Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Indian Launch Vehicle Explodes After Lift-Off

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the christmas-setback dept.

Space 227

Indian communications satellite GSAT-5P was destroyed by the explosion of its launch vehicle, the Geostationary Satellite Launch Vehicle. The GSLV malfunctioned while still in its first phase of its Christmas launch, after less than a minute of flight. YouTube has a video of the explosion, taken from TV9 Kannada.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

hey, don't knock it (0, Troll)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#34665956)

On the plus side I'm sure it was cheap.

Re:hey, don't knock it (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34665966)

Right, because the Americans have done so much better with their hideously expensive ones:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster [wikimedia.org]
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster [wikimedia.org]

Your ignorance is astounding. (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666118)

You do realize that there's a pretty significant difference between the rockets used to put artificial satellites in orbit and the Space Shuttle, right?

We've been putting artificial satellites into orbit for over 50 years now. While it's complex, it isn't particularly difficult to do. There's a large base of accumulated knowledge on the subject, and these days it can generally be done flawlessly by many different nations and space programs.

The Space Shuttle, on the other hand, is so much more complex. America is the only nation that has been able to pull it off so far. Not only that, but it's not just sending some circuitry and solar panels into orbit. The Space Shuttle was dealing with real people who were to be returned safely. It's quite remarkable that in over 30 years and well over 100 launches there have only been two disasters.

To make a programming analogy that you can understand, this is basically the equivalent of India fucking up a simple "Hello World!" app. It's a fuck up that just shouldn't happen these days.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666176)

Thanks for putting that into perspective; I wish I had some mod points to bring that to light.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666202)

OK, but also consider the fact that India is still a great ways behind in a lot of things due to certain historical events...Let's say compared to Black Americans and civil rights/racism.

I'm not saying its OK for things to blow up, but India didn't get into the space game until recently compared to America and Russia. Your ignorance is shown by the fact that you compared "Hello World" code to launching something into space.

In a perfect world, this should not happen. But in a perfect world, Americans and Russians could also share what they've learned with the rest of the world to help prevent these disasters from happening.

Happy Holidays!!

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666682)

You don't want my rocket into space because I'm black, right?

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (5, Informative)

edremy (36408) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666526)

The Space Shuttle, on the other hand, is so much more complex. America is the only nation that has been able to pull it off so far.

Actually, we're one of two. The Soviet Buran [wikipedia.org] did fly successfully, albeit unmanned. It probably would have worked at least as well as the shuttle -they avoided some of the mistakes on the shuttle, such as using solid rocket boosters and mounting the main engines on the shuttle itself, but the USSR ran out of cash in the late 80s.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (2)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666708)

I'd say - unfortunately. The Buran project was pursued primarily because of some misplaced notion of "strategic parity" - mostly pushed by some ignorant Soviet generals paranoid about (nonexistent...) advantage given by the Space Transportation System. Even within the concept of reusable spaceplane (not necessarily a good idea in general), the Soviet engineers wanted to go elsewhere [wikipedia.org] .

They did do it more sensibly - Energia-approach was basically an Ares V-like one, from the start. But it also meant cancellation of N-1 - second version of which was almost ready (with problems of the first one understood, so maybe v2 would be fine) - before it could give any results. And I wouldn't be too surprised if the Soviets / Russians could maintain (using less than what what Buran cost them) a small Lunar base for the last ~3 decades, if not for few setbacks which meant they lost the Moon Race (as a bonus: in such case US would probably try to reach for the next "big mission", so we would possibly had an Apollo-style Mars landings by now; more fun all-around)

Well, one could say that provoking them to do the Buran (with its costs) was the true goal of STS. In which case it has done its job a long time ago / why was it allowed to suck NASA dry for the past 2 decades? (while not providing anything as advertised)

At least we got Zenit out of Energia-Buran, appears to be most cost-effective launcher around...

