-
Is India simply reacting to the Chinese space programme?
by
Phillip Clark
on 27 Sep, 2014 14:32
-
Has anyone thought that in three areas India seems to be doing no more than react to what China plans to do in space?
In August 2007, after China’s first two piloted space missions, the Chairman of ISRO said that ISRO was seriously considering a manned space programme. The programme has progressed slowly and is even further away from an initial piloted flight than a return to “launching from the USA” for astronauts. Apart from putting Indians into orbit the programme doesn't appear to have any firm goals.
The Chinese started to seriously talk about flying unmanned lunar missions in 2001, with the three-step programme (orbiter, lander/rover and lander/sample-return) plans being made public in 2003, with the maiden launch in 2007. India’s Chandrayaan 1 was announced in August 2003 – after the Chinese announcements – and was launched in 2008. China has launched three lunar missions (with the only mar being Yutu getting “stuck" on the Moon), while Chandrayaan 2 is still a future dream.
March 2006 saw the Chinese announced that they would start deep space missions, starting with Mars. In March 2007 the Chinese entered into an agreement with Russia for a small Chinese Mars orbiter to be launched with the planned Fobos-Grunt mission. The launch of Yinghuo 1 was in November 2011, but of course it got no further that a low Earth orbit because of Russian failures with the launch. There were plans for the domestic launch of a Mars orbiter in 2015, but this seems to have slipped by at least one launch window to 2017-2018 or even two windows to 2020. India started its feasibility study for a Mars orbiter in 2010, with approval for the programme coming in August 2012: launch was in November 2013 (yes, India deserves credit for flying this mission so soon after its approval).
So, with piloted programmes, unmanned lunar missions and unmanned planetary missions, is India simply reacting to what the Chinese announce they plan to do?
-
#1
by
su27k
on 27 Sep, 2014 15:43
-
And China is just repeating what US/Russia have done to validate the rule of communist dictatorship, so what's your point?
-
#2
by
sanman
on 27 Sep, 2014 16:43
-
I don't agree - the fact is that both countries have been steadily progressing in their space capabilities, and there's a natural path of progression which suggests where and how capabilities should be extended next. Did the United States go to Mars ahead of the Moon? Of course not.
If India is just imitating China or the Soviets, then how come its technology stack is so different? China and Russia use purely liquid-propelled rockets, while India uses a mix of liquid and solid boosters just like the US and Europe.
India is sending its Aditya-1 solar observation mission to the Sun - where is China doing that?
India also plans to launch Astrosat to observe black holes and other high-energy phenomena - where is China doing that?
Personally, I would like to see India imitating the US with respect to spinning off space launch operations to the private sector, since this would lead to more reductions on cost and faster growth in India's space sector.
-
#3
by
ncb1397
on 27 Sep, 2014 18:52
-
And China is just repeating what US/Russia have done to validate the rule of communist dictatorship, so what's your point?
They are reformed communists. The communist party name doesn't really make sense: sort of like the Democratic party and Republican party names don't really make sense either. Anyways...
- China -
economic system: capitalism/socialism hybrid
form of government: authoritarian oligarchy
-
#4
by
sanman
on 27 Sep, 2014 20:20
-
What I'm really gratified at is that India now has a Prime Minister who is very intensely fascinated with space and the space program. When MOM was maneuvering into Mars orbit, he wanted to be on hand to personally witness the moment, and to give his congratulation or consolation speech. When he spoke, he spoke personally and off the cuff, showing an appreciation for specific aspects, like the huge lightspeed delay between Earth and Mars, and the need to undertake risks to achieve rewards.
So while India lags China's superb space program in so many ways, I'm hoping that the increasing attention to space by the new govt will shift India's space program into a steeper ascent trajectory.
By the way, why should we all see any so-called "space race" as unhealthy? It doesn't have to be about mere political bickering, but can be like the Olympics where everybody competes by putting their best foot forward. In the end, if it makes everybody try just a little bit harder to go a little farther, then why go out of the way to put negative connotations on that?
-
#5
by
JohnFornaro
on 28 Sep, 2014 14:32
-
Not at all. India is moving forward with its own space program.
-
#6
by
vineethgk
on 28 Sep, 2014 19:12
-
To add my two cents, I believe Phillip Clark's point here was that India should be more proactive in charting an independent path to space free from regional compulsions. Competition is good, as long as the money and effort that goes into it benefits the the society as a whole.
Though nationalistic aspects may have played a part in India's Moon and Mars missions, a key differentiator which I have noticed about ISRO is its desire for international cooperation, and Western nations in particular. That began from their early days of launching US-built Nike Apache sounding rockets, designing the SLV-3 inspired by the Scout, and to working closely with the French in designing the Viking/Vikas engine. As @sanman has noted, if the Chinese rocket design philosophy was modelled on the Russia's, the Indian design with its emphasis on solids was modelled more like West's. That said, the American pressure on Glavkosmos to scuttle the transfer of cryogenic technology to ISRO was a bitter chapter in relations, but then Chandrayaan-1 carried US instruments. Now a joint NASA-ISRO program to develop a radar satellite is under way, and an agreement to share information on MAVEN and MOM is close to becoming a reality. Similarly, ISRO has had close collaboration with CNES on projects such as Megha-Tropiques and SARAL. An equally important characteristic that is worth noting is ISRO's desire to gradually transition its rocket and satellite manufacturing to the private industry, again inspired by Western approaches. I see these as very positive signs, a chance for ISRO to mature into, shall I say, a 'professional' space agency, and I expect more to happen in this route.
