a while. They eventually had to boost the orbit to try to cool it down, but it still failed.

      The LRO doesn't have any donated science payload and has a far more comprehensive mission than that of the Chandrayaan-1. The LRO has completed a comprehensive and detailed map of the surface of the Moon as well as discovering water in a crater with LCROSS. The LRO is running fine and will probably be in orbit and returning data for several more years. This is what another $500 million gets you.

    5. Re:All for $100 million ? by GumphMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let's see, the United States, paying US rates for labour, managed to build, fly and land the Pathfinder on Mars for about $150 million ('92 dollars) in direct expenditure and spent about the same again running the mission. I think the Indians could conceivably an equivalent mission for less direct expenditure, but that is not a good measure of the peripheral expenditure and effort that would be required to obtain a similar knowledge and infrastructure base to that the US started from.

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    6. Re:All for $100 million ? by jimmydevice · · Score: 1

      Discarded mod points for two months, and now I want a funny for OP. Damn!

    7. Re:All for $100 million ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well and I'm sure folks at NASA will be happy to pick up the phone when India calls with tech questions.

    8. Re:All for $100 million ? by master5o1 · · Score: 1

      Obvious straw-man argument is obvious.

      --
      signature is pants
    9. Re:All for $100 million ? by kakaburra · · Score: 1

      Though Chandrayaan-1 failed before 1 year, it achieved 95% of its objectives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-1#Completion_of_primary_objectives). And Chandrayaan detected water 2 months before NASA confirmed the finding.

    10. Re:All for $100 million ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is the thinking that, amongst others, lead to the destruction of the British motorbike and electronics industries. In the US you are going to lose your car industry in the same way if you are not careful. Watch as 60 years behind, becomes 6 years, then 6 months, then because they are at par and cheaper, your industries will crumble.

    11. Re:All for $100 million ? by Patch86 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Mars Climate Orbiter (a NASA mission) cost $330 million and failed completely. Sometimes these things happen in space exploration. One year out of a two year mission isn't awful for a fledgling space programme like India's, and for that sort of cost.

    12. Re:All for $100 million ? by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      And if I read the pages correctly, NASA's probe still works, while India's stopped working after a year. thank you, come again...

      If I have a problem that can be solved by a $90 tool and the store only offers me a $583 one that not only will solve my problem but also 10 other problems I don't have then I would probably go to another store. If my customers want me to develop something that should have a development cost of about $90k and I only offer them a solution for $583k that I think will be a better solution then they are likely to go somewhere else. (And probably not come back.) Overengineering is a huge flaw and a lot of the times it's even preferable to deliver a subpar/faulty but inexpensive product than delivering something that works well but does and cost way too much. (Yes, marketing is all about talking about quality but you can talk about it all you want, customers will still buy the cheapest product that solves their problem.)

      *lights match*

      *flicks match onto strawman*

      *roasts marshmallows*

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    13. Re:All for $100 million ? by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

      Add the British car industry to that list too. And no, building Hondas in Swindon doesn't count.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    14. Re:All for $100 million ? by JimCanuck · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Yes because getting there, planting a flag, and building a land based communication array on Earth are achievements. When you define goals like that, obviously its hard to fail.

      Also, it detected water using the M3 from Brown University and the JPL. The Indian produced equipment on it scientifically, and technologically was a joke, and the only new things observed in the mission was done with either American or European equipment on board.

      Also note, when they attempted to use the mini-SAR radar system that ESA put onto the craft to check for water, the Indian's didn't even point it towards the moon!

      In the end, the data it collected was only confirmation from the results from the NASA Lunar Prospector which detected water as well. 10 years before the Chandrayaan was launched.

    15. Re:All for $100 million ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Right and NASA didn't wait to make a joint declaration. A country offers you a shot at placing instruments on their ultra-cheap vessel. The payloads are selected by ISRO. Yet the credit goes only to NASA. ISRO a year before launch wants to find water on moon. They had the vision. Is gracious enough to accommodate other countries for free. In return they get all the payloads were not Indian. So you are a backward country.

      The next moon mission is India/Russia only. Good luck putting that down. The rover is Russian the instrumentation is Indian.