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666536)

A 1 in 50 failure rate (catastrophic failure at that, resulting in complete loss of crew and vehicle) is pretty terrible when you consider what the Shuttle costs to build and prep for launch. This thing was never cost effective, especially when they have a tendency to blow up.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666586)

Given the risk and complexity involved and the fact that we are sending human beings into inhospitable parts of the universe, I think that's a damn good failure rate. Compare it to, say, ships lost during the colonization days some centuries ago.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (2)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666672)

The only trouble with that confidence is that in the case of both shuttle disasters, it was not fundamentally difficult technology or circumstances but poor design & politics [wikimedia.org] , and old parts & bad communication [wikimedia.org] that caused them. While I'm sure there were cases of senseless politicians sending ill-equipped ships to sea in the fifteenth century, I'm pretty sure fundamental inadequacies of technology (navigation, weather prediction, construction) explain the majority of disasters. In the case of the shuttle, we could have avoided them, but we didn't. It's the program management that deserves most of the blame, yes, but you can still argue that with better technology (that was available at the time), the problems would never have arisen.

Re:Your ignorance is astounding. (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666610)

Its still rocket science and that is a dangerous field, also the rotten old shuttles may be more complex, but at the end of the day they are strapped to the same style bottle rockets

Re:hey, don't knock it (4, Insightful)

puto (533470) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666194)

Other than those two, and a few other mishaps, the US has been putting people in space and bringing them back safely for over 40 years.

Re:hey, don't knock it (5, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666208)

Other than those two, and a few other mishaps,

      So what you're saying is that if we exclude every event where things went wrong, the US has a perfect record?

      Tell me something, do you work for the Federal Reserve?

Re:hey, don't knock it (1)

Linuxmonger (921470) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666584)

Until I have empirical evidence, it didn't happen, it's all hollywood, smoke, and big mirrors.

Rocket Science (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34665958)

Some of it is just statistics. Better luck next time.

Video in English (4, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 3 years ago | (#34665974)

A much better video in English here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH-0OH0MI2Y [youtube.com]

Re:Video in English (1, Insightful)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666070)

Not really. They both suck... Where's the unedited version?

Re:Video in English (5, Funny)

Minwee (522556) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666082)

Wikileaks has the one where you can see aliens shoot down the rocket.

Re:Video in English (5, Funny)

davester666 (731373) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666270)

Well, the unedited one shows the rocket continuing on into space properly. This video is just for the insurance company...

Re:Video in English (5, Informative)

Hynee (774168) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666134)

So it looks like the GSLV yawed beyond limits, upper stages (I think stage 3 plus payload) broke off (0:34 [youtube.com] on video), then stage 1+2 kept going, initially with decreased yaw (it got knocked back on course upon stage 3 separation), but then increasing yaw until 0:45 [youtube.com] when stage 2 broke away from stage 1 and the strap-ons broke off too.
The orange cloud at 0:45 should be the hypergolics in the strap-on boosters, I believe that's what caused the orange cloud in the Challenger disaster.
According to the wiki article on the GSLV's predecessor [wikipedia.org] the first stage injects chemicals (aqueous strontium perchlorate solution) into the nozzle to control yaw. I wonder if this has been problematic in the past?

Re:Video in English (1)

Nirvelli (851945) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666616)

At one point the guy on the phone mentioned a plumbing problem with the last rocket which lead to them detonating it (for safety reasons).
So the injected chemical problem makes sense.

Re:Video in English (1)

Nirvelli (851945) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666628)

Yeah, from the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] :

A defective propellant regulator of the fourth strap-on motor caused asymmetric thrust on the vehicle, steering it off course and consequently the self destruct feature was deployed as a safety measure.

Fireworks! (4, Interesting)

nickovs (115935) | more than 3 years ago | (#34665984)

Pretty!!! That's one expensive fireworks display that they put on for Christmas!

Seriously though, the GSLV seems to have a pretty poor success rate; this is the third of five operational launches to fail.

