Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

isro.gov.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 542 posts

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#181

Post by ganteth »

TuringNYC wrote: post #163

Firstly - congratulations to the whole team on this achievement I'm also curious - Why the south pole of the moon? does it have an added significance vs other locations on the moon? - Is a landing on the south pole more difficult to achieve? Seems so according to this article: https://www.reuters.com/science/why-are-space-agencies-racin...

Moon undergoes extreme temperature fluctuations from day to night, resulting in boil off. There are spots on the South Pole that never see sunlight, so it’s our best bet for finding large deposits of water (as ice).

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#182

Post by bambax »

legends2k wrote: post #179
bambax wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the point that the US already put people on the moon I didn't mention the US and I'm not from the US (I'm French). Humanity landed on the moon. Over 50 years ago. If a country today built a 1969 computer I wouldn't marvel at the achievement. And yes, sure, there are probably many instruments on board. But you can tell from the video -- and all the excitement here as well -- that this is mainly political and p…

South pole is unexplored and no one has ever landed there, manned or unmanned. Exploring the unexplored isn't science?

The moon is NOT unexplored. That's my point actually. Should we explore every inch of it?

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#185

Post by moopie »

bambax wrote: post #177
jshmrsn wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the point that the US already put people on the moon… but how can you possibly make the leap that there can be no scientific value to additional unmanned laboratories and instruments landing on the moon? Especially since this represents increasing the number of countries who can contribute to this scientific endeavor? If the US elects a president who is not interested in lunar science or has economic problems,…

> I get the point that the US already put people on the moon I didn't mention the US and I'm not from the US (I'm French). Humanity landed on the moon. Over 50 years ago. If a country today built a 1969 computer I wouldn't marvel at the achievement. And yes, sure, there are probably many instruments on board. But you can tell from the video -- and all the excitement here as well -- that this is mainly political and p…

You can use the “isn’t there anything better to do” towards literally anything

Why not this though

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#186

Post by sidcool »

actuator wrote: post #166
sidcool wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A T20 cricket match has 21 million peak views. So still low I would say.

More people are interested in sports than space landings, who would have thought

I like the sarcasm, but just wanted to put a perspective on numbers. India has a very different scale when compared to other countries.

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#187

Post by bandyaboot »

user_7832 wrote: post #91
confuseddesi wrote: post #75

It’s landed! Congratulations to India on this great achievement!

It’s brilliant! I think most Indians were really disappointed after the last failure, so it’s really reassuring that despite shooting further we were successful!

Just makes success that much sweeter. Well done India!

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#188

Post by dotnet00 »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #106
confuseddesi wrote: post #75

It’s landed! Congratulations to India on this great achievement!

Why such a long political speech and no views from onboard camera?

Unfortunately all the national space agencies seem to suffer from this. Both NASA and ESA also seem to think that people are tuning in to watch the smarmy politician talk rather than the robot making its way to space/landing on another body.

Had the same issue with JWST for example.

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#189

Post by throwaway4220 »

The_Colonel wrote: post #28
jvm___ wrote: post #12

Scott Manly has a video on why he thinks the last one failed. It sounds like their landing software didn't have "oh crap, we're way off course, just land wherever". It only had the happy path of "fly to here and land", so when it switched to the landing phase it tried valiently (including flying upside down) to try to fly back to the landing zone, but the landing zone was much further than fuel supplies allowed. Hope…

Not considering such a basic error condition seems like a gross omission. This can't even come from the software engineering, but must be some kind of managerial failure (e.g. we're short on time, but have to report great progress to my boss, so skip this scenario).

No that’s a bit unfair. ISRO, Israel, and Japan all had reasons for their failures that were mainly technical

Re: Chandrayaan-3 Soft-landing [video]

#190

Post by pjc50 »

b800h wrote: post #154
0xcafecafe wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The aid is not sent to the government but some chosen NGOs. India has said aid is not needed: https://icai.independent.gov.uk/html-version/uk-aid-to-india... .

Yes, I think they described it as 'peanuts'. It's in the form of investment as well, but if they don't want it and we can't afford it, it's odd that it carries on. I'm sure it's a complex matter.

I mean, we certainly can afford it, far more so than e.g. PPE Medpro, but it's worth questioning what it's actually for. Which will require more granularity than "India", since it's not going to the Indian government.
Post reply on HN