Equal blame lies with ISRO and GoI for not managing the PR effort at allmanoba wrote:The problem is, it is the "Canon" guys who first told the world that a discovery of new species has been made in Africa.vishwakarmaa wrote:If you happen to discover a new species somewhere in Africa..you “carried” a Canon camera with you..and took a picture and told everyone that you discovered a new species…
That is where the ISRO is lagging. The ISRO tells, that MIP and HySI have already made the discovery of H2O and OH presence on moon way back in June. Then what were they waiting for? They didn't have the balls to announce it first. Instead, they were waiting for the US of A to bless and "halal"ize the discovery.
The NASA cons grabbed the opportunity, and claimed that it is the Cassini which "made the discovery first" which is "confirmed" by Deep Impact Probe's data which is finally "strongly confirmed" by M3. And yes there is something called ISRO which is also part of this process. No mention of "free ride". No inclusion of ISRO guys in the panel.
And we are still waiting for the MIP and HySI results. Even if we get excellent result from those data, the humble, Gandhian ISRO won't claim any publicity.
Whereas the NASA clowns dance up and down singing "We serve humanity". Sigh. There are clowns and there are clowns.
Chandrayan-1 moon mission
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 841
- Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
- Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
- Contact:
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 385
- Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news ... 057854.cms
Same old story - Indians love to be "good boys" while bad boys take the lead.
Indian scientists kept waiting for approval from "international" scientific experts on its own water-find, while NASA went ahead and published its own M3 water-find.ISRO found water on moon 10 months ago
BANGALORE: Indian Space Research Organisation may have stolen the thunder of discovering water on the
Moon.
The Moon Impact Probe on Chandrayaan-I appears to have sensed water earlier than Nasa's Moon Minerolgy Mapper (M3) but protocol did not allow ISRO to declare the discovery. While MIP detected water molecules on November 14, 2008, just 22 days after Chandrayaan-1's launch, M3 did so in March 2009.
J S Goswami, principal investigator for Chandrayaan-1, told TOI: ``We had indications of water on November 14, the day MIP crash-landed on the Moon. It sensed some sort of water molecules. We were absolutely delighted but it had to be corroborated. Without international examination and cross-examination and confirmation of the evidence, it would not have been right on our part to go public about it.''
Mylswami Annadurai, project director, Chandrayaan-1 and 2, explained why India did not go public with the discovery. ``International protocol requires us to discuss the evidence, cross-calibrate it with experts and it goes through a peer review and gets their approval. After all this, if it's a credible finding comes the go-ahead for its publication. This process can take three to four months, sometimes even seven. Only after publication can we speak about the evidence.''
ISRO chairman G Madhavan Nair said the MIP showed indications as it was crash-landing - it caught signatures of water. ``As the MIP was landing, it took some pictures that indicated the water molecules eventually found by M3.''
The MIP had picked up strong signals of water particles towards the polar region from 70 degree latitude to 80 degree latitude, according to Goswami. While this was known in November 2008, the M3 discovery of water in March 2009 was confirmed only three months later ^ in June. That's because US scientists wanted to be sure they had indeed found water and it took three months of rigorous cross-examination to confirm it. Publication after the confirmation also took time.
Officials said India scientists waited all this while to make the discovery public as they wanted the findings of such global significance to be first published in a scientific journal.
Same old story - Indians love to be "good boys" while bad boys take the lead.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
^
It is not about "good guys"/"bad guys"..... it is lack of confidence in data/results obtained. JMT
It is not about "good guys"/"bad guys"..... it is lack of confidence in data/results obtained. JMT
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Lets cut ISRO and NASA both some slack. Results are still being analyzed. As someone correctly mentioned earlier, that it's not just holding a press conference and claiming 'We've found Helium on the Moon". It's also the duty of ISRO and associated scientific organizations to peer review and puiblish the science gained from the respective instrumentation. Once you've done that ISRO/ associated organizations can call a press conference very much like NASA and present the findings. Most reporters talking to ISRO officials try to get some off the cuff remarks in serach of a news breakthrough, like the Helium one. As mentioned in an earlier post, the data is very voluminous and it is taking Scientists some time to analyze through all this. ISRO must atleast keep us informed of timelines. It's from the off the cuff reports only we get small news feeds. NASA folks don't talk off the cuff. They hold these grand press conferences with lot of material and it's the better way to make news prevalent. Lets say NASA did'nt walk away with sole credit. It was extremely good coverage for ISRO too.
If there's something really big, then it makes sense to organize a PC, get relevent scientists who can explain the data instead of higher up officials or Directors who won't be able to answer data specific questions. IMHO most PCs in India announcing anything big have the official/ admin head honcho types answering queries vaguely and off the cuff and the consequence is bad reporting. JMT/
If there's something really big, then it makes sense to organize a PC, get relevent scientists who can explain the data instead of higher up officials or Directors who won't be able to answer data specific questions. IMHO most PCs in India announcing anything big have the official/ admin head honcho types answering queries vaguely and off the cuff and the consequence is bad reporting. JMT/
Last edited by harbans on 27 Sep 2009 20:53, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
^ x2 agreed.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 385
- Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
This is OT.Raveen wrote:I have realized a few things sir,
1. You have something negative to say about anything that lies to west of the west most point of the Russian border.
2. You can not post without attacking someone, and how that any of this is more acceptable or justified than the member who got a month off for using a similar tone beats me.