Re:Fireworks! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666090)

3 out of 5 aint bad considering we had TONS of failures before we successfully launched a man into space, even a few afterwards.

They're learning how we learned.

Re:Fireworks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666102)

Shouldn't they be able to learn from our mistakes?

Re:Fireworks! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666122)

Well, there have been dozens and dozens of successful Indian launches in the past, only this particular rocket series (GSLV) has a low success rate (2/5). The SLV, PSLV, and others have been remarkably successful.

And that aside, "learning from your mistakes" is only possible if you give them the tech and details of your launches, which is not happening at the moment.

Re:Fireworks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666246)

Agreed on your last comment. No matter how much America wants the world to become this utopia, it won't ever happen until this type of helpful information is shared. Too bad it all comes down to military technology and egos.

Privatize the space program already!! Whos in??

Re:Fireworks! (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666532)

You nuts? You know where private corporations would manufacture those rockets? Think for a moment before you say something like that!

Besides, ponder for a moment what that would lead to. First, mothball every idea you had about space exploration. There is no profit in that. Second, drop any notion that information would be shared. Should they stumble upon a new propulsion system, rest assured that it will be patent-bound before the first prototype comes close to making its first cough. Third, unless it's regulated like crazy (and then rest assured it will be heavily lobbied against), pollution and space littering will skyrocket. Exhaust from rockets ain't really "green", even with NASA's efforts to make it "greener". Don't think that private enterprise would. And since it's up in the stratosphere or beyond, who cares about it? It will spread so thinly across the globe that, by the time we notice it, we can't do jack about it anymore anyway. And since there is zero profit in cleaning up the exhausted stages, they'll orbit for a while 'til they come down ... somewhere. Oh, sure, they have to be disposed orderly, but ... let's ponder for a moment... chance to hit something and kill a few people, price to pay when it hits a few people, price to pay to make it really reenter controlled ... let's see what's cheaper.

Oh, and finally, I would not really sell an astronaut a life insurance anymore. The same applies here: What's cheaper? Ensuring the one you have stays alive or hiring and training a new one? What's the price of an astronaut, does anyone know? He better pray that this training is expensive enough that the corporation has any interest that his reentry vehicle really works. Or, in other words, I wouldn't ask for too high a salary, it might be interesting if they didn't have to pay it...

Re:Fireworks! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666476)

It ain't been on Wikileaks yet and spies are so terribly expensive. Not to mention that it's cheaper to blow up a few rockets than to risk a spy being caught and to piss of the US that way. Their rockets work, ya know...

Re:Fireworks! (4, Insightful)

crymeph0 (682581) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666120)

First rule of spaceflight #9: Most of your early attempts end in tears. I hope to see India's space program try, try again until they get it right, and not let the inevitable early failures dampen their spirit. With the United States government bound and determined to cede our #1 status as a spacefaring nation (unless Elon Musk already has designs for a rocket capable of taking us beyond the moon), I can only hope another democracy like India, and not a fascist regime like China, takes the lead.

Re:Fireworks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666344)

No, that excuse only works for the ones who PIONEER a new technology. When you invent something brand new--then yes, you are permitted to make a million mistakes. But if you invent nothing and only repeat what NASA invented in the 1960s, then tons of failures implies that you are sloppy idiots who have no concept of quality. After the solution to common problems becomes common knowledge, failures in that regard represent laziness, stupidity and inattention to detail. The Indian Space organization appears to suffer multiple failures because its employees are sloppy and have gaping holes in their understanding of the subject matter.

Re:Fireworks! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666386)

You are a fucking moron. As though NASA shares technology and mission details with ISRO! In fact, ISRO was put on the American "entity list" (meaning, denied access to information and tech) as early as the 1970s after India conducted a nuclear test. Considering that, what ISRO has achieved is almost as good as inventing it from the bottom up, with severe constraints in resources and funds.

Therefore, a) You are a fucking moron, and b) ISROs track record of the prior successful launches, including a rocket to the moon, reinforces the fact that you are a fucking moron.

