backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 150 comment(s) - last by sld.. on Nov 26 at 10:19 AM
Indian scientists say they meant to do that and hope for a future "soft" landing

Going to the moon is old news to most Americans after we sent a manned mission to Earth's satellite in the 1960's. Since then, several other countries have sent unmanned missions to the moon to study the satellite, but no one has yet replicated America's manned landing.

India has now joined the small cadre of nations to send unmanned missions to the moon including the U.S., China, Russia, ESA, and Japan. India launched its moon mission in October sending its spacecraft called Chandrayaan-1 towards the moon with a lunar probe onboard.

The probe was sent hurtling towards the surface of the moon to an eventual crash landing in the Shackleton crater on the moon's south pole. The lander was emblazoned with the Indian flag and hit the surface of the moon moving at about 3,100 miles per hour.

Indian scientists say that the crash was planned and that they will use the data collected by the probe during its descent to plan a future soft landing on the moon. The descent to the surface took 25-minutes according to Space.com. Instruments on the probe included a video imaging system, radar altimeter and a mass spectrometer.

The video system took pictures of the moon during the decent while the altimeter measured the rate of decent and the mass spectrometer studied the thin atmosphere on the moon. India released some raw images taken and said that it had not yet begun to analyze the data returned by the probe. India has plans to land a rover on the moon in 2011 and hopes to one day send a manned mission.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By arazok on 11/17/2008 2:50:44 PM , Rating: 5
When asked what they discovered from this probe, a scientists was quoted as saying “We discovered that 3,100 MPH is too fast to land on the surface of the Moon.”.

In other news, Indian scientists discovered that the chainsaw is ineffective when performing open-heart surgery...




RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Lord 666 on 11/17/2008 3:00:18 PM , Rating: 5
Or in other words its interesting that with 2008 technology the Indian team were not able to pull off a soft landing, but the US did it on the first try back in 1969?


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Mitch101 on 11/17/2008 3:07:33 PM , Rating: 5
That's what happens when you outsource your space program.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By othercents on 11/17/2008 3:29:24 PM , Rating: 3
I don't understand why data like this couldn't be shared between all space agencies. Really does every space agency have to crash a probe into the moon just to verify the data that is already available?

Other


By snownpaint on 11/17/2008 5:13:25 PM , Rating: 2
I said the same thing, jokingly, about aliens visiting earth.. Hopo: "There is a Federation of Aliens and even if one visits Earth, the rest have to 'just' say they were here." I used this example to explain a topic debate between friends as to why aliens keep landing on earth (over the decades) and why their spaceship descriptions are different. We debate stupid ideas sometimes..


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Sahkuhnder on 11/17/2008 5:17:40 PM , Rating: 3
India didn't crash a probe into the moon to verify the data. It did it to wipe out a UFO base!

India Daily: Will India reveal the existence of the UFO bases in the moon?

http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20219.asp

"But there is a major debate in process within Indian Government and Indian Space Research Organization. The debate is on telling the truth to the world about the existence of the UFO bases in the moon."

LMFAO!


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By ashishmishra on 11/17/2008 6:10:03 PM , Rating: 2
ROFL, that is hilarious. I seriously hope there wasn't an actual debate but just some maverick journalism.


By Souka on 11/17/2008 7:07:56 PM , Rating: 3
Oh my... I thought the term "maverick" ended with the election...


By FireSnake on 11/18/2008 2:57:13 AM , Rating: 2
Couldn't of said better myself! Rated you up. I guess they are just being selfish :-/


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By JonnyDough on 11/17/2008 3:52:57 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Indian scientists say that the crash was planned and that they will use the data collected by the probe during its decent to plan a future soft landing on the moon.


Did you mean " descent ?"

This is what happens when you outsource your blogs.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By FaceMaster on 11/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Xavitar on 11/17/2008 6:51:02 PM , Rating: 5
Nod for the Descent reference!


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By FaceMaster on 11/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By JonnyDough on 11/17/2008 9:21:37 PM , Rating: 3
I remember the game. :-)


By GreenEnvt on 11/18/2008 10:56:23 AM , Rating: 2
I played so much Descent1/2/3 over the years. Lan parties all over north america.
Went to the Descent3 $50,000 tournament, won a bunch of prizes.
Loved that series.


By foolsgambit11 on 11/17/2008 4:00:44 PM , Rating: 2
He obviously knows the difference, and just misspelled it - it's correctly spelled at the beginning of the next sentence.

Give him credit for using the correct 'its', though.


By swampjelly on 11/18/2008 9:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's what happens when you outsource your space program.


The first two responses were definitely 5's, but the this one is an ELEVEN!!


