India Plans Moon Mission by 2008 400
LPetrazickis writes "According to the Tribune, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has announced today that India will send a spacecraft to the moon by 2008. The Chandrayaan-I mission will showcase Indian achievements in science and technology to the world. Both European and Canadian Space Agencies have shown interest in the mission. SifyNews reports that 2008 was initially mispronounced as 1908. Today is the 56th anniversary of India's independence." Previous talk about this has come from the Indian space agency; this announcement from the Prime Minister seems to have more weight.
Please read the article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Right (Score:4, Informative)
So what? (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe we will respect the middle east now that they have the same abilities as us, this does not mean anything, the soviets have had nuke for years and years.
I dont really care if India has nuke, and I doubt they'd put it in space unless we do it first, its insane to put it in space but I see them doing it to protect themselves from us, I mean we are willing to go to war just because we want to without going through the UN, I wouldnt blame India for being alittle bit scared of us.
Re:India that far in technology? (Score:5, Informative)
Aryabhatta Satellite (First Indian Experimental Satellite) [iitb.ac.in], Launch Date : April 19, 1975
Re:Maybe india should worry more about planet eart (Score:5, Informative)
and the argument would be wrong.
does that sound even faintly like the united states in 1969?
source: the cia [cia.gov]
From an Asian perspective... (Score:5, Informative)
my two cents (Score:5, Informative)
For all those who have been whining about the state of India's finances and poverty levels, let me add that the PM in his Independence Day speech (think State of the Union) is also building highways, creating jobs in rural areas [hinduonnet.com], not to mention modernizing our ports and major airports. [hinduonnet.com]
May I also add that India's external finances are in great shape [hindustantimes.com]( a $6.5tn deficit comes to mind, cough cough ) and we are at present reorganizing our expensive debt.
We are sitting on so much cash, (and soon, low interest debt) that for the first time, India has become a lender nation.
Inflation is static at just under 2%, the Indian rupee has been holding its ground against all international currencies. Duties are being lowered, tariffs and trade barriers are being slashed, capital and bond markets are flourishing -- why the hell can't we have a moon mission?
Agreed, poverty and health problems cannot be disregarded, but to say this money would be better spent anywhere else is just stupidity -- India has long prided herself on her space programme -- we have great comm satellites and have been launching them since the early '70s, and a moon probe is a logical next step.
Finally, the moon probe is just one proposal among many, and slashdot readers, or at least those posting derogatory comments, need to keep a sense of proportion.
Re:Maybe india should worry more about planet eart (Score:5, Informative)
(from the CIA World Factbook and other sources as listed)
1. 3% of the US population is illiterate
2. 12.7% of the US is under the US poverty line, defined as an individual earning less than USD 8,860 a year. The Indian poverty line, by comparison, is defined by the world bank to be earning less than USD 365 a year (from Poverty USA and India Watch).
3. Infant mortality in the US is not 10/1000. It is 6.75/1000. That is not the lowest in the world, but the figure ranks among most developed nations. Cholesterol-related teenager deaths? While the USA is getting too fat, causing a rise in diabetes in young people, I have not heard of a rise of teenage heart attacks or teenage heart disease fatalities, so I think your theory is way off. The obesity problem bodes poorly for lifespan and healthcare costs, but not so much for teenage mortality.
4. I won't dispute this last point much. The deficit now is ridiculous, and it was equally ridiculous when we went to the moon ourselves. Such spending is certainly not sustainable over the long haul. However, comparing deficit-per-capita means nothing without considering the deficit as percent of money brought in. A 30 billion deficit on 50 billion collected, as in India (if the previous posts were correct), is 60%, compared to $600 billion on 2 trillion, which is around 30%.
However, budget deficits aside, I think the point most people have is that India has many more places it should be spending its money other than space and nuclear weapons. Beside the high poverty in India, the caste system still rears its ugly head in the rural areas, which hampers development.
The Economist recently did a feature comparing China and India, basically showing how much farther China is ahead of its neighbor.
--Scott
Re:India that far in technology? (Score:2, Informative)