Re:Fireworks! (3, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666114)

Seriously though, the GSLV seems to have a pretty poor success rate; this is the third of five operational launches to fail.

It is their most ambitious booster to date, and AFAIK, it has more 'indigenous' technology than previous systems. If the Indians are like everybody else, they're gonna go boom for a while.

It is Rocket Science.

While that's true (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666370)

It looks like they need to do a serious evaluation on it. While it might just be implementation issues, the kind of thing you can work out as you get better, perhaps it is also just not a very good design. At this point I think it needs some serious evaluation.

Re:Fireworks! (3, Interesting)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666388)

It is Rocket Science.

Not really. As companies like SpaceX have shown, these days it's more rocket engineering than science. The basic principles are well known, the biggest hurdle seems to be quality control on a huge number of parts.

LOL (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34665986)

Americans still can't spell Canada!

Re:LOL (2, Funny)

jaypifer (64463) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666064)

Of course we can, it's our biggest state.

Re:LOL (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666190)

To be fair, Canadians have it easier, just put eh after every letter.

Re:LOL (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666430)

Wehhehaehteh dehoeh yehoehueh meheehaehneh behyeh tehhehaehteh, eh?

Too much propellant (-1, Troll)

bhodikhan (894485) | more than 3 years ago | (#34665994)

Too much curry. They need to work on the propellant mixture a bit.

Everyone focuses on the engine.... (4, Interesting)

fotbr (855184) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666022)

And completely misses the fact that several seconds before the first stage goes up in a fireball, the top of the rocket falls off and collides with the first stage.

Someone forgot to apply the indian version of lok-tite to some mating ring bolts. :)

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (2)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666112)

And completely misses the fact that several seconds before the first stage goes up in a fireball, the top of the rocket falls off and collides with the first stage.

It fell off because the rocket started pitching over . . . likely due to the engine.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (1)

SETIGuy (33768) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666290)

And completely misses the fact that several seconds before the first stage goes up in a fireball, the top of the rocket falls off and collides with the first stage.

It fell off because the rocket started pitching over . . . likely due to the engine.

Maybe. It's hard to tell from the video. Another possibility is a structural or airframe failure near max-Q. The vehicle is noticeably bent. Whether it is bent because it is not heading into the relative airflow, or if the bend it what is causing it to pitch away from the direction of motion, it's hard to say.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (4, Funny)

Sanat (702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666116)

Maybe they did not realize the gravity of the situation.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (1)

Kagura (843695) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666356)

There's that word again; "heavy". Why are things so heavy in the future? Is there a problem with the earth's gravitational pull?

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666562)

Most definitly! During the last year, it increased a lot.

At least my bathroom scales say so.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (4, Interesting)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666144)

And completely misses the fact that several seconds before the first stage goes up in a fireball, the top of the rocket falls off and collides with the first stage.

Someone forgot to apply the indian version of lok-tite to some mating ring bolts. :)

More likely the explosive bolts exploded a wee bit early....

From what I've been able to gather from the commentary and looking at the clip a bunch of times, it looks like it lost attitudinal control first, then the upper stage failed. Can't be sure exactly when the RSO blew the rocket up, but I think it occurs much later in the sequence when it's clear that the booster failed. Typically an errant booster is given a bit of time to fall apart before it's blown up as the destruct sequence is manual and one would like to get some video of what failed before everything turns into a bunch of expensive fireworks.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (0)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666152)

And completely misses the fact that several seconds before the first stage goes up in a fireball, the top of the rocket falls off and collides with the first stage.

Someone forgot to apply the indian version of lok-tite to some mating ring bolts. :)

Or maybe the problem was they DID apply the Indian version of lok-tite.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (2)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666182)

The ISRO mentions a "large altitude error"; I'm no rocket scientist, but if I had to guess I'd say that the first stage stopped thrusting evenly, causing the GSLV to veer off course and the errant rocket was destroyed for safety reasons. Or the resulting torque from the offset thrust vector tore the second stage off.

