Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Technology

India Launches 10 Satellites At Once 201

freakxx writes "India sets a world record after launching 10 satellites in one go using its workhorse, the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV). All the satellites were put into their respective orbits successfully. It was the core-alone version of the launch vehicle weighing 230 tonnes with a payload of 824 kg in total. Two of the satellites were Indian satellites, while the rest were from different countries. By this launch, the ISRO has proven its credibility and it is going to boost India's image in the attractive multi-billion commercial market of satellite launches. This was the 12th successful launch of the PSLV."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

India Launches 10 Satellites At Once

Comments Filter:
  • by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:03AM (#23224474) Homepage Journal
    because as a world there is enough wealth to end hunger.

    Yet we don't because it is not so PC to remove the many reasons for that hunger. We also do not have the stomach for it (no pun intended) because it would cost us lives to remove the leadership that routinely starves their own populations.

    India is coming forward rapidly, by advancing space science they advance all their sciences. They also give their people something to strive for - something they can show children that India is and what they can become. Let alone the fact that satellites provide better weather monitoring , can track crops and movement of animals. The possibilities of helping their own are a hundredfold, let alone what they can do for others.

    Oh, before you troll India again I must ask, did you buy food out this week? If so, why? There are lots of poor people who could have used it in rice to feed a family... so why didn't you help? Oh, yeah, thats because its easier to be a forum troll and blame others for not doing instead of doing yourself.
  • Re:Good for India. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:13AM (#23224654) Journal

    But what about those 1 billion people (ok, number out of ass, but you get the point) that are starving to death and live in horrible conditions?
    1) Commercial launches such as these pay for themselves and help defray the total cost of the India space programme.
    2) High tech stuff like this creates jobs for academics and skilled workers, who'll be part of India's growing middle class. I believe that creating wealth top-down, by having wealth trickle down from an affluent and productive middle class to the poor, works a hell of a lot better than forever "giving that man a fish to eat".
  • by oliderid ( 710055 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:18AM (#23224744) Journal

    Most of the above posts make fun of India. Well I must say that this record is quite impessive considering all the fuss the ESA made over their launch of two satellites in a row few years ago.

    Few things I have noticed the last years:

    • they bought Jaguar from Ford few weeks ago.
    • They established serious businesses competing in our fields (computer).
    • Math has been an indian skills for centuries.
    • The indian state is democratic.

    Sure they still have a long road ahead (poverty, bureaucracy, nationalism, protectionism,akward traditions, etc.) but they are definitely on the right path.

  • Re:Good for India. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:20AM (#23224782)
    Stop whining ... everytime someone (esp India) does something worthwhile, all of a sudden poverty is visible and no other accomplishments. Have you done home work on the % of people who live below poverty line in US of A ? Get a grip and stop the rant, for once admire something, even if it is for few seconds.

    Indians will eventually solve their problems.

    R
  • Re:Good for India. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by esme ( 17526 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:24AM (#23224854) Homepage

    But what about those 1 billion people (ok, number out of ass, but you get the point) that are starving to death and live in horrible conditions?

    I'm always amazed by this kind of arrogance towards developing nations. This kind of comment is seen any time there's a post about the OLPC project, for example.

    Do you really think it would be productive if the government of India spent its entire time trying to directly alleviate hunger and poverty? Don't you think that encouraging industries that provide high-paying jobs is a good part of a long-term strategy to improve people's lives?

    More to the point, did it never occur to you as a (presumably) well-educated, technically-inclined person that education, science and technology were part of the solutions to the developing world's problems, not just a distraction?

    -Esme

  • Re:Recommendations (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:24AM (#23224862) Journal

    Politicians might stop wasting vast amounts of European taxpayers money on their own vastly over-budget but completely worthless GPS system
    From Wikipedia:

    Galileo is intended to provide more precise measurements to all users than available through GPS or GLONASS, better positioning services at high latitudes and an independent positioning system upon which European nations can rely even in times of war or political disagreement.
    It might be redundant for many positioning applications, but completely worthless...?

    According to the same source, the EU is spending 3.4 billion Euros on this. This is just half of what we're spending on "administration" this year, and considering the other truly worthless crap we are spending money on, having our own GPS system is a pretty good goal in comparison.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:25AM (#23224878)

    âoeFirst they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.â

    I guess India's up to step 2.

