India Approves Third Moon Mission, Months After Landing Failure

India has approved its third lunar mission months after its last one failed to successfully land on the moon, its space agency said on Wednesday, the latest effort in its ambitions to become a low-cost space power. From a report: The Chandrayaan-3 mission will have a lander and a rover, but not an orbiter, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chairman K. Sivan told reporters at its headquarters in Bengaluru, according to an official telecast. The Chandrayaan-2 mission in September successfully deployed a lunar orbiter that relays scientific data back to earth, but was unable to place a rover on the lunar surface after a "hard" landing. That mission had aimed to land on the south pole of the moon, where no other lunar mission had gone before. The region is believed to contain water as craters in the region are largely unaffected by the high temperatures of the sun.

Will the original orbiter still be up?

[BAReFO0t]

I don't know in what orbit it is. A stable one, or one that needs to be constantly re-adjusted and sustained wirh some kind of fuel?

Re:

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Low lunar orbits are very unstable due to mass variations of the close lunar surface.

Why this negativity?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

It is true the previous mission ended in failure to land the rover. Definitely it deserves to be mentioned. But, in the headline? Why?

It got a rocket big enough to carry that much load, got as far as the moon, did the transfer orbit right, orbiter worked, the rover crashed.

True unmanned robots have been successfully landed on the moon and the mars before. But not something routine.

I am no fan of ISRO. My thesis guru ( S M Deshpande, IISC, Bangalore) was in one post mortem committee about ASLV failure.

Re:

[timeOday]

That was my reaction. The cost of the failure didn't cost them any more than a success would have, so if they've identified and fixed the problem, why hold up?

Because it must be portraied as a "war".

[BAReFO0t]

The for-profit media is only paid if it gets your attention. So creating buzz, aka trolling, is their natural mode of operation.
And the for-power media (=propaganda), only gets power, if it creates a "us VS them" scenario. A competition, or ideally, a "war".

It is kinda the point of countries, to create an artificial "us VS them", because nothing unites more (in obedience), than a common enemy.

When the people (not country) who built and operated this mission, could just as well be seen as our guys, from the

Re:

[Aighearach]

Why?

Because [Nelson quote omitted].

Maybe it was shot down by laser sharks?

Maybe they should just try again?

"One. More. Time.
One. More. Time.
One. More. Time."
--Belldandy

Maybe they should try again but limit the administration staff to only twelve thousand people in the control room next time.

Dassault Rafale

[NewYork]

But imports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail" --Maslow

Perseverance

[rmdingler]

“It's not how many times you get knocked down that count, it's how many times you get back up. ” -attributed to many, including G.A. Custer.

Perhaps because it is India, or because the budget for the mission was so small, the Chandrayaan-2 soft-landing attempt has been widely derided by many, including the venerable NASA.

Learning from failures is a large part of how we advance science and technology; indeed, how we learn to walk and talk.

Re:

[ClickOnThis]

This, for the love of FSM. Every spacefaring nation has its share of failures. But the successes help to inspire new generations to take up STEM careers and contribute to the socioeconomic health of their nation. Not to mention provide technologies like communication, environmental monitoring, navigation, etc. Perseverance indeed.

Can we even count the number of NASA failures?

[BAReFO0t]

There have been so many.

But, so what?

For scientists, there is no failure or success. Only useful and useless learning opportunities.

Re:

[JaredOfEuropa]

Exactly, and India isn't spending Apollo-level amounts of money on these missions either. It wouldn't surprise me if the space program actually has a positive ROI for the people of India, especially if you count the secondary benefits of providing pride and inspiration.

Good for ISRO

[AddisonEzekiel]

As the US moon mission fostered all sorts of dividends, here's to hoping that the ISRO does the same for India. I'm not being a USA homer, but fails like this highlight both the technical chops and the political fight with the USSR that made putting a person on the moon possible. Technically, I'm curious if the weight and cost having humans on board Apollo justified the ability to smooth over technical failures in 11 (landing) and 13 (transit).

Re: Good for ISRO

[ICdumbpeople]

They didnt put humans on board apollo to smooth over technical failures. We landed several spacecraft on the moon with no humans aboard just fine prior to apollo 11. We put humans on board to go to the moon.

Good To Hear!

[careysub]

What remains to be learned about the Moon is immense. We are still scratching the surface and the more missions that are sent to study it the better. Every major nation on Earth can contribute something of value.

I hope, and expect that India will continue to add to our body of knowledge about the Moon.

Also focusing on past failures in the TFS headline is absurd. The number of nations sending space probes that have had no failures is zero. As the say, this is rocket science.

Wierd Priorities

[fluffythedestroyer]

When you got basic problems like giving water to your own people, I question their priorities. Maybe its me but mastering the basics first should be a priority before doing anything with space; you know like making sure everyone has water and food.

Re: Wierd Priorities

[ICdumbpeople]

Why must they be exclusive? Not doing spaceflight isnt going to solve the water problem. All progress is progress.