There are also reports of locals finding hunks of charred reindeer throughout the region, but I'd chalk that up to coincidence.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666222)

They're not designed to fly sideways. Can't say that American rockets fare any better in those circumstances.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (1)

TehBlahhh (947819) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666338)

Neither do the french ones.

This looks on the surface similar to the Ariane-5 failure in '96. Which, as we all know, was eventually traced to an unprotected 64-bit double to 16-bit integer conversion overflow ...

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (2)

vandelais (164490) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666390)

Wile E Coyote begs to differ.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666378)

The engine lost power and the stack lost its gravitational hold. What you saw was still caused by the loss of power in the engines.

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666520)

The expert dude in the video said they triggered destruction after loosing control of the rocket. Makes sense...

Re:Everyone focuses on the engine.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666602)

So basically, the front fell off?

The music was cool (0)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666024)

Really goes with the video...

Uh... (1)

dragonhunter21 (1815102) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666066)

Merry Christmas?

the problem in hindsight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666086)

Was a failure to do the needful. If the needful had been done, this would not have happened.

Re:the problem in hindsight (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666094)

+1 ironic

At least tech support is a local call (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666138)

Just sayin'

Re:At least tech support is a local call (0, Flamebait)

BangaIorean (1848966) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666148)

And here comes the first moron with a call center joke. Well, some things never change...

Re:At least tech support is a local call (1)

Dolphinzilla (199489) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666280)

it was still funny! OK - so yeah maybe its an unfair stereotype but it is so rare that any phone call I make to any kind of call center isn't met by someone who is obviously Indian - it is inevitable that the joke was coming.....

Re:At least tech support is a local call (2)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666604)

You gotta expect a bit of venom there. You call for tech support and the very first thing they do is lie to you. About their NAME or all things. How well can a call go when you can't even get past the hellos before the lies start? Just to top it off, it's an insultingly transparent lie.

Re:At least tech support is a local call (2)

gtall (79522) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666540)

Hello! Hmmm...you say it blew up. Here's what you could try:

1. Could you try rebooting? Oh, it's already blown up.

2. How about reinstalling your software? Ah, no machine left to reinstall into.

3. Please contact your manufacturer. You may have to mail in the remains.

Re:At least tech support is a local call (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666566)

And they might even understand what they're saying! Though, I doubt that will increase the quality a lot.

Interpretation (1)

Framboise (521772) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666140)

Viewing the video, I had the impression that the first stage was unable to keep the rocket straight, which caused a high lateral pressure on the rocket, especially at the top. The top was then taken off by this lateral wind. For a long time the rocket kept the same inclination angle but was progressively destroyed.
So the destruction appears to have been caused by a power drop in the first stage, not by a direct explosion.

   

Not surprising (2, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666174)

My experience with teaching students from India is that they do great on the theory, but in the lab not watch out.

Re:Not surprising (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666184)

My experience with teaching students from India is that they do great on the theory, but in the lab not watch out.

And here we have a pompous ass who extrapolates his "teaching experience" to rocket launches. So, Mr. Pompous Ass, what about the dozens of past successful Indian launches? How does your "teaching theory" account for that, eh moron?

Re:Not surprising (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666226)

That even pompous asses are right once in a while?

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666266)

KABOOM!

Re:Not surprising (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666448)

People like to sling around implications of racism, but the fact is it has everything to do with culture.

For example, consider the difference between students raised in Asia, and students of Asian decent raised in the west. The students raised in Asia (and not necessarily Asian themselves) cheat like hell because doing well in school is *extraordinary* important in Asia. Students who were raised in the west were not raised in this extreme pressure, and are on average more honest (or at least act more ashamed of their cheating).

This phenomenon is well documented. Posting as AC, because people will undoubtedly attempt to slander this as "racist" as well.

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666228)

My experience with Indians has been that they're like everyone else, but smellier...