3. You will take any and every oppurtunity to plug in your Soviet/Communist/Russian dream into every post of every thread irrespective of how irrelevant and OT it might be.
This is OT again. If you don't have any arguments left, admit it. Avoid personal attacks please.Raveen wrote:Hence I appologize, but I can not argue/discuss with you...for multiple reasons including the fact that I don't want to facilitate your Soviet/Communist propoganda here. Thank you for your time.
And if you think I am running Soviet propaganda, then you are welcome to run American propaganda. Noone stops you, sir.
Last edited by vishwakarmaa on 27 Sep 2009 20:54, edited 1 time in total.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 841
- Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
- Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
- Contact:
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
pgbhat wrote:^
It is not about "good guys"/"bad guys"..... it is lack of confidence in data/results obtained. JMT
I agree 100%harbans wrote:Lets cut ISRO and NASA both some slack. Results are still being analyzed. As someone correctly mentioned earlier, that it's not just holding a press conference and claiming 'We've found Helium on the Moon". It's also the duty of ISRO and associated scientific organizations to peer review and puiblish the science gained from the respective instrumentation. Once you've done that ISRO/ associated organizations can call a press conference very much like NASA and present the findings. Most reporters talking to ISRO officials try to get some off the cuff remarks in serach of a news breakthrough, like the Helium one. As mentioned in an earlier post, the data is very voluminous and it is taking Scientists some time to analyze through all this. ISRO must atleast keep us informed of timelines. It's from the off the cuff reports only we get small news feeds. NASA folks don't talk off the cuff. They hold these grand press conferences with lot of material and it's the better way to make news prevalent. Lets say NASA did'nt walk away with sole credit. It was extremely good coverage for ISRO too. JMT/
although I think GoI should be more proactive in asserting India and it's accomplishments internationally.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 385
- Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Bad boys make the protocols. Good boys follow protocols.pgbhat wrote:^
It is not about "good guys"/"bad guys"..... it is lack of confidence in data/results obtained. JMT
ISRO has a lot to learn about politics of International science, where West holds monopoly. Otherwise, it will end up being a good boy assistant in the lab.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
What has lack of confidence in results/data got to do with protocols??vishwakarmaa wrote:Good boys follow protocols. Bad boys make the protocols.pgbhat wrote:^
It is not about "good guys"/"bad guys"..... it is lack of confidence in data/results obtained. JMT
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
so you admit that you have no source to back the claim that "West-aping lobby in GoI who refused to show confidence in solo mission and instead advised to seek foreign "ashivraad"".vishwakarmaa wrote:When CY-1 was being planned, an ISRO scientist termed it as Indian project having payloads only from IIT and SAC, on Zee Alpha(local language channel) in his interview and also gave some details of purpose of mission. Also the payloads he termed were not 11 but 5 to 6 at most.ISRO's plan was to go solo only. It was political pressure from West-aping lobby in GoI who refused to show confidence in solo mission and instead advised to seek foreign "ashivraad".
at the moment you are simply ruining a perfectly good thread with your diatribes.
kindly desist. that goes for anyone else as well.
enough of the cock and bull discussion on dishonest practices of ISRO/NASA/GOI/whatever.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Just added a bit to my earlier post..however the media most on BRF are well aware is scientifically challenged. I was tracking this major news breaking through on Sept 23rd itself. TOI/ HT desi media did'nt put a line out in the next day editions. It's only after gora media networks took it up that TOI editorial teams decided hysteria/ hype type headlines on front page news. IMHO Hindu gives the best scientific coverage as compared to TOI/ HT which are significantly scientifically challenged. Looking at some comments by ISRO bosses after this, i think they'll learn from this for sure.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Yours logic is also deeply flawed, Sir.Raveen wrote: I am going to play the devil's advocate here:
Just because the europeans launch INSATs for us doesnt mean the INSAT belongs to them, similarly your camera logic is flawed in my opinion.
We pay for the launch. The INSAT is ours, the data it generates is ours, we receive the data, everything except the orbit insertion is ours. Kourou just launches the satellite.
Whereas M3 and CY-1 is a collaborative work. There is no need for India to carry M3. More over there was an "Announcement of Opportunity". It's the ISRO, which hand picked M3. ISRO had the hand over deciding or rejecting M3. Finally M3 get free ride to moon, as close as to the orbit of not 200km, but 100km. And it's ISRO, which receives all the data.
And NASA announces that Cassini, Deep Impact Probe and M3 (not CY-1, mind you) together discovered H2O and OH on moon.