      Mod the parent up to 5. It's racist.
           

    16. Re:All for $100 million ? by nucrash · · Score: 1

      And we could cut down the cost of manned space travel too if we just strip out all of the safety precautions that cost so much. I mean, we don't need to pressurize the capsule with a nitrogen/oxygen mix to keep the salty sea air out of the capsule, we should just use pressurized oxygen, it's much cheaper. And we don't need to worry about tiles peeling off of the bottom of our vehicle, let's just use super glue to attach them. And do we really need five computers on the Space shuttle when a single one would work just fine. We could just reboot it if something goes wrong. And really, should we worry if it gets too cold out and an O-Ring expands and punctures a hole in the external tank? Really, we have lots a people who want to go up into space, who cares if we lose a couple.

      --
      Place something witty here
    17. Re:All for $100 million ? by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      From the wikipedia entry, Chandrayaan operated for 312 days as opposed to the intended two years but the mission achieved 95 percent of its planned objectives

      So, it looks like they did non even engineer to the required specs.

    18. Re:All for $100 million ? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      How about Mini Coopers? Mine was made in England.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    19. Re:All for $100 million ? by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      The new Mini? Made by BMW.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    20. Re:All for $100 million ? by JimCanuck · · Score: 1


      Considering NASA has thought there was water on the moon with more or less reasonable doubt since 1999 during the Lunar Prospector mission, and every space agency since has devoted lots of time validating that data, and trying to come up with ways to get more, I don't see how they had a "vision" as it was a world wide vision for over a couple of decades, with NASA finding evidence of water over a decade ago.

      So I don't see your point?

    21. Re:All for $100 million ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      Mod the parent up to 5. It's racist.

      Why can't you get a grip of yourself?
       
      Just because people do not subscribe to your view that India is the greatest nation on earth does not make them racists
       
      The one who is behaving like a racist here, is you
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    22. Re:All for $100 million ? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      The new Mini? Made by BMW. In England.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    23. Re:All for $100 million ? by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      By a German company, with German money. Also, I didn't say there's no car industry in the UK, only that we fucked it up good an proper in the 70s.

      Seriously, name one volume manufacturer in the UK that isn't foreign owned.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  3. in unrelated news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Romney announces he will outsource NASA to india.

    1. Re:in unrelated news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      George W. Bush didn't do that already?

      I sure would like to see Bollywood fake a Moon landing. Think of the song and dance possibilities!

  4. Priorities! by Kaz+Kylheku · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Supposedly 30% of their households don't have electricity and the remainder suffer from regular blackouts, and they want to go to Mars?
    How about a simpler mission first: get from one side of Delhi to the other without hours in traffic.

    LOL!

    1. Re:Priorities! by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      and their cars catch fire

    2. Re:Priorities! by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Funny

      In all seriousness, it's cheaper and easier to send a rocket to Mars than it is to undertake the kind of legislative and social engineering required to fix Delhi's traffic and India's electrical problems.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:Priorities! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Gotta build new shanty towns somewhere, might as well be mars.

    4. Re:Priorities! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Try to look at it from their point of view. They don't see it as "going to Mars" so much as just getting out of India. I hear they've got 600,000,000 volunteers...

      (yes, I do realize it's not actually a manned mission; just play along)

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Priorities! by guttentag · · Score: 4, Funny

      and their cars catch fire

      At least they weren't big fires. They were Nano fires.

    6. Re:Priorities! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      What makes you think they're not trying to do the simpler stuff first? Getting people to use more efficient transportation is a lot more difficult than space travel! There will be a manned colony on Pluto before we fix the traffic mess In Los Angeles, never mind Delhi!

    7. Re:Priorities! by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      No we do, but (unfortunately) we also have bee systematically killing our space program.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    8. Re:Priorities! by Lapog · · Score: 1

      Despite your 'LOL', I believe the priorities are correct.

      If you really understood what priorities for government mean (that different branches of a government have their respective priorities) then you'll also understand that the traffic in Delhi or the power cuts have nothing to do with India's space ambitions.

      Oh wait. . . this is slashdot. So, anything ambitious/expensive/challenging attempted by any non-western country is by default LOL. . .

