Why America Needs India’s Rockets • Hacker News Board

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#31

Post by drzaiusapelord » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:34 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #15

avar wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is because any mature rocket technology can trivially be adjusted to be a nuclear weapons delivery platform. By assisting India you're paying for their ICBM development. Maybe the line shouldn't be drawn at rockets, but unless you think we should have free & open markets for nuclear weapons I daresay you think the line should be drawn somewhere.

>> This is because any mature rocket technology can trivially be adjusted to be a nuclear weapons delivery platform. There is also the issue of maintaining the capability domestically. If someone else is too cheap it would destroy the local capability. Imagine the US losing the ability to launch it's own satellites - like it lost the ability to launch people. That said, there needs to be a way to make domestic launch…

> like it lost the ability to launch people.

The US has not remotely lost the ability to launch people in the context you're suggesting (lost knowledge, lost budget, lost political will). Its literally between launch systems. No knowledge or budget has been lost. On top of it, its doing what no other nation seems able to do, spark a space race between corporations with their own goals and cost-cutting measures. That's on top of NASA's incredible record of space science missions and robotic missions in the interim.

As far as the RD-180 issue goes, ULA buys those engines and re-packages them into domestic launch vehicles that create domestic jobs and keep the majority of the profits local. There's a big difference both practically and politically between this and having a foreign company launch your satellites. So India is not being treated that differently here.

That said, RD-180 purchasing is being phased out. The Delta IV is being retired and that only leaves the Atlas V, which I believe is no longer allowed to buy new engines since an earlier sale this year. That's on top of the Pentagon approving $162m to help fund the AR1 and BE-4 engines which will ultimately replace the RD-180 for the ULA.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#32

Post by quirkafleeg » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:34 PM UTC

throwaway-hn123 wrote: post #10

venomsnake wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only after we dismantle Pakistan and India nuclear weapons programs.

Sure, once we've done the same to US, Russia, China, France and the UK.

Leaving only North Korea and Israel?

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#33

Post by simula67 » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:35 PM UTC

rqebmm wrote: post #11

whack wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions that we already buy rockets from China/Russia. It's hard to imagine India as a bigger security threat than either of those countries.

India is less a security threat than a destabilization threat. I'm sure the US is more worried about them firing nukes at Pakistan than California.

Why is this concern not valid for China or Russia ?

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#34

Post by om42 » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:36 PM UTC

akshayB wrote: post #13

One of the things I always struggle to understand is whenever ISRO get mentioned people jump on US vs India salaries. We live in a world where globalization has changed everything. See what happened to Solar industry when China started dumping cheap solar panels across the global market. Auto manufacturing, software business and many other sectors it is a very common practice. If you have a target of launching someth…

TLDR: They're two different agencies that have different cabailities and responsibilities.

Other than logistics cost NASA's rockets have much higher payloads (think 100 tons vs 10 tons), number of rockets available, number of satellites launched into space (but I think ISRO technically has a better success rate), deep space missions and research(ISRO recently sent its first MARS rover), space stations, manned missions, NASA is also involved in aeronautics, and robots/rovers. Source: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-NASA-an...

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#35

Post by sremani » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:38 PM UTC

mmmBacon wrote: post #25

actuator wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know on what you are basing the destabilization threat on. India has a no first usage policy on nuclear weapons [1] and has shown no intent of using the weapons. Also in all the wars in which India was involved, it was never the aggressor. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_and_weapons_of_mass_dest...

The first strike policy is irrelevant in this context. What matters is capability and parity. If a country develops a nuclear capability that they didn't have before, in his case weapon delivery, this is proliferation. This puts pressure on other states to come to parity with that new capability. In this case that pressure would be likely on Pakistan.

This western view of Pakistani "parity" is mother of all nuisance. US literally funded Pakistani proliferation with billions of aid, which every one knew was being diverted, while those guys were hiding Osama in their cantonment. Yes, Pakistan would be eating grass if it were not Saudi and American aid.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#36

Post by sn41 » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:40 PM UTC

actuator wrote: post #29

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISRO salaries straight from glassdoor: Scientist/Engineer ₹802,100 Scientist/Engineer ₹798,473 So, 800k rupee is about $12,000 USD. NASA's avg engineer salary is 10x that. edit: NASA employees also get generous government benefits like pensions and such. Federal employee benefits are the envy of the nation. Not sure why you people are arguing against basic facts here. Salaries, cost of living, etc are a fraction in I…

Don't go on these numbers alone. There are a lot of other perks that you get when you work for a government organization or PSU in India. For example housing, transport, pension etc is all taken care by the organization.