And you go, oh I see. Why the hell then the MIP and HySI names are not included, or just got a wee bit of mention, if they too supposedly identified water on moon way back in June.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 841
- Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
- Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
- Contact:
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
I agree sir; my post was in response to the previous one and hence it was only befitting that it be as deeply flawed in logic as the one it attempted to answer.manoba wrote:Yours logic is also deeply flawed, Sir.Raveen wrote: I am going to play the devil's advocate here:
Just because the europeans launch INSATs for us doesnt mean the INSAT belongs to them, similarly your camera logic is flawed in my opinion.
We pay for the launch. The INSAT is ours, the data it generates is ours, we receive the data, everything except the orbit insertion is ours. Kourou just launches the satellite.
Whereas M3 and CY-1 is a collaborative work. There is no need for India to carry M3. More over there was an "Announcement of Opportunity". It's the ISRO, which hand picked M3. ISRO had the hand over deciding or rejecting M3. Finally M3 get free ride to moon, as close as to the orbit of not 200km, but 100km. And it's ISRO, which receives all the data.
And NASA announces that Cassini, Deep Impact Probe and M3 (not CY-1, mind you) together discovered H2O and OH on moon.
And you go, oh I see. Why the hell then the MIP and HySI names are not included, or just got a wee bit of mention, if they too supposedly identified water on moon way back in June.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
I personally prefer, someone sends Chang'e-II and "prove" that it is the Chang'e-I, Kaguya and MIP which pe*d out of fear while crash landing, and hence the water presence.
Then we can ask where from Cassini and DIP got the data 400 years ago. At least the chinese got the balls to ask such questions (though inane). Godspeed China! Godspeed! We, all the BRFites are with you.
Then we can ask where from Cassini and DIP got the data 400 years ago. At least the chinese got the balls to ask such questions (though inane). Godspeed China! Godspeed! We, all the BRFites are with you.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6141
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Officials said India scientists waited all this while to make the discovery public as they wanted the findings of such global significance to be first published in a scientific journal.
With due respect-horseshit.
In science priority is everything. I am surprised ISRO has not beenn able to grasp this simple concept.
With due respect-horseshit.
In science priority is everything. I am surprised ISRO has not beenn able to grasp this simple concept.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 385
- Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
There are political sensitivities in discussing this openly here. Tell me your email ID. We discuss this offline if you want.pgbhat wrote:What has lack of confidence in results/data got to do with protocols??vishwakarmaa wrote:Good boys follow protocols. Bad boys make the protocols.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Again as I said indicates of confidence in MIP data or incomplete examination of MIP data. Any how Goswami is one of the co-authors in the paper published. ..... they now have to publish MIP data/results too.J S Goswami, principal investigator for Chandrayaan-1, told TOI: ``We had indications of water on November 14, the day MIP crash-landed on the Moon. It sensed some sort of water molecules. We were absolutely delighted but it had to be corroborated. Without international examination and cross-examination and confirmation of the evidence, it would not have been right on our part to go public about it.''
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 385
- Joined: 19 Jun 2008 08:47
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
As I said, I don't want to get banned from BRF. Mods are already behind me for talking against West.pgbhat wrote:Again as I said indicates of confidence in MIP data or incomplete examination of MIP data. Any how Goswami is one of the co-authors in the paper published. ..... they now have to publish MIP data/results too.J S Goswami, principal investigator for Chandrayaan-1, told TOI: ``We had indications of water on November 14, the day MIP crash-landed on the Moon. It sensed some sort of water molecules. We were absolutely delighted but it had to be corroborated. Without international examination and cross-examination and confirmation of the evidence, it would not have been right on our part to go public about it.''
Give me your email ID. I explain you the logic behind why I think so.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
No thanks let us agree to disagree and move on.vishwakarmaa wrote: As I said, I don't want to get banned from BRF. Mods are already behind me for talking against West.
Give me your email ID. I explain you the logic behind why I think so.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
However one interprets it, it is a sad fact that ISRO PR is not anywhere near good standards. A simple look at its website would reveal how much we need to work on improving the PR, although they are improving on it (the new website is far better than the ugly one they had sometime back). They could have at least updated their site saying that they are working on the water hypothesis. That way they could validate their claim that they found the water 10 months before. Looking at the NASA channels it looks like we have a long way to go...sanjaykumar wrote:Officials said India scientists waited all this while to make the discovery public as they wanted the findings of such global significance to be first published in a scientific journal.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Whatever statemenst ISRO makes has to be through their web page. Clear press statements must be published on web pages. DDM cannot be trusted with delivering technical information. Press conferences with PPTs from scientists aimed at educating DDM.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Here is the link to the press briefing by ISRO on Chandrayaan - Chandrayaan-1 Missionpgbhat wrote:Press conferences with PPTs from scientists aimed at educating DDM.
I wish they had done something like this earlier with the data from MIP. 10 months is too long of a time to sit with the data to be published on a website. Peer reviewed scientific publication may need more time though.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
^
Read that thx for the link.
Read that thx for the link.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Everybody likes to claim "I knew it 10 months earlier" "I knew it 10 years earlier"
Whatever they had, they likely weren't sure of it -- it could have looked like a sensor error to them, including contamination while back on Earth.