    9. Re:Priorities! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Your arrogance is exceeded only by your stupidity.

      Communicated like a true Anonymous Coward, and as expected, quite ignorant.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    10. Re:Priorities! by damitr · · Score: 1

      Oh actually, going to Mars is way of getting rid of the traffic problem. As you must be knowing there is no traffic on Mars. That is the brilliant idea. As for the electricity problem, they are planning to construct nuclear power plants on Mars (of course with help from the West) whose surplus will be beamed back to India to take out the regular blackouts. Who knows what else they are up to?

    11. Re:Priorities! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      How about a simpler mission first: get from one side of Delhi to the other without hours in traffic.

      Simpler? To get something to Mars, you have to push it really hard. To get roads rerouted or mass transit systems to get set up in a sprawling metropolis, you need to get many people to agree to it, and overcome some people who will really want to oppose it for a multitude of reasons.

    12. Re:Priorities! by Jade_Wayfarer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sadly, it's not "Funny", it's "Informative".

      --
      Absence of proof != proof of absence.
    13. Re:Priorities! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Can't wait to see how hard this fails, as everything in India has:

      Rampart bribery to get this moved along
      Corporate espionage with 2 other companies stealing the designs to try and undercut whoever won the contract
      Everything crashing and burning due to cutting all corners
      Hiring all mission control staff from the usual pool of call center drones, resulting in many "doing the needful" and demanding a document on the simplest of procedures as out of the box thinking is just something not done.

       
      What worries me the most is not if the rocket will fly
       
      What worries me the most is that the thing will fly to Mercury, instead of Mars
       

    14. Re:Priorities! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes - especially since one country can do only one thing at a time.

      It costs money. We're sending them a big pile of money to help fix problems they can't afford to fix. And they're spending money on a fanciful dream. This mission isn't going to benefit them in any regard other than public relations. It's a feel-good circle jerk, and if they can find the money in their budget to fund this kind of PR stunt then they can quit asking for handouts. It's not about only being able to do one thing at a time, it's about setting some priorities. Despite all the hand-wringing you see on the news we have plenty of cash in the US to spend on spaceflight, and we're making major technological gains. Many of these gains directly benefit India as they often collaberate with us on those projects. All this mission is about is bragging rights.

    15. Re:Priorities! by rbrausse · · Score: 3, Informative

      Supposedly 30% of their households don't have electricity and the remainder suffer from regular blackouts, and they want to go to Mars?

      Why explore space?

      Granted, this was in 1970 and NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center director - but he made many valid points and his letter is also true for India.

    16. Re:Priorities! by dell623 · · Score: 1

      Actually Delhi has one of the best public transportation systems in the world with more stations being built at I type this (literally). No idea what LA has...

    17. Re:Priorities! by dodobh · · Score: 1

      That's easily fixed. Just ship all the poor people to the US/Australia/Europe. There's historical precedent for sending poor people to other continents too.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    18. Re:Priorities! by Xest · · Score: 1

      That's okay, they can use the aid money the UK pays them every year for that sort of thing.

    19. Re:Priorities! by Xest · · Score: 1

      Actually I intended it largely tongue in cheek. Perhaps the humour would be particularly non-obvious to a non-British audience who don't have to suffer such headlines each time it comes up in the likes of The Daily Fail and other borderline far right FUD publications, so apologies for that.

    20. Re:Priorities! by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Supposedly 30% of their households don't have electricity and the remainder suffer from regular blackouts, and they want to go to Mars?
      How about a simpler mission first: get from one side of Delhi to the other without hours in traffic.

      LOL!

      Priceless. Better abolish NASA until the travel times across LA are cut back a little, eh?

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    21. Re:Priorities! by bhagwad · · Score: 1

      Who is "they" in your rant? I'm an Indian and I support this mission wholeheartedly.

  5. I have an idea by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    They could pay for the entire mission by broadcasting on pay-per-view TV a live (well 8 minute delay lol) robot fight on Mars! Battlebots was the shit back in the day. Naturally, they could take it to Mars and make a fortune!

    1. Re:I have an idea by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      If it were in english i'd pay to watch it, other language i'd torrent it later.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
  6. Sixth country, Zambia or Congo? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    I thought Zambia never made it after this 1964 attempt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL5gEpkATTA

    They were regarded as crackpots back then and still are, I guess.