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By omnicronx on 11/17/2008 3:29:01 PM , Rating: 5
The US did exactly the same thing with the Ranger program before they attempted a soft landing with the Surveyor program.

And just so you know, the first 6 missions were considered failures. It was not until their 7th mission that they managed to impact the moon on purpose with functional sensors.

The Appollo missions were the third set of the missions to the moon. 9 probe missions (Ranger program), 7 landing missions and 3 full manned missions to the moon (without landing) were completed before Neil Armstrong walked on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission.

I'm not trying to make it out as though the Apollo based missions were not a thing of greatness, especially since they did it 40 years ago, but don't make it out as though it took them one try to send a probe to the moon and one try to send man to the moon, because this is just not the case.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By FITCamaro on 11/17/2008 3:32:17 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah but the internet didn't exist then so no one could make fun of them. Now we have that luxury. :)


By omnicronx on 11/17/2008 3:35:54 PM , Rating: 4
Haha

At least you are being honest =D


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Solandri on 11/17/2008 4:00:40 PM , Rating: 3
Just to fill out the history, the Soviets first succeeded in hitting the moon with Luna 2 in 1959. Almost 50 years ago.

In fairness to the countries following the U.S. and Soviets, the fact that it's been done means there isn't as much to be learned anymore. So there's less compelling reason to repeat it, harder to get the approval of the bean counters.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Netscorer on 11/17/2008 9:20:48 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
...Since then, several other countries have sent unmanned missions to the moon to study the satellite...


Who needs true history when you live in America... Soviets won race to the first sputnik in cosmos(1957), the first sputnik to the moon(1959), the first man in cosmos(1961), the first spacewalk (1965), the first earth orbital station (1971). They lost the first man to the moon by the hairline and yet all we hear about is how Americans were the first to achieve this.
I had a privilege of meeting Aleksiy Leonov - the first cosmonaut to walk in space and he was telling me how USSR was ready to send the first man to the moon even if it was meant to be a tragedy, but Korolev (chief architect of the USSR space program) fought to prevent it, knowing that the procedure of returning cosmonauts back to the earth from the moon surface was not yet finished. Then there were several disastrous launches in a row and the rest is history...


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Duwelon on 11/17/2008 9:58:32 PM , Rating: 5
The truth is the Moon was the biggest prize of them all. Going around the world was huge, as was the first successful launch into outer space, but unless your fetish is reaching orbit, getting to the moon was THE milestone, and the USA happened get there and back successfully.

Besides, Russia proved how much success can be had when you're willing to forgoe a lot of safety measures and badly designed projects. Russia has a ruthless history of short cuts in their technology just to achieve results at the cost of lives. A graphite controlled nuclear power plant called Chernobyl is another example of Russian engineering.

I do admire Russian technology advances, but they are no USA.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By rudolphna on 11/17/2008 10:55:29 PM , Rating: 2
the problem with chernobyl wasnt an engineering problem. The problem was that they were refueling one of the reactors. While they were refueling, they were also running a drill that, in the event of an emergency, the plant would not be able to be shut down. And whaddya know, something went wrong. I forget what exactly, but it ended up causing the disaster we know as chernobyl. It wasn't an engineering fault, it was human, operator, error.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Calin on 11/18/2008 3:01:20 AM , Rating: 3
There was no refueling I know of.
The graphite rods intended to moderate the reaction were made to "fall off" into the reactor core (gravity assisted) in case something bad happens. Should they have been pyrotechnically-assisted (as was supposed to be done), maybe all of this wouldn't have happened.
Also, they were running tests at close to 5% reactor power, and they had no idea about some instability at those power levels.
In the end, that instability bit them, and until the graphite rods fell into the reactor core, there was already a runaway nuclear reaction, the reactor core was breached, radioactive graphite and other materials on the reactor's roof and so on.

(if I remember correctly, they were testing if, in the event of an emergency shut down, the energy contained in the already heated steam is enough to supply electricity for all the shutting down operations)


By chavv on 11/18/2008 7:02:18 AM , Rating: 5
actually rods used in Chernobyl were cut shorter because when building the bed under reactor a "smartass" decided to make it shorter to save concrete :O . Under the graphite there were "displacers", dummy rods with no graphite. And rods INTENTIONALLY, were made to enter the zone with like 40sm/sec
the problem - in first 2-3 sec of going down rods introduced positive feedback on chain reaction, due to dummy rods displacing water (which absorbed more neutrons than dummys)
Just before the crash they went beyond anything people who designed reactor ever thought a fool will go - they upped all rods but 4-5, while anything less than 25 or so was forbidden.