But now that the main M3 results have shown strong evidence, everyone would rush to claim they had similarly good data 10 months/years earlier. Even Cassini's results have now been reinterpreted to show it had observed lunar surface water.
If you publish or press-conference first, then you are the one sticking your neck out by making the claim.
I think that India should conduct the bi-static test again with Chandrayaan-2, because I think it's likely to show positive results, given what we now know about lunar surface water.
If water can exist in this form in the hot regions, then it can certainly exist in better form in the cold regions (ie. bulk ice), at least in small quantities.
That's why I think we should try to upgrade the GSLV-Mk3 into a Mk3XL version, to give extra payload capacity. I realize that Mk3 itself can lift 4.4 tons to GTO, but the fact is that we'll be carrying a lander and 2 rovers already. Some extra payload capacity could enable more science payloads to be included, such as for another bi-static test to yield valuable info on water ice.
Whatever they had, they likely weren't sure of it -- it could have looked like a sensor error to them, including contamination while back on Earth.
But now that the main M3 results have shown strong evidence, everyone would rush to claim they had similarly good data 10 months/years earlier. Even Cassini's results have now been reinterpreted to show it had observed lunar surface water.
If you publish or press-conference first, then you are the one sticking your neck out by making the claim.
I think that India should conduct the bi-static test again with Chandrayaan-2, because I think it's likely to show positive results, given what we now know about lunar surface water.
If water can exist in this form in the hot regions, then it can certainly exist in better form in the cold regions (ie. bulk ice), at least in small quantities.
That's why I think we should try to upgrade the GSLV-Mk3 into a Mk3XL version, to give extra payload capacity. I realize that Mk3 itself can lift 4.4 tons to GTO, but the fact is that we'll be carrying a lander and 2 rovers already. Some extra payload capacity could enable more science payloads to be included, such as for another bi-static test to yield valuable info on water ice.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/opin ... 062551.cms
Q&A: 'Chandrayaan-2 will try to get details about water on moon'
28 September 2009, 12:00am IST
G Madhavan Nair , chairperson of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), has played a key role in the design and development of
the four-stage Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), the workhorse of ISRO. The PSLV launched the Indian mooncraft, Chandrayaan-1 on its journey to the moon. The mission has won worldwide acclaim after one of its foreign payloads, NASA's Moon Mineralogy Mapper, discovered water molecules. Nair spoke to Srinivas Laxman :
What's the impact of the discovery on our space programme?
The discovery of water has really reinforced India's position as a growing space power. Its status has considerably gone up and this is evident from the several congratulatory messages which we have received from different parts of the world and the various space agencies. We will be getting more and more significant data.
What's the next step?
In the mooncraft there are a number of supporting instruments. These will be used for further confirmation of the presence of water molecules. This whole process is expected to take three to six months. In addition, we are also eagerly awaiting the results from NASA's LCROSS (Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite) spacecraft that will crashland at Cabeus, a crater near the moon's south pole, on October 9. This mission is also expected to search for water ice.
On Friday, you said it was ISRO's Moon Impact Probe (MIP) which crashlanded near the Shackleton Crater in the lunar south pole on November 14, 2008, that first detected signs of water. Why was this important fact not publicised earlier?
The MIP first detected signals of water while it was descending towards the lunar surface on November 14. Since it was a short duration flight we could not make any positive announcement that it had detected signals of water until we got firm proof and confirmation. This took about 10 months and now that we have concrete evidence about the presence of water we decided to announce the discovery by MIP.
In which part of the moon was water found?
In the polar regions.
What is the status of the second Indian moon mission, Chandrayaan-2?
We expect to launch it in 2013. It is a joint Indo-Russian mission that, apart from the orbiter, will have a lander and two rovers. This mission will also attempt to obtain more details about water.
Has ISRO started receiving scientific proposals for this moon flight?
Yes, suggestions have started coming in and the process of evaluating them will start soon.
Which is ISRO's next mission?
We are preparing for the launch of the Geo Synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle towards the end of December that will have an indigenous cryogenic engine. The rocket will carry the GSat-4 communication satellite.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
I think that India should conduct the bi-static test again with Chandrayaan-2, because I think it's likely to show positive results, given what we now know about lunar surface water.