    Later, this failed attempt from Congo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR97o_FuX-c

    Rats. Bad luck.

    So, who is the sixth country?

  7. Re:Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1st world - US allied
    2nd world - Soviet Union and China allied
    3rd world - Non-allied

    This is a Cold War term. The Cold War is over, so stop using it. Saying that the US is becoming a 2nd world country sounds ridiculously stupid to someone who understands what these terms actually mean (meaning that the US is becoming an ally with the Soviet Union and rejecting its alliances with NATO).

  8. Nobody in India would know by mpfife · · Score: 1

    They don't appear to be able to keep the power on long enough for anyone to see it broadcast...

  9. Re:Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now that America is becoming a 2nd world country

    About time this damn Cold War ended. I thought I'd never be able to leave my bunker.

  10. 6th? by guttentag · · Score: 5, Informative
    As far as I can tell, there are only two countries, plus the European Space Agency, that have achieved Mars orbit (by launch year):
    1. United States 1964
    2. United States 1969
    3. Soviet Union 1973
    4. United States 1975
    5. United States 1996
    6. ESA 2003
    7. United States 2003
    8. United States 2005
    9. United States 2007
    10. United States 2011

    And there are only two countries that have successfully landed on Mars (by landing year):

    1. Soviet Union 1971
    2. United States 1976
    3. United States 1997
    4. United States 2003
    5. United States 2008
    6. United States 2012

    Japan launched a probe, but it failed to achieve orbit (it "missed the planet") and China had a joint venture with Russia that never left Earth's orbit. Wikipedia has a nice graphic illustrating the history of Mars exploration.

    1. Re:6th? by guttentag · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sorry, somehow I thought they were talking about successful launches. In that case, you've got (1) US, (2) USSR, (3) ESA, (4) Russia, (5) China, and (6) My Little Brother, who tried to launch himself to Mars by jumping high enough on his bed. I classified it a failure when he hit his head on the ceiling and passed out, but if the criteria is "launches," then he absolutely has to be on the list, which would make India lucky number 7. Good luck India, and if I may humbly suggest, pillows duct taped to the ceiling will save you lots of headaches in the event that you do not achieve escape velocity.

    2. Re:6th? by Yoda222 · · Score: 1

      But ESA is not a country. So India is the 25th country to attemp a mars mission. (I didn't count european union countries not part of the ESA, and if the mars mission are not in the mandatory program, if not I should probably remove the country not participating in those missions)

    3. Re:6th? by EdgePenguin · · Score: 1

      That infographic seems to miss out the successful Soviet landing in 1971...

    4. Re:6th? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Reading is hard. Try it again. You'll get the hang of it sooner or later.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    5. Re:6th? by EdgePenguin · · Score: 1

      I know he mentioned it, retard, I was talking about the picture he posted. It isn't there

      Maybe you should do some reading yourself before you snark at other people?

    6. Re:6th? by mattphillips · · Score: 1

      This one is pretty neat too. Shows all of the missions. (Not just the failed ones) http://flowingdata.com/2009/10/26/failed-space-missions-to-mars/

  11. Re:Thankfully by Intropy · · Score: 2

    Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh comrades?

  12. I'm waiting for... by Circlotron · · Score: 1

    ...North Korea to announce a Mars mission. They have a good track record for space stuff so far. :raises eyebrows and nods head:

    1. Re:I'm waiting for... by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

      You haven't heard? North Korea has colonized Mars already, we thought they were just building nukes.

      --
      I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  13. Corruption by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Corruption in India is unlike corruption in other places on earth, for in India, corruption is the norm, not the exception

    Funds spent on anything - including education - would be reduced 80% to 90% by the time the money reaches the intended target(s)

    And the Indian government's announcement that they will spend $100 million dollars on the Mars exploration project (BBC is reporting it as I type) means the project actually cost in between $10 million to $20 million dollars

    Incredible, simply incredible !