Of course, I'm not proposing lack of personal hygiene as a cause of the rocket failure. Let's let the Indians look at the telemetry and figure it out shall we?

Probably... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666178)

blackberrys fault...

Why's it so hard to get this thing in orbit? (1)

Scutter (18425) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666196)

Why's it so hard to get this thing in orbit? I mean, it's not rocket scie.....wait a minute...

Re:Why's it so hard to get this thing in orbit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666248)

time to deploy the far side mug I feel...

http://www.lechatnoirboutique.com/proddetail.php?prod=FSRS

Go home... (1)

Baldrson (78598) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666200)

...they need you.

Re:Go home... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666238)

If we go home, who will help America launch its rockets/satellites then? :)

Re:Go home... (1)

Baldrson (78598) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666322)

Yeah I agree that the Apollo program might not have failed if only the 1965 Act had been a few decades sooner. But we got over that xenophobia and, with your help, overcame that failure born of inbreeding and went on to colonize the solar system with a booming economy!

But sacrifices must be made...

No surprise.. this is india after all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666234)

I hate to say it but my careful observation (having worked with this particular ethnic group in the last 15 years) says that this culture is not ready for such things yet.

This is largely because:

1) Typical Indian culture tries to do things themselves regardless of whether they know how to do it or not

2) Rather than employing the knowledge base of resources that ARE familiar with such things (can we say, russia, korean or european specialists), as consultants they figure "Hey we are 70% of the consultant workforce anyway.. We can do it ourselves!!!).. sorry guys.. but this isnt someone elses outsourced tech support

3) In response to the above, its likely that said resources simply arent allured to living in india (at this time).. Again no surprise. I suspect as india matures into a more developed nation, this stigma will vanish (hey..most indians will be in america.. Indian real estate will be fairgame to develop into "REAL" estate (apologies for the pun.. i couldnt help it)

I hope someone reading this will ignore the satire and focus on what little wisdom is in this post. I judge not a people by the actions of a few.... I judge a nation by the example set by many

cheers
-crim

 

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (4, Insightful)

BangaIorean (1848966) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666274)

Then, you'll probably explain how India managed to launch 30+ rockets successfully in the past, and launched one rocket successfully to the moon as well?

See, this is what I detest about Americans. The sheer smugness, ignorance, arrogance and incredible lack of knowledge is mind boggling. We have all this careful "analysis" and "observation" in the parent's post, and I'll bet my ass that this chap didn't know anything about the past record of the Indian space program and simply jumped in to post an inane comment, assuming that "hey, it's Eeeendiaaa, them tech support guys, laaats of them can't speak proper English, so how can they launch rockets?" Disgusting.

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666400)

We're not all like that.

Unfortunately the vocal idiots make us look much worse than most of us really are.

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666446)

It's shit stinking jinglys like you that I personally find disgusting, try taking a shower for once. Oh wait, you don't know what those are (unless its the brown variety from a cows anus).

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (0)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666484)

Then, you'll probably explain how India managed to launch 30+ rockets successfully in the past, and launched one rocket successfully to the moon as well?

Didn't India get most of its rocket technology from the USSR?

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (1, Interesting)

BangaIorean (1848966) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666588)

Certainly not. A few components, early on in ISROs history - sure. But not "most of it". Remember that India's foreign policy leaned towards the Soviets while being "non-aligned" officially, but neither did India have a Warsaw pact kind of treaty with them, nor was India ever communist, and the Soviets never fully trusted India. There was no way the Soviets would have given us full fledged space tech. From their perspective, there was no guarantee that in India's democratic model, the pro-capitalist opposition parties would not gain strength some day, making India move closer to the USA. In the eventuality of such an event, unlike East European countries, the Soviets, having no influence within India, would have been able to do nothing to prevent such a course of events.

Anyhow, this is irrelevant to the discussion here. I was just pointing out the stupidity of the grandparent post.

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (2)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666608)

Certainly not. A few components, early on in ISROs history - sure. But not "most of it".