The bi-static experiment is applicable effectively if 2 satellites are in orbit together (one sends a signal to the specific area and the other recieves the reflected signature signal with a certain angularity for effectiveness IIRC). With the same satellite it's not going to be effective. I'd say lets wait for the HySI, MIP and the HIgh Energy spectrometer results from ISRO. If needed to publish in US, ISRO should not balk at taking NASA help to get the results in established public domain. Take Carla and Green as co authors of the paper if needed. Idea is to make the data public. Do it well on the He 3 discovery/ confirmation. CY has done a very good job. Nair seems to be the only one speaking onb every issue. I don't think as head honcho of a very diverse spectrum he can assure relevent answers to every relevent question. NASA Chiefs rarely speak out. They delegate it to the respective team heads to handle. ISRO it seems must learn a lot from NASA from this. This learning curve is a very positive aspect for ISRO. Should'nt be taken negatively as some here are taking it. JMT/
Example:
The bi-static experiment is applicable effectively if 2 satellites are in orbit together (one sends a signal to the specific area and the other recieves the reflected signature signal with a certain angularity for effectiveness IIRC). With the same satellite it's not going to be effective. I'd say lets wait for the HySI, MIP and the HIgh Energy spectrometer results from ISRO. If needed to publish in US, ISRO should not balk at taking NASA help to get the results in established public domain. Take Carla and Green as co authors of the paper if needed. Idea is to make the data public. Do it well on the He 3 discovery/ confirmation. CY has done a very good job. Nair seems to be the only one speaking onb every issue. I don't think as head honcho of a very diverse spectrum he can assure relevent answers to every relevent question. NASA Chiefs rarely speak out. They delegate it to the respective team heads to handle. ISRO it seems must learn a lot from NASA from this. This learning curve is a very positive aspect for ISRO. Should'nt be taken negatively as some here are taking it. JMT/
Example:
This is not what readers like us want to know. We want to know what the discovery of water in it's present form means to the Indian space program. Not in terms of prestige, pride or as a status symbol. In terms of science. Nair is not giving the right answers. I have no hesitation is saying this now. The scientists behind the instrumentation are the key people who can answer these queries correctly. Not Nair.What's the impact of the discovery on our space programme?
The discovery of water has really reinforced India's position as a growing space power. Its status has considerably gone up and this is evident from the several congratulatory messages which we have received from different parts of the world and the various space agencies
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
I hear you, but Nair is also responsible for getting the political support and funding for ISRO as well as in fending off the politically-motivated attacks (eg. Chandrayaan was a failure, etc), unlike the instrumentation team experts. So Nair's remarks reflect the overall picture that ISRO has to face.
As for science answers, I don't know that instrumentation team experts are in a position to answer policy-related questions on how future science experiments would be impacted by this discovery. I think that the wider pool of analysts from the broader scientific community would be in a better position to comment.
Regarding the bi-static experiment, yes, I fully realize that the experiment has to be done by 2 spacecraft. I'm assuming that LRO or LCROSS would still be available by the time Chandrayaan-2 arrives, albeit at the end of their lifespans. Again, the bi-static experiment was conceived before there was proof-positive of any kind of water on the Moon. Now that we know about the thin-film water, it would make a bi-static experiment all the more relevant and fruitful. So it might be useful to even field a few nanosats specifically equipped to do more bi-static measurements, to map out the possible bulk-ice deposits in greatest possible detail.
Another thing I'm wondering about, is if there could be mapping of subterranean features like caves and lava tubes, which might be useful for scouting out prime locations for bases. Since the Moon has no appreciable atmosphere, cosmic radiation and even micrometeorites can prove fatal. Meanwhile, the Moon is also quite geologically stable, and hence the use of underground bases might be the best way to ensure a protected environment for lunar personnel.
You could map out the exact dimensions of caves using rovers with lasers, so that inflatable envelopes of suitable dimensions could be manufactured on Earth accordingly. Those envelopes would be brought to the caves along with liquid foam insulation that would first be sprayed onto the cave walls. The envelope could then be inflated inside the cave, and would hopefully stick to the adhesive foam insulation already sprayed onto the walls. The process could be repeated, spraying foam on the interior surface of the envelope and then inflating another envelope inside that as an inner wall. This inner envelope would come with ready-made airlock hatchway already attached, so that astronauts could enter inside and live in a pressurized environment. Once on the inside of this environment, the astronauts could use UV-thermal lamps to cure/harden the insulating foam layers that sit between the envelopes and also the cave walls. Voila - you have a rudimentary base.
Like our prehistoric ancestors, I think that 21st-Century Man should start living on the Moon in caves first, since those are the most sheltered environments, as even our prehistoric cavemen ancestors also knew. The future of Man on the Moon lies underground.
As for science answers, I don't know that instrumentation team experts are in a position to answer policy-related questions on how future science experiments would be impacted by this discovery. I think that the wider pool of analysts from the broader scientific community would be in a better position to comment.
Regarding the bi-static experiment, yes, I fully realize that the experiment has to be done by 2 spacecraft. I'm assuming that LRO or LCROSS would still be available by the time Chandrayaan-2 arrives, albeit at the end of their lifespans. Again, the bi-static experiment was conceived before there was proof-positive of any kind of water on the Moon. Now that we know about the thin-film water, it would make a bi-static experiment all the more relevant and fruitful. So it might be useful to even field a few nanosats specifically equipped to do more bi-static measurements, to map out the possible bulk-ice deposits in greatest possible detail.
Another thing I'm wondering about, is if there could be mapping of subterranean features like caves and lava tubes, which might be useful for scouting out prime locations for bases. Since the Moon has no appreciable atmosphere, cosmic radiation and even micrometeorites can prove fatal. Meanwhile, the Moon is also quite geologically stable, and hence the use of underground bases might be the best way to ensure a protected environment for lunar personnel.