    If the Japan announces that they are going to explore Mars, I would have put more credence on it than this announcement from India

    I'm sorry, it's not that I'm anti-India or something - but things that sound too good to be true, may be just that, too-good-to-be-true
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Corruption by dbIII · · Score: 1

      In the USA corruption in the space program is called "pork" and it's killed at least seven astronauts.

    2. Re:Corruption by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      It's not unusual for a typical Indian government project - be it a bridge or a hospital - to have an original stated budget of X amount of money, that would take a Y amount of time to complete
       
      At the end, the budget might ballooned 20 folds, and the time of completion, 3 to 6 years late, sometimes even 20 years late, and sometimes it seems the damn project takes forever, and still unfinished
       
      Things like these are very widespread in India, corruption is killing India from within
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  14. Re:And What of Custer? 7th Cav? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is excellent news. At last we can stop sending them billions in aid every year. Seems like they have plenty of cash.

  15. Re:Thankfully by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    If America was heading toward Communism, I would certainly notice.

    Unfortunately for everyone involved, it heads back to the same feudalism that it tried to skip, not unlike Russia that was thrown into development of modern Capitalism that it also tried to skip.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  16. Orbit? by Sussurros · · Score: 1

    How about India putting a person into Earth orbit first. It's not so easy.

    --
    I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
    1. Re:Orbit? by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 1

      Let's leave to the space trolls the question of whether India should be launching anything besides weather and GPS satellites. But it's orders of magnitude easier to put inanimate objects into space. So if India has ambitions beyond Earth orbit, Mars is as good a target practice as any. From a purely economic point of view, Mars is as useless a piece of rock as the Moon.

  17. Why so hard? by dark+grep · · Score: 1

    I don't know why it would be so difficult to put a spacecraft in orbit around Mars, or land on the place. I mean, it's not rocket science... hey, wait a minute...

    1. Re:Why so hard? by Noughmad · · Score: 2

      I don't know why it would be so difficult to put a spacecraft in orbit around Mars, or land on the place.

      In other countries: Budget constraints, lack of testing, bad political decisions, simply not being as awesome as America.

      In the US: imperial/metric unit mixups.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  18. Timing of the announcement by v1x · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, the Indian economy has slowed down considerably, investor confidence is down, and years later, many of the problems noted in the posts above still remain to be solved. While this mission had been previously reported in other sources, the linked article was published on August 15--Indian Independence day--so the official announcement by the PM sounds more like the kind of feel-good pitch that one can expect in any 'address to the nation,' in most places in the world. The Chandrayaan mission was similarly announced 9 years ago during an independence day speech by a former PM, and completed 5 years later, although the costs ($90 million) were substantially higher than initially announced. Given that track record, it seems highly unlikely that this project can be pulled off in $100 million, although I suppose like any government initiative, the project probably has a better chance of getting funded if the scientists asked for that amount than what it might actually take (say, 10 times as much?), and then ask for more later! :-) At the end of the day, any kind of government investing in science is a good thing, and the recent Mars Curiosity landing is more evidence that a space mission captures people's imaginations like nothing else. Hopefully, this mission will have that kind of effect on the next generation of students in India.

  19. Yes. Ditto Israel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They have enough money to build nukes and stuff. Why are we donating billions in financial and military aid every year?

    1. Re:Yes. Ditto Israel. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      Close. It's apocalyptic Christians. [Insert passage from Revelation here, maybe quote the Left Behind series]

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    2. Re:Yes. Ditto Israel. by toriver · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is necessary for their mythology that the Jews assemble in Israel and rebuild the Temple (they are behind on that part) so that Jesus can return and convert those heathens to Chriostianity. The Jews, that is...

  20. Re:Thankfully by unixisc · · Score: 2

    First world, second world had nothing to do w/ the Cold War. First world meant the first known world to Europeans at the time, which was Europe, the Middle East and the Mediterranean coasts of Africa (think the kingdoms of ancient Egypt, Carthage). The second world was what Columbus discovered - the Americas. The third world was the rest of the world that went on to be colonized by European powers - most of Africa, India, South East Asia and so on.

  21. What? by ApplePy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    No call center jokes yet? I'm disappointed.

    I believe India is spending too much money. For the paltry sum of $50 million, I'll launch an unmanned probe in the general direction of Mars. That's half price!