Running at 50-100MW the reactor was unstable which was well known, they pulled up rods trying to increase the power, when power started to go up fast, the operator pushed emergency button and all rods started going down - but it was too late (speculations are that in last half hour any attempt to push all rods down would've mean Bang, only trying to pull 1 rod at a time or so could've give chance escaping disaster), during these 2-3sec the positive feedback was huge, power generated raised maybe 2-3 magnitudes (due to evaporating water, steam also generates positive feedback and so on)
unable to be cooled the fuel cells evaporated in same time rods were stuck up because carriers on which they fall down half-melted... the rest is history :(


By rudolphna on 11/18/2008 3:50:49 PM , Rating: 2
My father is a nuclear mechanic for the navy. They had to study all about chernobyl, and they were tought (If I remember correctly, I may be mistaken). Chernobyls reactors were designed to be able to run while being refueled, and what I said previously happened.


By SiliconAddict on 11/18/2008 12:00:07 AM , Rating: 2
We still don't know how many people were really lost in the Russian space program. It was rumored that there was a team that never did come back down. Now if that is pure fantasy or truth....*shrugs* Who the heck knows. It definitely isn't out of the realm of possibilities when you factor in their safety short cuts, the propaganda impact if something that that did happen and it got out, and the fact that if something can go wrong in space it usually does.


By Netscorer on 11/18/2008 8:23:37 AM , Rating: 2
Retelling the rumors about failed soviet expeditions is the same as telling that Americans faked their landing to the moon. It's just that - rumors.
Regarding safety shortcuts that many here shout about - the truth was that neither Americans nor Soviets knew what exactly to expect - you can't build reliable safety protocols based on too many unknown variables. Yes, in many cases launches were a gamble. It was this way on both sides and let's not speculate that Americans valued safety more then Soviets did.
Besides, now, more then 50 years after the first launch, look who has more reliable launching platform. Small hint - it's not US.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Samus on 11/17/08, Rating: 0
By omnicronx on 11/17/2008 5:01:41 PM , Rating: 1
It was a typo.. I used the word three times in the same post..


By Smilin on 11/17/2008 4:03:35 PM , Rating: 1
The US didn't do it on the first try...which was also not in 1969.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By GTVic on 11/17/2008 4:42:20 PM , Rating: 3
Not as bad as crashing on a much more expensive trip to Mars because the US couldn't do metric conversions.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 11/17/2008 6:49:19 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Not as bad as crashing on a much more expensive trip to Mars because the US sent a $125 million probe to Mars with untested software .

Fixed that for you.


By subhajit on 11/18/2008 1:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
Do you know when India got its independence? What is the budget of ISRO? Also please remember space technology cannot be bought in an open market.


By Regs on 11/18/2008 8:31:29 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe we should try to show them up and go for twice that speed? We can make a money fire afterwards.


By randomly on 11/18/2008 9:18:06 AM , Rating: 4
The story is confusing and incomplete. The India probe was successfully placed in orbit on the first attempt. Neither the US or Russia managed that.

There are two parts to the satellite. The orbital part which has most of the scientific instruments on board that now is in orbit at 102 km above the moon. It has 11 different instruments on board including capabilities for imaging, terrain mapping, spectroscopy in multiple bands, radiation measurements, and other instruments.
http://www.isro.org/Chandrayaan/htmls/psexperiment...

There was also an impactor probe that was released to hit in the Shackleton crater at the south lunar pole to kick up an impact plume in an effort to search for frozen water.
http://www.isro.org/Chandrayaan/htmls/mip.htm

It was also used to test technologies that will be used on their second probe to the moon which will include a soft landing and a rover.

So despite all the snide remarks by some of my more ignorant fellow US citizens the Indians are doing extremely well.


By kp on 11/18/2008 2:50:12 PM , Rating: 1
Yup!! India is stupid enough to really send a mission to moon rather than shooting it in the studios and claiming they sent someone to moon, like what smart Americans did way back in 1969!!!


By encotel on 11/18/2008 9:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
For people with low memory, US send 4-6 missions to moon before it figured out how to land and spend equivalent of 8.7 billion dollars in todays currency. Whereas this is India's first mission and it has done it in 1/100th cost of what it took US. So, when you compare 1969, remember, US space program already had several missions to moon before it actually landed.

Besides, there were several trial missions, that never went to press. Given that, what India did in 1/100th cost, is incredible.