You could map out the exact dimensions of caves using rovers with lasers, so that inflatable envelopes of suitable dimensions could be manufactured on Earth accordingly. Those envelopes would be brought to the caves along with liquid foam insulation that would first be sprayed onto the cave walls. The envelope could then be inflated inside the cave, and would hopefully stick to the adhesive foam insulation already sprayed onto the walls. The process could be repeated, spraying foam on the interior surface of the envelope and then inflating another envelope inside that as an inner wall. This inner envelope would come with ready-made airlock hatchway already attached, so that astronauts could enter inside and live in a pressurized environment. Once on the inside of this environment, the astronauts could use UV-thermal lamps to cure/harden the insulating foam layers that sit between the envelopes and also the cave walls. Voila - you have a rudimentary base.
Like our prehistoric ancestors, I think that 21st-Century Man should start living on the Moon in caves first, since those are the most sheltered environments, as even our prehistoric cavemen ancestors also knew. The future of Man on the Moon lies underground.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
The normally reliable Tavleen Singh pukes all over the Chandrayaan program:
Moonshine for water
Apparently, she doesn't notice all the huge sums of money being spent by Indians on making and watching stupid Bollywood movies with escapist themes, or the money spent on cricket mania. Thus money spent on science tops her list of frivolous expenditures.
Moonshine for water
Apparently, she doesn't notice all the huge sums of money being spent by Indians on making and watching stupid Bollywood movies with escapist themes, or the money spent on cricket mania. Thus money spent on science tops her list of frivolous expenditures.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Wow! I step out for 3 weeks and there is enough Rona & Dhona (tm) to fill in a Pacific Ocean.
First of all jingoes, calm down and try to understand this points:
1. MIP did detect presence of water on Moon. However it has to go through scientific review. In the absence of any other comparative and independent data other than from M3 and HySI, ISRO is perfectly correct in taking a defensive posture on this. Imagine if ISRO steps out and says that there is water on moon based on MIP data and later on review it comes out that the C-I may have carried moisture contributing to anomalies in data, ISRO's maiden mission would have been jeopardized with much loss in credibility. For example, the TimesNow video of PSLV-C14 launch was calling out Dismal failure of Chandrayaan in bold. DDM does not have objectivity, they want to sensationalize. Imagine that happening in scientific circles.
2. ISRO scored a major goal in its first maiden deep space venture itself. It basically means that the entire programme was well thought out, well provided by appropriate choice of payloads and well executed. Only place ISRO failed is to manage expectations. That is instead of saying that the C-I life is 2 years, they should have said that the life of C-I is 3 months. Then crow about how long it lasted, just like what NASA is doing with MERs. Still ISRO is justifiably proud on providing the vehicle to score this major event and also establish its credentials in deep space.
3. NASA's M3 team was well within its right to announce the results. It was their payload after all. Enabled by C-I for which it did get much credit and ISRO also learned a lot from the M3 results. Further with a validated M3 results, that can be used for validating rest of ISROs payload. Now if jingoes had paid attention, the M3 results were compared with results from Cassini and Deep Impact. The point is even the NASA M3 team were careful and the team had a member which was also a member of Cassini. Also to be noted is that ISRO did not have access to Cassini and Deep Impact data. Further, NASA is a scientific-political organization. Within NASA several teams are in competition and M3 team may be in competition with the LCROSS team. It would have simply be a situation where M3 team had to rush the information out of the door!
So all in all an excellent week for ISRO. Congrats!
PS: Tavleen singh is barking for her master. IE introduces such article as equal-equal and for all to care IE might be running on foreign money. Ignore her, for the scientists know that any technology to extract water from moon's regolith can lead to extract water from moisture bearing clouds!
Also lack of sanitation or water is a civic problem, instead of pulling down the Department of Space, the real question should be asked that if we can pull such high tech projects in space, what stops us from doing it on Earth! But then people on their master's payroll cannot understand such subtleties.
First of all jingoes, calm down and try to understand this points:
1. MIP did detect presence of water on Moon. However it has to go through scientific review. In the absence of any other comparative and independent data other than from M3 and HySI, ISRO is perfectly correct in taking a defensive posture on this. Imagine if ISRO steps out and says that there is water on moon based on MIP data and later on review it comes out that the C-I may have carried moisture contributing to anomalies in data, ISRO's maiden mission would have been jeopardized with much loss in credibility. For example, the TimesNow video of PSLV-C14 launch was calling out Dismal failure of Chandrayaan in bold. DDM does not have objectivity, they want to sensationalize. Imagine that happening in scientific circles.
2. ISRO scored a major goal in its first maiden deep space venture itself. It basically means that the entire programme was well thought out, well provided by appropriate choice of payloads and well executed. Only place ISRO failed is to manage expectations. That is instead of saying that the C-I life is 2 years, they should have said that the life of C-I is 3 months. Then crow about how long it lasted, just like what NASA is doing with MERs. Still ISRO is justifiably proud on providing the vehicle to score this major event and also establish its credentials in deep space.