    --
    That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
  22. Are we focusing too much on Mars? by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Serious question, why does it seem that Mars is the only planet we're interested in? According to this wiki page, there have been numerous flybys, probes, and landings on mars, as well as two rovers. There have also been explorations of venus, though no rovers due to the heat, just two soviet landers. There have been flybys of Jupiter and explorations of jovian moons.

    Saturn though, there have only been four flybys. Neptune and Uranus were only observed up close by Voyager 2. And there is a flyby planned for Pluto.
    Why isn't there more interest in the further planets? Is it simply that it will take longer? Seems like the sheer number of explorations of Mars would make some of the further targets more interesting.

    1. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It gets harder the further out you go. Less sunlight, less efficient solar power leading to use of nuclear isotopic power supplies. IIRC only the US and USSR have used nuc thermal supplies in space - although India does have an active nuclear energy research program and nucular weapons. Harder communications - India doesn't have world wide tracking systems.

      India doesn't seem to have a clear path to space. Seems like their missions are scatter shot - one moon, then Mars, then whatever. Who knows what internal politics are going on? Mars also offers the chance to piggy back on US / ESO communication links although I have not heard they plan on doing that.

      Besides, Mars is cool. Although in general, I agree. I'd love to see many more Jovian moon missions.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Serious question, why does it seem that Mars is the only planet we're interested in?

      It's close (only Venus is closer, and that has a lot more hostile environment) and potentially habitable by humans, and possibly had life on it in the past.

    3. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by nazg00l · · Score: 2

      A very successful Saturn orbiter mission, Cassini, has been going on for years. Numerous moon flybys, lots of interesting data, pretty pics as well.

      Beyond that, the main problem is cost. Uranus is four times farther away from the Sun than Jupiter, Neptune is six times farther away. Travel by direct transfer requires burning lots of fuel in Earth orbit, which makes it very expensive. Using gravity assist requires lots of time, and a long mission requires employing personnel and devoting resources for many years, which is also expensive. Not to mention that the probe must survive ten or twenty years in space and only then perform the actual mission, which makes the design expensive as well.

      The singular pair of Voyager missions was only possible thanks to very lucky arrangement of planets at that time. Unfortunately, this won't repeat any time soon.

    4. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Well, that makes sense. The Jupiter moons, any idea if those would those receive enough light to make a rover feasible?

      Mars is cool, but the fact that we've only seen Neptune and (jokes aside) Uranus up close once, and have barely seen Pluto... I'm far more curious about them, that's the only reason I'd want us to move on.

    5. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Besides, Mars is cool.

      Correction: Mar is (water freezing) cold

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    6. Re:Are we focusing too much on Mars? by rwv · · Score: 1

      potentially habitable by humans

      I agree. For space missions, Goldilocks Zone is much more valuable to study than Non-Goldilocks Zone. This also explains the investment in Telescopes capable of finding Earth-sized planets in *other star systems* which could become targets for probes in the future when Faster Than Light travel becomes possible.

  23. Why don't they just... by f3rret · · Score: 1
    --
    Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
  24. So much uninformed crap in this thread... by dell623 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdot has interesting and informative posts on many topics, but I don't know why everything goes to hell the moment India is mentioned..

    1) It doesn't take a hugeass rocket to send an unmanned probe to Mars. The amount of energy needed once you're in the right orbit to escape earth's gravity is minimal. So it's not that crazy to imagine India doing it given that they already got a probe to reach the moon. It's the next step, not a massive leap. Putting a lander on the moon or Mars, or manned spaceflight would be a much bigger step. So the figure of 100 million is not outlandish and it's very possible and a logical progression given the current technical capabilities of the Indian space program. In fact, India may well be able to use one of their existing rockets for this, the hard part is making sure interplanetary probes get captured into the orbit of the target planet, instead of missing it completely (something that's not that hard to do and multiple countries have aimed and missed in the past, I remember a Mercury probe that ended up orbiting the sun).

    2) Yes, India has overwhelming amounts of corruption. The space program is one of the better run organizations though.