To wrap it off, I do hope the next Indian deep-space missions would carry instruments from many countries.
(
EDIT: Confused JohnFornaro with the original poster. Corrected the error)
-
#7
by
JohnFornaro
on 30 Sep, 2014 12:43
-
And China is just repeating what US/Russia have done to validate the rule of communist dictatorship, so what's your point?
They are reformed communists. The communist party name doesn't really make sense: sort of like the Democratic party and Republican party names don't really make sense either. Anyways...
Hah! That's rich. Worthy of a side discussion, but hey. I ain't starting that discussion.
Though nationalistic aspects may have played a part in India's Moon and Mars missions, a key differentiator which I have noticed about ISRO is its desire for international cooperation, and Western nations in particular.
Ikeep saying much the same thing about motives:
Why can't India be motivated primarily by the deep seated human urge to explore and learn?
-
#8
by
vineethgk
on 01 Oct, 2014 08:23
-
Why can't India be motivated primarily by the deep seated human urge to explore and learn?
Even if that were the spirit that drives ISRO, they may not be able to advertise themselves that way, at least not till India makes significant progress in solving its pressing socio-economic problems on the ground. Till then ISRO's primary mandate always shall be in aiding India's economic development - Earth observation, Communication, Weather forecasting, Navigation etc. Deep-space exploration is something they would do as a bonus to enhance their capabilities for future roles
-
#9
by
JohnFornaro
on 01 Oct, 2014 13:23
-
Why can't India be motivated primarily by the deep seated human urge to explore and learn?
Even if that were the spirit that drives ISRO, they may not be able to advertise themselves that way, at least not till India makes significant progress in solving its pressing socio-economic problems on the ground.
Well first, Patanjali 1.7 and 1.8. I'm going to stay with may assertion above, both for India and the US.
Second, both of our countries have grave socio-economic problems, and neither of our governments reflect ordinary people in their quiet morality.
-
#10
by
sanman
on 01 Oct, 2014 13:37
-
Even if that were the spirit that drives ISRO, they may not be able to advertise themselves that way, at least not till India makes significant progress in solving its pressing socio-economic problems on the ground. Till then ISRO's primary mandate always shall be in aiding India's economic development - Earth observation, Communication, Weather forecasting, Navigation etc. Deep-space exploration is something they would do as a bonus to enhance their capabilities for future roles
Notice that other interest groups, like those participating in arts and culture, have no problem getting govt funding. Are you going to seriously claim that artistic pursuits are capable of solving societal problems more effectively than technological pursuits? Those who criticize ISRO funding are really just playing political games, and don't have a serious argument to make.
During the 1980s, when India began investing in computerization, then too there were also scoffers who asked whether the govt intended to fill people's stomachs by feeding them floppy disks. But today, India's software exports to the rest of the world generate a lot of income which propagates through the economy and provides all kinds of employment. Today, engineering services rather than software are India's fastest-growing sector. Since aerospace is considered among the most challenging fields in engineering, I think that India demonstrating its prowess in that field along with cost advantages is a good way to attract customers.
-
#11
by
JohnFornaro
on 01 Oct, 2014 13:43
-
Are you going to seriously claim that artistic pursuits are capable of solving societal problems more effectively than technological pursuits?
Are you going to seriously claim that faith based technological pursuits are capable of solving societal problems more effectively than similarly faith based artistic pursuits?
The problem with science is that it ignores art. The problem with art is that it ignores science.
This is called factionalism. And it is a faith held closely by either proponent.
Me? I don't get it.
-
#12
by
sanman
on 02 Oct, 2014 02:14
-
LOL, John - don't get me wrong, I'm an art-lover, but when it comes to scrounging for funds in a finite budgetary environment, I'm going to have to go for the readin', writin', 'rithmatic and science over the art and cultural stuff.
Science produces more than art does. If people start living on Mars one day, they'll have scientists to thank for it more than artists - and I say that as a sci-fi fan!
-
#13
by
R7
on 02 Oct, 2014 08:21
-
Why can't India be motivated primarily by the deep seated human urge to explore and learn?
It can but people in charge of paying the bills are usually motivated by more mundane urges (like ensuring their reelection). If it's any consolation the phenomenon is universal
-
#14
by
JohnFornaro
on 02 Oct, 2014 12:32
-
LOL, John - don't get me wrong, I'm an art-lover, but when it comes to scrounging for funds in a finite budgetary environment, I'm going to have to go for the readin', writin', 'rithmatic and science over the art and cultural stuff.
Now, you're moving the goalposts, my young Paduan.
Science produces more than art does. If people start living on Mars one day, they'll have scientists to thank for it more than artists - and I say that as a sci-fi fan!
Here, you generalize so much that you're not even wrong. Art produces far more art than science does. Define the verb "to produce" such that it includes both fields of human endeavor. Don't forget that there are few artists who, "when it comes to scrounging for funds in a finite budgetary environment", think that money grows on trees.
Your problem is simply one of assuming that the definition of "produce" only pertains to the technological. And "don't get me wrong", the artistic faction ignores the "production" value of science.
Finally, "if people start living on Mars one day", it will depend on the previously existing and thriving cis-lunar economy.
Slipping back into the topic: Sure, there will be future interactions between China and India regarding their space efforts, and punditry will pretend that the "reactions" of each country's space agencies should prove some sort of poorly defined dependency of one country's program on another's.
Neither country runs the other country's space programm. India is doing what it can with the time, treasure and talent that she has. Now, if only they would treat their women as spiritual beings instead of as chattel. Both countries.