3. NASA's M3 team was well within its right to announce the results. It was their payload after all. Enabled by C-I for which it did get much credit and ISRO also learned a lot from the M3 results. Further with a validated M3 results, that can be used for validating rest of ISROs payload. Now if jingoes had paid attention, the M3 results were compared with results from Cassini and Deep Impact. The point is even the NASA M3 team were careful and the team had a member which was also a member of Cassini. Also to be noted is that ISRO did not have access to Cassini and Deep Impact data. Further, NASA is a scientific-political organization. Within NASA several teams are in competition and M3 team may be in competition with the LCROSS team. It would have simply be a situation where M3 team had to rush the information out of the door!
So all in all an excellent week for ISRO. Congrats!
PS: Tavleen singh is barking for her master. IE introduces such article as equal-equal and for all to care IE might be running on foreign money. Ignore her, for the scientists know that any technology to extract water from moon's regolith can lead to extract water from moisture bearing clouds!
Also lack of sanitation or water is a civic problem, instead of pulling down the Department of Space, the real question should be asked that if we can pull such high tech projects in space, what stops us from doing it on Earth! But then people on their master's payroll cannot understand such subtleties.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
hey, very nice post, disha!
don't stay away then, keep up the information flow
now how can I get my idea submitted for orbital beamed power to help the new Indian rover explore the shadowed unlit areas where the most water and helium-3 would be?
I'm thinking a rectenna should be incorporated into the solar panels of the rover, to enable it to receive power beamed down from the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter, so that the rover can explore areas that don't receive direct solar illumination.
You could use beamed microwaves, or even beamed infrared for better power density since there's no atmospheric attenuation. Plus, ISRO could point to such beamed power technology as being useful for Earthly applications of receiving power beamed down from space.
here's the latest news on the newly-added Indian rover:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/three ... er/522364/
Wow, sounds like they want to make another Spirit or Opportunity - isn't that overkill?
Why would you need machine vision, AI, etc, when they're only going to be about 4 light-seconds away, thus only giving 10secs roundtrip lightspeed delay at most? Can't we do regular remote control with 10secs delay? Send a command, wait 10secs for a response, send another command, etc.
don't stay away then, keep up the information flow
now how can I get my idea submitted for orbital beamed power to help the new Indian rover explore the shadowed unlit areas where the most water and helium-3 would be?
I'm thinking a rectenna should be incorporated into the solar panels of the rover, to enable it to receive power beamed down from the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter, so that the rover can explore areas that don't receive direct solar illumination.
You could use beamed microwaves, or even beamed infrared for better power density since there's no atmospheric attenuation. Plus, ISRO could point to such beamed power technology as being useful for Earthly applications of receiving power beamed down from space.
here's the latest news on the newly-added Indian rover:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/three ... er/522364/
Wow, sounds like they want to make another Spirit or Opportunity - isn't that overkill?
Why would you need machine vision, AI, etc, when they're only going to be about 4 light-seconds away, thus only giving 10secs roundtrip lightspeed delay at most? Can't we do regular remote control with 10secs delay? Send a command, wait 10secs for a response, send another command, etc.
Last edited by Sanjay M on 28 Sep 2009 09:18, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
I don't really see what difference it makes whether ISRO or NASA get first credit for the H20 discovery. ISRO showed how international cooperation can yield results - that's their hallmark, which will help us generate the goodwill and collaboration that is needed in space exploration. If we did it well once, we can do it again, that's what champions do ! US attitude is based on marketing, they need results to show their govt, that the expenditure is worth it... hell they will even market a made-in-india sweater from Walmart/Kohls/JCPenny as American if they need to...Also Ariane launched most of our Insat satellites...does that mean that Ariane has a gr8 stake in our satellite's success ?? No !! But we shud take 1 step at a time, perfect it and move to the next... plaudits will come !
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
umm, those are not even remotely comparable scenarios.Also Ariane launched most of our Insat satellites...does that mean that Ariane has a gr8 stake in our satellite's success ??
ariane launch was a purely commercial contract. M3 was a joint effort in which ISRO offered a ride to the moon for free. not that I'm saying ISRO deserves more credit than it's got but it's contribution is certainly not equivalent to that of Arianespace in INSAT projects.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
The reason is articles like this http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/eyeonasia/index.htmlmadsaw wrote:I don't really see what difference it makes whether ISRO or NASA get first credit for the H20 discovery.
. The above article is overall balanced compared to others. Note that Einhorn is BW correspondent based in India and actually loves his host country. At the same time, the media including foreign media has been extremely super-critical of C-I and it appears that somebody might have told Mr. Einhorn about Challenger or Columbia failures and that is not apple/orange comparisons and it might not be an official line as well, just some lower level engineer might have made a comment in passing perhaps (complete speculation on my part). ISRO needs a more confident and balanced PR. And not by pointing out NASA's weaknesses (that should be left to Blogs and forums like BR) but by pointing out that it was C-I was their brainchild and they coordinated the whole show and without C-I humans would be still left scratching their heads.
Last edited by Rahul M on 28 Sep 2009 13:38, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: no need to use url tags. forum SW will automatically create hotlinks for valid urls.