By xphile on 11/23/2008 8:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
But they can comment on their lunar crashes in 14 languages with fake American accents, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By ttour on 11/17/2008 3:51:15 PM , Rating: 5
Indian scientists today admitted that a "hard" landing of the Indian moon probe, slamming into the surface of the moon at 3,100 MPH may have been unplanned. A chief Indian Space Agency Program spokesman said that "the moon probe control team tempoprarily lost power to their WII probe controllers when a sacred cow somehow escaped it's assigned area in the mission control room and mistakenly pulled the WII main controller power cord from the overhead wiring harness. By the time we plugged the power cord back into the power harness, the WII system reset and we found ourselves bowling." No word on any future planned missions. It's possible the Space Agency may outsouce future missions.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Azsen on 11/17/08, Rating: 0
By NubWobble on 11/17/2008 11:59:22 PM , Rating: 2
LMFAO, fantastic!!


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By armred on 11/17/2008 4:51:52 PM , Rating: 2
We cannot fully understand the planet we live on after living on it for what, hundreds of thousands of years? But everything about the moon is "obvious" after some countries have sent satellites a few years earlier?


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Maximilian on 11/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By joker380 on 11/17/2008 6:08:53 PM , Rating: 2
you know this kind of egoistic dumb attitude has landed US in the current position they are in. Look at the FAB 3 Auto they are bankrupt not even US people wants to buy their own car. And i believe US was the first country to come out with it. So if you are proud that US is 50 yrs ahead in space give it another 25 years and we will see you in our rear view mirror, probably we will find Europe behind us than US. And 30% of US citizen still believes that US never sent a men on the Moon. Go do some fact checking Russia was in a better position to send a men than US but they didnt because of uncertainty of radiation to their astronaut.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Nfarce on 11/17/2008 6:32:45 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
So if you are proud that US is 50 yrs ahead in space give it another 25 years and we will see you in our rear view mirror, probably we will find Europe behind us than US.


Sadly, you are probably going to be right. 50 years ago we had schools that actually taught things and flunked your ass if you didn't pass. We are becoming a nation of dullards and dependent pansies who want the government to take care of our needs from cradle to grave. Who needs to learn anything when the government can feed you, clothe you, and shelter you?

Further, I can't help but worry like hell about our government schools who freely "pass" a failing or sub-standard student to the next level solely so his or her "self esteem" won't get hurt. Some of our schools are doing away with freaking GRADES and putting stupid symbols on report cards because Ds and Fs hurt self esteem. NO, I am not making that up.

And don't get me started on the wusification of taking away competitive sports programs in grade schools because the mindless idiot liberals running our schools feel competition is bad and unfair that someone can win and someone can lose. This mindless mentality is going to destroy us within in a generation.

Dude, you have no idea how right you are.


By Scrogneugneu on 11/17/2008 8:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Some of our schools are doing away with freaking GRADES and putting stupid symbols on report cards because Ds and Fs hurt self esteem.


Funny.

Over here (Canada), we always had grades expressed in percent. Lately, the trend has been to slowly move to a letter-based system, because the percent one was deemed too harsh on the students' feelings.

Somehow, someone at the government believes that "Jim got 70% while Joe got 50%" is harder for Joe than "Jim got a C, Joe got a D".

And yet, their biggest concern is this. Not the fact that half the graduates can't spell (there are some truly scary examples out there) or understand what the answers they wrote on the papers meant, but the simple fact that a 20% difference has a greater impact on Joe than a single letter difference.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By NubWobble on 11/18/2008 12:17:57 AM , Rating: 1
Those stupid liberals this and those stupid liberals that. When you understand that a country of people who have no understanding of anything are easier to control than a well-educated country you will stop blaming liberals for everything that is wrong with your country.

The Roman Empire kept the entire populace of Rome poor because it was easier to control. The US are going down the exact same path of "Give them bread and games." That is why people are so fanatical about American Football and other 'brutal' sports (hockey).


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By Nfarce on 11/18/2008 10:24:08 AM , Rating: 2
Nub - if you do not live in the United States and have not gone through or experienced first hand the FAILURES of our public education system (like watching a high school "graduate" have trouble filling out a job application), then you have no..zero...zip...zilch...nada comment to make on my comment.

Second, it is a known fact that a certain faction in this nation are in control of our education system at the public government grade school level. Look up the NEA (National Education Association) and find out who they consistently back for presidential and congressional candidates.

Third, if you knew even basic history about the Roman Empire you'd know that they collapsed from within due in part to apathy, sloth, and the loss of self-reliance and perseverance. In short, they became what I referenced in my original post that we are becoming today (thanks in part to our government education system). See a pattern here?

Fourth and finally, the fact that you chose to not pick apart my post and address specifics and instead only frothed about my comment about "liberals" is laughable. But not as laughable as your comment about Americans being "fanatical" about football and hockey. Like we've never seen soccer (non-American "football") riots around the globe or something.