    3) Even though India is a poor country, due to the sheer size of the population the amount of money the government controls is huge. Not USA/China huge but at least the size of large European economies. 100 million is pocket change. And not spending it on a research mission to Mars that can help advance technology in the country doesn't mean it would go towards feeding hungry people. Just like reducing 100 million of the defence budget in the US won't put that money into schools or universities or healthcare or whatever.

    4) It has little to do with the slowing Indian economy (even if it grows at 5% that's far more than most other countries in the world right now).

    5) Talk of burning cars or powerless villages is just bigoted racist arrogant illogical bullshit.

    1. Re:So much uninformed crap in this thread... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has interesting and informative posts on many topics, but I don't know why everything goes to hell the moment India is mentioned..

      1) It doesn't take a hugeass rocket to send an unmanned probe to Mars. The amount of energy needed once you're in the right orbit to escape earth's gravity is minimal. So it's not that crazy to imagine India doing it given that they already got a probe to reach the moon. It's the next step, not a massive leap. Putting a lander on the moon or Mars, or manned spaceflight would be a much bigger step. So the figure of 100 million is not outlandish and it's very possible and a logical progression given the current technical capabilities of the Indian space program. In fact, India may well be able to use one of their existing rockets for this, the hard part is making sure interplanetary probes get captured into the orbit of the target planet, instead of missing it completely (something that's not that hard to do and multiple countries have aimed and missed in the past, I remember a Mercury probe that ended up orbiting the sun).

      2) Yes, India has overwhelming amounts of corruption. The space program is one of the better run organizations though.

      3) Even though India is a poor country, due to the sheer size of the population the amount of money the government controls is huge. Not USA/China huge but at least the size of large European economies. 100 million is pocket change. And not spending it on a research mission to Mars that can help advance technology in the country doesn't mean it would go towards feeding hungry people. Just like reducing 100 million of the defence budget in the US won't put that money into schools or universities or healthcare or whatever.

      4) It has little to do with the slowing Indian economy (even if it grows at 5% that's far more than most other countries in the world right now).

      5) Talk of burning cars or powerless villages is just bigoted racist arrogant illogical bullshit.

      Preach it brother! Every time I see a post about a technical development in India or any other developing country I just brace myself for the usual tidal wave of ignorant racist pricks and Michael Scott/David Brent aspiring comedians who think it's okay to poke fun at dark skinned people who talk funny. "Oh look at the little wogs trying to be all advanced and civilized like us, aren't they adorable?" "They need to solve all their poverty problems first before they start exploring space." Makes me sick.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  25. Well, as long as they don't buy American by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    It all depends what the hourly salary is of the people working on it. Maybe the Indians aren't counting the cost of pork projects to have this bill pass?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  26. Yeah, lol by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Didn't America have a massive blackout in the North East a while back? And have rolling blackouts for years in California? And have massive flooding because of poor water works?

    Which one is the third world nation again?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  27. Re:Thankfully by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    So I can rephrase that one for you:
    2. America heading towards a centrally-planned economy? Check.

    No. Centrally planned economy (as implemented within each and every large company) works just fine. The problem is, their strategy is based on destruction of the rest of society, and that works as intended, too.

    --
    Contrary to popular belief, the secular god leftism does indeed lead to disaster.

    lol wut

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  28. Not quite by Sussurros · · Score: 1

    There is the Old World which is Europe and Asia and there is the New World which is the Americas. The Third World is that which is neither the new world nor the old world. Nowadays Third World just means poor countries and it has meant non-alighned countries in the past but there never has been a First World nor a Second World, there has only been the New World and the Old World.

    --
    I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
  29. Build a Rocket First by Terry95 · · Score: 1

    Before an Indian rocket goes to Mars it might be helpful if they, you know, built one? Last I heard, and a brief Google search doesn't seem to show any new progress, they were still using Russian engines on their cryogenic upper state. This was because they've been trying for 20 years to build a working engine, apparently without any measurable success at all. Somehow buying a Proton and trucking it to an Indian launch pad isn't quite the same as "an Indian rocket". Here is the link to last time I heard of actual hardware leaving the ground.