Reason: no need to use url tags. forum SW will automatically create hotlinks for valid urls.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Anyway, here's another example of a good potential experiment for Chandrayaan-2:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... -moon.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... -moon.html
But how do you extract water that is likely locked up as small concentrations of ice in the lunar soil? Microwaves could provide the key, according to work by Edwin Ethridge of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and William Kaukler of the University of Alabama, both in Huntsville, who first demonstrated the technique in 2006.
They used an ordinary microwave oven to zap simulated lunar soil that had been cooled to moon-like temperatures of -150 °C.
Keeping the soil in a vacuum to simulate lunar conditions, they found that heating it to just -50 °C with microwaves made the water ice sublimate, or transform directly from solid to vapour. The vapour then diffused out from higher-pressure pores in the soil to the low-pressure vacuum above.
On the moon, the vapour could be collected by holding a cold metal plate above the soil. The rising water vapour would then condense as frost onto the cold plate and "you could scrape it off", Kaukler says.
Baking and processing dry lunar soil at high temperatures could also release oxygen and hydrogen for rocket fuel or other uses. But that would take about 100 times as much energy as extracting them from native lunar water, Spudis says: "Everything becomes easier and cheaper and quicker."
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
SanjaySanjay M wrote:hey, very nice post, disha!
don't stay away then, keep up the information flow
now how can I get my idea submitted for orbital beamed power to help the new Indian rover explore the shadowed unlit areas where the most water and helium-3 would be?
I'm thinking a rectenna should be incorporated into the solar panels of the rover, to enable it to receive power beamed down from the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter, so that the rover can explore areas that don't receive direct solar illumination.
You could use beamed microwaves, or even beamed infrared for better power density since there's no atmospheric attenuation. Plus, ISRO could point to such beamed power technology as being useful for Earthly applications of receiving power beamed down from space.
-----
------
.
You may need to work out some details of your scheme to improve chances of catching the attention of isro.
I am thinking atleast:
-Power required by the rover ( you may have to make some assumptions here)
-size of the rectenna and its efficiency.
-size of the solar panel on orbiter
-What will be the revisit frequency of the orbit over the rover site.
-How much time will be available to transfer power in each orbit.
-How the microwave beam will be steered?
-
-
This looks (to me) as a high risk option.As the technology is new, and is untried.
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Not sure, but you will have to take the case via a college. Note that ISRO is under tremendous pressure to incorporate all sorts of payloads for C-II. It is like 543 MPs wanting a ride in a bus meant for 54 persons and one driver. And all 543 MPs are not GandhiansSanjay M wrote: Plus, ISRO could point to such beamed power technology as being useful for Earthly applications of receiving power beamed down from space.
How would you know that in that 10 seconds the rover has rolled into an irrecoverable crater? It at least needs to have enough smarts to resist commands that may put it in jeopardy. One has to prepare for a situation where a command is issued to move 1 meter forward, the rover does not respond, the driver issues the command again and the rover actually got two commands and has moved 2 meters forward. That is one scenario I could think off. With the rover driver not getting a feedback immediately, there are multiple things one has to train and prepare for.here's the latest news on the newly-added Indian rover:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/three ... er/522364/
Wow, sounds like they want to make another Spirit or Opportunity - isn't that overkill?
Why would you need machine vision, AI, etc, when they're only going to be about 4 light-seconds away, thus only giving 10secs roundtrip lightspeed delay at most? Can't we do regular remote control with 10secs delay? Send a command, wait 10secs for a response, send another command, etc.
On another note, this is the time to involve the IITs and IIScs and start developing some cutting edge technologies. If you are going there with 2 rovers, incl. a russian one, go with the cutting edge for yours!
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
Hmm talking about moon rovers found this info on the last Soviet Rover on moon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_2
The rover would run during the lunar day, stopping occasionally to recharge its batteries with the solar panels. At night the rover hibernated until the next sunrise, heated by the radioactive source.
* January 18, 1973 to January 24, 1973: The rover drives 1,260 metres
* February 8, 1973 to February 23, 1973: The rover drives 9,086 metres further
* March 11, 1973 to March 23, 1973: The rover drives 16,533 metres further
* April 9, 1973 to April 22, 1973: The rover drives 8,600 metres further
* May 8, 1973 to June 3, 1973: The rover drives 880 metres further
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
People, Just a query!
What do you know about the journalistic/editorial credibility of India Daily (http://www.indiadaily.com)? From what it appears in this article, ISRO guys know about extraterrestrial presence on the moon. I got this link for facebook's "Final Frontier"
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20879.asp
What do you know about the journalistic/editorial credibility of India Daily (http://www.indiadaily.com)? From what it appears in this article, ISRO guys know about extraterrestrial presence on the moon. I got this link for facebook's "Final Frontier"
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20879.asp
Re: Chandrayan-1 moon mission
edit.
Last edited by Rahul M on 28 Sep 2009 14:26, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: alien conspiracy theory ? no way !
Reason: alien conspiracy theory ? no way !