My suggestion to India: focus on encouraging the would-be Elon Musks in your population. Give them permission to do it. Remove the barriers to them doing it.
You'll get there much faster if the private sector were doing it.
Your comments have repeatedly broken the site guidelines. We ban accounts that do this, so please follow them from now on. That means posting civilly and substantively, or not at all.
The fact of the matter is, space has only really become feasible for the private sector in the last few decades in the US and a few other countries. The overriding reason for this has been large government funded research programs funding the sunk cost initial R&D for the private sector. A secondary reason is the now widespread usage of commercial satellites. Countries with private space companies also have long-standing aeronautical engineering companies.
India lacks all of these things. Shifting all of the space program to private companies would be a disaster there.
Companies rarely finance scientific endeavors because the payout on them is too long - and many pure science efforts like landing on Europa offer no possible payback plan. Science in space cannot exist without government largess.
Also, one of the primary reasons for space research has historically been weapons deployment (ICBM). Private firms are not going to fund that sort of development - unless the government pays them to do so.
I am tired of people applying a free market rant to everything they run into. Any economist will tell you that the "free market" only really applies in very particular markets (perfect competition), and even those have a common trade/law/infrastructure system established by a government. Space is actually better suited to oligopolies, which are almost as far away from a free market as possible and practically dictate a need for regulation.
The reason you are getting downvoted is because you come across as fault pointer at a successful event.
Yes, India needs more private sector participation. It has been divesting like crazy but more the better. There's lots of groundwork, infra and social norms need to be challenged and changed for US like entrepreneurship scenario. India has it's own strength and weaknesses. In last few years, it has done a good job of recognising those weaknesses and enhancing strengths.
The picture clearly shows a 'winged' rocket as described in the article.
"The episode has the smell of government propaganda."
Not sure from where you get the smell of government propaganda. ISRO has been credited for some of the most successful launches. They sent a probe to mars in the first attempt. There seem to be smart folks working there.
I don't understand the downvotes. There's always a place for contrasting opinions, and /especially/ when they're expressed politely, they deserve a polite response.
I have the same doubts. I'd love to see a picture of the real thing.
"Scientists at ISRO believe that they could reduce the cost by as much as 10 times if reusable technology succeeds, bringing it down to $2,000 per kg."
Wow! That's extremely cheap! What are SpaceX's expected numbers?
"The Falcon Heavy, aims to lower the cost to $1,000 per pound [or $2,204.62 per kg]." (old article) [0]
However, the pricing page for SpaceX shows the Falcon Heavy runs $90 Million USD for a launch of 54,400 kg to LEO (on a fully expendable vehicle, so no refunds). That works out to be $1,654 per kg (or $750 per pound, under their original estimate). Reusing the first stage rockets reduces the lift profile but the costs are projected to be about 2/3 of their original value, so I'd suspect the overall cost to be even lower - around $1,300/kg or so.
[Edit] Elon Musk is on record as saying his ultimate goal is $100 per pound, or $254/kg. That presumes daily flights.[2] In a Senate meeting in 2004 he said, "Ultimately, I believe $500 per pound [$1,270 per kg] or less is very achievable."[3] Depending on discounts on the Falcon Heavy, SpaceX is sitting around that cost level.
Some news outlets have been calling it a "space shuttle", which is highly inaccurate considering that this has no plans of being for human use. I'm happy with the progress ISRO has made but lying/deception will not help anybody.
"The hypersonic flight experiment (HEX) will be followed by the landing experiment (LEX), return flight experiment (REX) and scramjet propulsion experiment (SPEX)."
Notice - scramjet. I think it isn't reusable space program like SpaceX's. It is more of an advanced tech development program with "spaceplane" being a goal. Dovetails nicely with the current active development of 7Mach Russian-Indian scramjet missile BraMos 2.
This isn't 'lying' or 'deception' in any sense of the words. News outlets are calling it a space shuttle because they are either misinformed, confused, or just trying to find a form of words that will be familiar to a layman and confer a general sense of what is being attempted while not striving for, or caring too much about, technical accuracy.
Off topic - It's a little sad when people's first reaction to a mistake or inaccuracy is to immediately claim it as a deliberate attempt to mislead or other malicious act, and I see this a lot. Generally in Internet arguments the response to someone making an incorrect statement seems to be to call them a liar, as though they are deliberately misstating things, rather than simply being wrong...
If it shuttles things to and from space, doesn't that make it a space shuttle? I guess it depends on where you want to draw the lines between launch vehicle and shuttle.
The origin of the term shuttle is from weaving with back and forth motion carrying a payload, so something that is reusable can very arguably be termed a shuttle (especially if it can bring things back and forth to orbit).
'Everything went according to the projectory, he said adding that the winged space plane will not be recovered from the sea.' - Is that okay? Do a lot of missions around the world consider sea a dumping ground?
The ocean, for spacecraft first stages, yes. Rocket launches are so infrequent and the ocean so large that it seems irrelevant, and in any case there's no practical alternative for a nation that's just getting started with spaceflight.
Uncle, this is not north korea or some bullshit US company. ISRO has sent missions to mars and moon. NASA works with them. Moreover, please open you eyes and check the first picture on the article.
They're probably not trying to compete in the global market for space launches as much as simply reduce costs for the Indian national space program. Most people often forget that SpaceX is a US company, and hence the services it supplies are subject to US laws, specifically, export restrictions and sanctions.
SpaceX is within 1-2 years of the Falcon Heavy; same timeline for the Dragon 2 capsule (reusable) for carrying humans into and out of space. Blue Origin's timeline to orbit is a quite a bit longer and filled with a lot more question marks.