    Just remember, the technological curve that India's on is a lot sharper than the one the US has had, and the last 8 years of stunting science in the US by the current administration is only going to hurt long-term.

    --iamnotayam
  • Re:Good for India. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:49AM (#23225238)
    If you think that money makes you happier you are very wrong.

    After having travel led many countries I can find people in rural India may not have electricity, may not have great roads but definitely they are happier than a lot of us folks.

    The simplicity of rural life sometime make me wonder whether what we do is really worthwhile.
  • Stop insulting (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:51AM (#23225282)

    You realize that not all of India lives in poverty right? When foreign nations look at US news, they see guns in schools and that becomes their image of the US. When people travel to India/watch the news, they travel to rural areas to look at what life is like. They don't remember the urban cities, they remember the poor citizens walking back and forth from wells to get water.

    Ignorance is another reputation the US has. Stop ruining our image, educate yourself before you start stating vacuous comments.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @11:56AM (#23225372)
    I just see this coming up on every forum. What people overlook is that India's population >> EUs population, can Europe concieve any (democratic)system working on that scale? "Assuming" the benefits of the space program are restricted to the 'elite' 10%, that number is much greater then the population of France/germany or any other european country.

    ~~johri.
  • by eln ( 21727 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @12:00PM (#23225456)
    I don't know what you're talking about, there aren't any fiscal conservatives in the halls of power anymore. All that are left these days are borrow-and-spend politicians (Republicans have proven to be experts at this, but the Dems aren't exactly falling all over themselves trying to raise taxes or cut spending either).

    But yah, no one in Washington is even remotely interested in spending money putting much of anything into space, so any superiority we may have left in regards to space travel is pretty much doomed.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @12:02PM (#23225482)
    A good list. Thanks for seeing India in positive light.

    But as an Indian, I am not so sure about the last item. Theoretically, yes, we are a democratic union of states. Practically, in every election, you will have hard time deciding which candidate has less murders, rapes and extortion changes against his/her name - that too assuming that your name is in the voters' lists, and you will actually be able to vote.

    Democracy lives only in the memory. The country has gone to pigs. All the development and progress you see is IN SPITE of the government, not BECAUSE OF. But the Indian soul has been battered and bruised so much over last 1000 years, that when its raped by its own, it doesn't even hurt anymore.

    But as our politicians love to say every freaking time they visit another country, we are the largest fucking democracy in the world. And the world likes to repeat it.
  • Re:Good for India. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kgskgs ( 938843 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @12:02PM (#23225484) Journal

    But what about those 1 billion people (ok, number out of ass, but you get the point) that are starving to death and live in horrible conditions?


    Every time I read a comment like this, I don't know what to say.

    Do you know what is the single biggest thing that has helped poor farmers all across India? Please visit http://www.echoupal.com/ [echoupal.com]

    It is a website for small farmers. Even for those farmers who don't have Internet, there are kiosks in villages where volunteers explain them and help them use the website.

    Using this, the farmers network and help each other solve problems. Single biggest benefit of this has been spotting and eliminating corrupt middlemen who give unfairly low price to farmers and sell it for high price to traders. This one advantage is worth entire effort behind this initiative.

    Unfortunately Western media does not find these stories interesting. They love to show poor hungry children begging for food. Then they get to portray the Western world as the noble minded donor.

    The truth is even poor people want to work hard and improve their lifestyle. Information technology, Internet, communication infrastructure, is what will give them a chance. It is absolutely right thing if a poor country with a billion hungry people launches satellites. It is better than a rich country launching wars.
  • Re:Recommendations (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ballfire ( 807022 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @12:12PM (#23225636) Homepage

    You know, with this satellite they injected a total of 824 Kg into a 625 Km orbit.

    Galileo has an orbit with a altitude of 23222Km with 675Kg a satellite. [wikipedia.org]

    How could this be used to launch Galileo?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @02:17PM (#23227552)
    And it's a sad thing that we'd rather have a big stick to threaten the neighbours with, than an extra slice of bread.

    I think you are missing some of the more subtle reasons nations want nukes. Its not so much about saber rattling, but more about the equivalent of a giant "Beware of Dog" sign that really ensures that your neighbors don't think about invading.