According to this article, the earlier versions of this rocket used Russian engines, and they lost another one in April due to replacing Russian engines with Indian engines:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indigenous-engines-bring-down-GSLV/articleshow/5814028.cms [indiatimes.com]

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (1)

sgage (109086) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666582)

I'm an American, and I detest some, maybe even many, Americans for much the same reasons that the rest of the world does. But we're not all like that - imagine how disgusted and embarrassed we are about some of the crap done in the name of the US?

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (2, Insightful)

luis_a_espinal (1810296) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666624)

Then, you'll probably explain how India managed to launch 30+ rockets successfully in the past, and launched one rocket successfully to the moon as well?

See, this is what I detest about Americans. The sheer smugness, ignorance, arrogance and incredible lack of knowledge is mind boggling. We have all this careful "analysis" and "observation" in the parent's post, and I'll bet my ass that this chap didn't know anything about the past record of the Indian space program and simply jumped in to post an inane comment, assuming that "hey, it's Eeeendiaaa, them tech support guys, laaats of them can't speak proper English, so how can they launch rockets?" Disgusting.

Either you are that stupid to not realize not all Americans are like, or you have been waiting for a "good" opportunity to level a disgusting generalization of us. Either way, you are not that much better from those you seek to criticize. I've meet quite a few tards from your own country (and from Pakistan) that claim as scientific stupid shit like the Romans couldn't do arithmetic while the Indians of the time could or some other inane shit to prop themselves above every other single race in the world.

It would never cross my mind to think about generalizing that stupidity over all people of your country. Guess why? It's called brains. You (and I mean you Bangalorean), you might be educated, but intelligent and decent, you are not. Until you realize how stupid it is to generalize, you will never be.

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (1)

Mysteray (713473) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666640)

Meh.

People everywhere are short-sighted, mistake-making, bozos if you expect too much of them. We Americans have spent the last century parading around the globe talking about how high our ideals are. Often I've been in agreement with them, but we shouldn't be surprised if people hold us to some kinds of standards.

See, this is what I detest about Americans.

Detest, hate, these are very strong words. LIfe's too short to feel that way about anyone, if you can help it.

Re:No surprise.. this is india after all (1)

Mysteray (713473) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666652)

Then, you'll probably explain how India managed to launch 30+ rockets successfully in the past, and launched one rocket successfully to the moon as well?

Oh come on. You can't possibly expect everyone to know that.

Those aren't nearly as interesting as the one that exploded on YouTube.

PAKI-SABOTAGE !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666236)

Alasondro Alegré has blogged on this at ill.com. He has the proof !!

Kanada! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666310)

I didn't know Indian had a Canada.

Re:Kanada! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666574)

They do, it's just spelled "Pakistan".

Re:Kanada! (1)

mano.m (1587187) | more than 3 years ago | (#34666706)

No, that's more of India's al-Qaeda. Or everyone's, really.

Collided with Santa Claus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666434)

Collided with Santa Claus

Indian rocket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666534)

GSLV [wikipedia.org] success rate of less than 3/7

The youtube video seems to show the normally arrow straight vapor trail weaving noticeably prior to the explosion, suggesting lost of attitude control.

I think the problem with Indian enterprises is that too many components are likely sourced from outside the country, and too many cooks spoil the broth.
If you can't even make your own say fasteners, it's going to come back and bite you at some point.

land of smelly retards, and proud of it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666576)

what do you expect from a country that has shit all over it?

Re:land of smelly retards, and proud of it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666650)

Hmm, here's one more of our countrymen who's working hard to make our country more hated in the world than it already is. India happens to be the only major country in Asia which still has an overwhelmingly positive perception of the US (over 65% as per surveys), but jackasses like this guy are trying hard to reverse that and earn us the title of "the universally hated nation". Seriously moron, get a life.

testing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34666684)

it's just like my boss was telling me the other day "test more frequently and thoroughly, cuz ur shit's unstable"

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?