Housing yes. Transport is taken care of only for official purposes. Only once in 2 years is a family travel paid for by LTC (IIRC). Pension is now more like the 401(k) in the US.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#37

Post by danielweber » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:43 PM UTC

aq3cn wrote: post #5

As much I know ISRO has less failure rate and they get the job with little budget in comparison to NASA or any other space agencies. This alone is the reason, one might be tempted to use Indian technology. > India's Mars mission, with a budget of $73 million, is far cheaper than comparable missions including NASA's $671 million Maven satellite that is expected to set off for Mars later in November. Source: http://www…

MOM and MAVEN were just about simultaneous (arriving at Mars two days apart), but they weren't comparable. MOM's primary mission objectives were things like "navigation." MAVEN would be NASA's 3rd orbiter at the time, to say nothing of the 4 or so previous orbiters, and so they weren't trying to just repeat earlier things.

Now, if you compare launch costs, you get a better feel for the differences. Those were about $43 million (MOM) to $187 million (MAVEN). But MAVEN was almost twice the mass.

SpaceX will give you a Falcon 9 Full Thrust launch, fixed price, for $62 million, which can launch something twice as big as MAVEN to Mars.

So SpaceX and India are price competitive on a kilogram-to-GTO basis.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#38

Post by pm90 » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:47 PM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #6

aq3cn wrote: post #5

As much I know ISRO has less failure rate and they get the job with little budget in comparison to NASA or any other space agencies. This alone is the reason, one might be tempted to use Indian technology. > India's Mars mission, with a budget of $73 million, is far cheaper than comparable missions including NASA's $671 million Maven satellite that is expected to set off for Mars later in November. Source: http://www…

You also have to consider that Indian salaries aren't remotely close to US salaries and other local factors. Software engineers make 12x what they make in India. The US can't just have a $73m mission considering the standard of living for engineers and managers here. ISRO is notoriously cheap even by Indian standards. Its probably not realistic to expect this type of pricing the same way the US can't mass produce thi…

This is a very important factor, for sure. Its very fortunate that the Indian education system does produce a lot of engineers. Quality is a problem, for sure, but I would argue it is much easier to train someone who has had some exposure to Math/Science than to start from scratch. This is one of the areas where India's large population and emphasis on education (specifically engineering) seems to be paying off very well.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#39

Post by LeifCarrotson » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:49 PM UTC

rajathagasthya wrote: post #22

avar wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is because any mature rocket technology can trivially be adjusted to be a nuclear weapons delivery platform. By assisting India you're paying for their ICBM development. Maybe the line shouldn't be drawn at rockets, but unless you think we should have free & open markets for nuclear weapons I daresay you think the line should be drawn somewhere.

> By assisting India you're paying for their ICBM development India is now part of MCTR (Missile Control Technology Regime) that limits ICBM development. So that's no longer a valid concern. Also, India has done well without the assistance of the US in space technology and will continue to do so. So if the US doesn't want to assist in technology, it's not going to be a show stopper for India. It will continue to eat…

> India is now part of MCTR (Missile Control Technology Regime) that limits ICBM development. So that's no longer a valid concern.

That's regime sounds like a great intent, but the simple fact is that taking a satellite launching rocket, replacing the satellite with a nuke, and aiming it back at the ground somewhere is trivial.

Re: Why America Needs India’s Rockets

#40

Post by pm90 » Thu, Nov 03, 2016, 3:53 PM UTC

gnipgnip wrote: post #16

Indian PSU research centers are well-known for being incompetent (including DRDO, CSIR, HAL...) [1]; in this ISRO is something of an oasis (or so I've heard). These orgs are generally neither nimble, nor particularly interested in acquiring talent, unlike their American competitors (or even NASA). Hiring is often one large nationwide JEE-like exam held once a year to recruit new engineers. Not surprisingly few Engine…

The assertions of incompetence of Indian PSU's are not without merit, although I think you are taking a rather pessimistic view of institutions.

First of all, there are a whole lot of talented engineers in India, simply because of the population itself. Few go to the top colleges that you speak of and graduating from there doesn't necessarily mean they are the "best". So you can't take a lack of graduates from those colleges as a sign of lack of competence.

Next, good institutions can take even "mediocre" people and enable them to do great work (Notice that I use "enable" and not "guarantee"). ISRO seems to have created such a culture, and as long as that tradition/culture continues, it should continue to do very well.