    The economics of nuclear weapons are also favorable. You can maintain a ten million-man army, which requires constant training, feeding, replacement, etc... or you can build a bunch of nukes and have the same destructive capability. Its a classical trade-off between a high initial cost for a payoff later. Whats even better, is that the really expensive cutting edge R&D work was done during the cold war, so the cost of development is far lower today.

    The Economist did a piece awhile back discussing why North Korea needed nukes- and their analysis showed that the cost of maintaining their huge standing army was literally going to cause the nation to collapse.

    So nukes get you a few things- protection, status/power, and in the end a few more slices of bread too.

  • Re:Good for India. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28, 2008 @02:21PM (#23227604)
    Dude, you have to look at facts. not all one billion are under poverty. 400 million are middle class. 4 out top 10 billionaires are from India. If you don't know facts don't waste time writing..
  • by dhavleak ( 912889 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @03:08PM (#23228282)

    India's guided missile program (Agni) is known to borrow heavily from it's civilian space program - this is true.

    However, it's important to note India's proven track record as a non-agressor, which is especially remarkable when you consider that its surrounded by hostile parties in one way or the other.

    India's first nuke test was in 1972 [wikipedia.org]. That's 36 years of indigenous nuke capability. In that time, they have been in a constant state of tension with Pakistan (and gone to war once - Kargil), had a prime minister (Rajiv Gandhi) asassinated by the LTTE (Sri Lankan militants), have parts of Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh (another state of India) occupied by China, have ULFA seperatists operating in Assam (a north east state of India), and have constant tensions at their border with Burma and Bangladesh.

    Not once in this time has India used it's military in anything other than a defensive role. If India's neighbours (and indeed the rest of the world, and especially the US) showed that much restraint, the world would be a much better place.

  • by dhavleak ( 912889 ) on Monday April 28, 2008 @08:18PM (#23231824)

    ...and this is precisely the self-laudatory flag-waving we-can-do-no-wrong nationalism that makes you dangerous.
    This makes Indians dangerous? Being proud of a track record of non-aggression?

    What about the US attacking Iraq without provocation, killing 100,000s of them, displacing them by the millions, and reducing their country to rubble? And then Clinton and McCain beating their chests with self-laudatory flag-waving we-can-do-no-wrong nationalism saying "we have given the Iraqis the wonderful gift of freedom, and now it's time for them to play a bigger role in securing their country?" Get off your high horse dude!

    During the cold war, the US and USSR were busy trying to divide the world into "us" vs. "them" (NATO vs. Warsaw and so on). Instead of getting involved, India was one of the founder members of the non-aligned movement [wikipedia.org] - the idea being to live and let live instead of being part of the never ending cycle of escalating tensions. If Indians are proud of that, I'd say they have a right to be.

    One of OP's comments was: "I still remember seeing the news on TV when they had built their first nuke, and the general euphoria. It was waay back, while they were even poorer than today. Arguably that money could have been better invested in industrializing a little faster."
    I don't know if OP was referring to the nuke tests of 1972 or 1998. The '98 tests drew very sharp international criticism (at which point I started following this issue). Most notable critics were the US (which has enough nukes to destroy the world many times over), and countries like New Zealand and Australia that come under US "nuclear umbrella" protection. Rather hypocritical don't you think? Japan and any country without any nuclear ambitions are the only ones here who have a right to criticize. The rest of us need to just shut up, or destroy our own nukes first if we want to have a say.

    Please don't interpret this as an anti-US/New Zealand/Australia/Pakistan/China rant or anything like that. People are just people everywhere in the world. It's the regimes that make a country "aggressive" or "passive" or somewhere in the middle, and it's human nature to be patriotic about your country. My point is that the US and other "aggressive" countries could adopt a foreign policy or two from India. Or rather, people the world over should press their governments to do so. We shouldn't get into conversations like this with the frame of mind of "I'm an Indian/American and I'm gonna defend India/US and win this thread at all costs".

    And lastly, from my comments you may have inferred my nationality incorrectly. For the purpose of this thread I'd prefer not to state what it is -- hopefully the anonymity will prevent people from assuming some sort of jingoistic intent in my comments.

Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin

Working...