With that said, there is value for India in having their own cheap space launch system which can't be blocked off by the US on a whim.
I agree. Even if the launch vehicle were to fail, there's a large amount of value for India in building up the significant infrastructure (both technological and intellectual) involved in having broad space capabilities. In the next five or so years India will pass France to become the fifth largest economy in nominal terms; in the next 15-20 years they'll probably overtake the UK, Germany and Japan to move into third place. It definitely makes sense for them to keep investing in space regardless of the outcome on something like this vehicle.
Indian Space Research Organization or ISRO plans to test two more such prototypes before the final version which will be about six times larger at around 40 metres and will take off around 2030. src :http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-all-set-to-launch-its-o...
Video would be cool. Something I really like is being able to watch all these launches, famous or otherwise. On Youtube, you can go all the way to the Saturn SA-1 launch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0-8Pd7fK9w. Fantastic stuff.
some people in india are saying this might be a lousy propaganda, no one knows what, you can never be 100% sure of what modi government says (or does).
But, let's say I have enough money and man-power to build a nintendo-ds and a hygienic toilet, moreover assume, I don't have either. Also assume, I go outside my home to take a dump on the street (or behind a bush), but I also want to play super-mario-bros on the nintendo-ds at the same time. which one should I build first? obviously the toilet, right?
before making a reusable spacecraft, we should spend some rupees on making some good toilets --
Every country -- even the poorest -- can afford to do multiple things well at the same time. Both sanitation and space exploration have their own benefits.
As a Nigerian economist once said, "we are not a poor country; we are a poorly managed country".
58 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 112 ms ] threadYou'll get there much faster if the private sector were doing it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
India lacks all of these things. Shifting all of the space program to private companies would be a disaster there.
Companies rarely finance scientific endeavors because the payout on them is too long - and many pure science efforts like landing on Europa offer no possible payback plan. Science in space cannot exist without government largess.
Also, one of the primary reasons for space research has historically been weapons deployment (ICBM). Private firms are not going to fund that sort of development - unless the government pays them to do so.
I am tired of people applying a free market rant to everything they run into. Any economist will tell you that the "free market" only really applies in very particular markets (perfect competition), and even those have a common trade/law/infrastructure system established by a government. Space is actually better suited to oligopolies, which are almost as far away from a free market as possible and practically dictate a need for regulation.
Yes, India needs more private sector participation. It has been divesting like crazy but more the better. There's lots of groundwork, infra and social norms need to be challenged and changed for US like entrepreneurship scenario. India has it's own strength and weaknesses. In last few years, it has done a good job of recognising those weaknesses and enhancing strengths.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/india-successfully-...
No close-up pictures of the "shuttle." Strange. (And I'm not talking about a generic long range picture of a rocket taking off either.)
The episode has the smell of government propaganda.
I have the same doubts. I'd love to see a picture of the real thing.
Here's a picture from a link in this thread: http://www.isro.gov.in/sites/default/files/galleries/Reusabl...
Remember, it's a scale model!
After all India ain't North Korea.
However, the pricing page for SpaceX shows the Falcon Heavy runs $90 Million USD for a launch of 54,400 kg to LEO (on a fully expendable vehicle, so no refunds). That works out to be $1,654 per kg (or $750 per pound, under their original estimate). Reusing the first stage rockets reduces the lift profile but the costs are projected to be about 2/3 of their original value, so I'd suspect the overall cost to be even lower - around $1,300/kg or so.
[Edit] Elon Musk is on record as saying his ultimate goal is $100 per pound, or $254/kg. That presumes daily flights.[2] In a Senate meeting in 2004 he said, "Ultimately, I believe $500 per pound [$1,270 per kg] or less is very achievable."[3] Depending on discounts on the Falcon Heavy, SpaceX is sitting around that cost level.
[0] http://www.airspacemag.com/space/is-spacex-changing-the-rock...
[1] http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities
[2] http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/07/21/138166072/space...
[3]http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=12774
"The hypersonic flight experiment (HEX) will be followed by the landing experiment (LEX), return flight experiment (REX) and scramjet propulsion experiment (SPEX)."
Notice - scramjet. I think it isn't reusable space program like SpaceX's. It is more of an advanced tech development program with "spaceplane" being a goal. Dovetails nicely with the current active development of 7Mach Russian-Indian scramjet missile BraMos 2.
Off topic - It's a little sad when people's first reaction to a mistake or inaccuracy is to immediately claim it as a deliberate attempt to mislead or other malicious act, and I see this a lot. Generally in Internet arguments the response to someone making an incorrect statement seems to be to call them a liar, as though they are deliberately misstating things, rather than simply being wrong...
The origin of the term shuttle is from weaving with back and forth motion carrying a payload, so something that is reusable can very arguably be termed a shuttle (especially if it can bring things back and forth to orbit).
I want close up pictures of this so-called shuttle.
This was at the bottom of the Hindu article. How does this compare with SpaceX and Blue Origin's timelines ?
With that said, there is value for India in having their own cheap space launch system which can't be blocked off by the US on a whim.
(Posted here before : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11751458)
But, let's say I have enough money and man-power to build a nintendo-ds and a hygienic toilet, moreover assume, I don't have either. Also assume, I go outside my home to take a dump on the street (or behind a bush), but I also want to play super-mario-bros on the nintendo-ds at the same time. which one should I build first? obviously the toilet, right?
before making a reusable spacecraft, we should spend some rupees on making some good toilets --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixJgY2VSct0
we should be more serious about prioritizing the issues that we want to spend the tax-payers' money on.
As a Nigerian economist once said, "we are not a poor country; we are a poorly managed country".