    1. Re:Build a Rocket First by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Just so you know they are not using the russian engine for the Mars mission (they infact have only one russian engine left, and any further launches would have to depend on the indigenously developed cryogenic stage (which did fail spectacularly in 2010, but they are depending on it for both Chandrayaan-2 & the Mar mission))

    2. Re:Build a Rocket First by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      On reading more, they are using their PSLV for the mars mission. Lesser payload, but no cryogenic stage. So there you go, they already have a rocket, that has been used successfully for so many years (used recently for the moon mission), and they are reusing it. Now go back to your basement and cry that the only complain you could come up with is no longer valid.

  30. Re:Thankfully by blane.bramble · · Score: 1

    You are getting "first world, second world" confused with "new world, old world".

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

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

  31. Re:Thankfully by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    You're conflating "second world" with "not a superpower". Which is stupid, because the USSR was considered a "second world" country and a superpower, while most of the European countries would be considered firmly "first world" while not being anything like superpowers.

    Not that the Cold War lingo really means much these days however you spin it.

  32. Re:Thankfully by Kartu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We're sending them a holy fuckload of money...

    Couple of billions (if at all) for a country with 1.3 billion people... is not a fuckload of money, sorry.

    The stated end goal of Communism is a complete abolition of all government control and the abandonment of a monetary system...

    I was bourn in USSR. I'm not sure where your idea about abolition of government control comes from (well, ok, it assumed people would be good enough to require no police etc, but you still need someone to coordinate buildling infrastructure etc). Main point of communism that was advertised was abolition of a monetary system. And they honestly tried to stimulate people work harder for fame, not money. It had its downsides, but if you ask people who lived there and have "democracy" now, I don't think most would give a flying fuck about political system.

  33. Re:Thankfully by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    Austin, we won.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  34. Re:And What of Custer? 7th Cav? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    $126 M in 2011.

    Billions?

  35. So what if the engines are Russian by dbIII · · Score: 1

    NASA is probably going to use Russian engines at some point as well, and the recent Air Force test is really an Australian scramjet with some minor tweaks apparently (the air force design is classified but they haven't been working on the design for very long so it must be very similar to what they were given).
    Sometimes it's better to go with something that works instead of painting a flag on your penis and waving that around.

  36. Re:Spend money in infrastructure by toriver · · Score: 1

    Same applies to the USA. You need to spread the wealth around...

  37. How can they do it so cheaply? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Um, anyone here ever heard of "offshoring"? Know what they pay for engineers in India, as opposed to the US?

    Then there was the news story I heard yesterday, questioning as to why India should spend the money to do that. The idea of having dreams, and goals that *aren't* soley monetary, seems to be not politically correct (at least according to the US right, apostles of St. Ayn Rand.

    Let's see if the US can actually do something anymore.

                        mark

  38. Remember the US semi-conductor industry. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    This is the thinking that, amongst others, lead to the destruction of the British motorbike and electronics industries. In the US you are going to lose your car industry in the same way if you are not careful. Watch as 60 years behind, becomes 6 years, then 6 months, then because they are at par and cheaper, your industries will crumble.

    We in the US don't have to look at the Brits to see the consequences of such thinking. The US used to mock the Japanese as "cheap camera manufacturers" until they swiftly took the entire semi-conductor industry during the PC revolution. The US has never recovered from that (and the way it goes, never will.)

    It is true that Indian (and Chinese) technology is shit compared to ours. How could it not be considering they only have a fraction of the experienced found in the US or in countries like Russia or Japan??? And yet, unlike us, India and China keep pushing forward while we kill our neurons watching the Kardashians or the latest antics of Ochocinco. And they will get better (just as the Japanese, Taiwanese and South Koreans have.)

    We are having a whole bunch of fucking Sputnik moments, but we are too busy being arrogant assholes, smelling our own farts while ensuring ourselves that our competitors are troglodytes who make square tires out of shit. The whole fucking world is improving and catching up, and we do not pay notice, not doing anything at all to preserve our advantage. And that's how we will lose.

  39. Yeah I heard about it. by ananthap · · Score: 1

    Yeah I too heard about it. The government is going to liberalise the policy on allowing multinational brands in retail and as a consequence mars bars are going to be easily available. So people can GO MARS. But seriously, its like the previous announcements of the government on world's cheapest laptop etc. A lot of hot air and cryogenic engines from the old sov states. OK