By sld on 11/26/2008 10:14:44 AM , Rating: 2
I thought the Roman Empire collapsed because they burnt their best hopes (their moral compasses and agents of unselfish neighbourly love) at the stakes and fed them to the lions... nevermind.


By BikeDude on 11/22/2008 2:28:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Further, I can't help but worry like hell about our government schools who freely "pass" a failing or sub-standard student to the next level solely so his or her "self esteem" won't get hurt. Some of our schools are doing away with freaking GRADES and putting stupid symbols on report cards because Ds and Fs hurt self esteem.


Funny, I thought the problem was senators like George W Bush in Texas who, in a moment of incredible stupidity (yeah, he had quite a few of those even before becoming a President), decided to introduce standardised tests so the government could reward the good schools and the best teachers. This resulted in entire schools shifting all their focus to the standardised test, making sure the kids would pass those tests with flying colors, and often making sure the weaker kids stayed at home 'sick' on the test day. At the end of the day, few of these kids were able to read a book or solve problems that weren't multiple choice.

("60 Minutes" had a story about this a few years back)

Yes... Blame the liberals.


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By hadifa on 11/17/2008 7:10:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not an Indian nor American but I find it interesting that you bash Americans for being egoistic but proud of following in their footsteps half a century later!

BTW, please don't forget your fellow primitive Earhling friends when you see us in your spaceship's rear view mirror! ;-)

Regards,
Insignificant One


RE: India – Researching the Obvious since 2008
By subhajit on 11/18/08, Rating: 0
By Yames on 11/18/2008 10:25:35 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, some here are being immature, but you don't need to stoop to their level by saying "typical Americans ...."

Every nation has its problems, but the good ones try to correct these. It makes no sense to hark on the short comings of a nation and pin it on the typical person of that nation. That is pure ignorance.


By sld on 11/26/2008 10:11:57 AM , Rating: 2
Your post was true at first but quickly became hogwash towards the end.

And nope, I'm not American, just stating the truth. =)


By DeepBlue1975 on 11/18/2008 6:33:43 AM , Rating: 2
You all got it wrong.

They're not trying to land on the moon...

They're trying to bomb it!!!


By MRang on 11/18/2008 11:42:43 AM , Rating: 2
There is a satellite orbiting the moon and no thanks to you..
So pipe up and let the scientist do their work..

I cant understand how you could have a president with an IQ of a dodo up there for eight years and have the audacity to comment on these scientists.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others..


By Kyanzes on 11/18/2008 3:55:45 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I at least there aren't any smoking astronauts.


Translation
By amanojaku on 11/17/2008 2:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Indian scientists say that the crash was planned and that they will use the data collected by the probe during its decent to plan a future soft landing on the moon.

We're just happy it hit the damn thing. Even better, it's in one piece!




RE: Translation
By Ammohunt on 11/17/2008 2:50:27 PM , Rating: 5
I heard the probe was named "7-Eleven"


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Translation
By Sahkuhnder on 11/17/2008 5:01:16 PM , Rating: 4
"Less than 40% of United States citizens are white, that's not even including "illegals."

That is not even close to what the US people actually said about themselves.

US Government 2000 Census: "77.1% reported white".

http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-4.pdf

Isn't the internet wonderful? It allows us access to actual facts!


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Translation
By Sahkuhnder on 11/17/2008 9:18:48 PM , Rating: 4
I graduated from college too. So what? All of your rambling don't *prove* anything or support your statement with *facts*.

The US government 2000 Census is the most current counting of the US population. It says "77.1% reported white".

If the US Census isn't good enough proof for you then post a link to support your "Less than 40% of United States citizens are white" claim.

You said: "we actually looked up more recent statistics". So you claim. Fine, then let's see them. Put some data behind your statements.

Links to facts, not more of your unsubstantiated, unverifiable opinion please.


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/2008 9:27:37 PM , Rating: 2
I think I may have had my facts mixed up. I'm pretty sure it was estimated that by 2020 or 2025 that whites would be down to about 40%. My bad?


RE: Translation
By Sahkuhnder on 11/17/2008 9:38:16 PM , Rating: 3
For whatever tiny amount it may be worth you greatly have my respect.

If current trends continue, whites are estimated to become 50% of the US population in 2042.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...


RE: Translation
By omnicronx on 11/17/2008 5:10:44 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Little known fact as well: Canadians, Mexicans, and Brazilians are also American.
Are you a moron? You can't just make things up just so you can add the giant Brazilian Portuguese (non white) population to your 40% stat that is a good 30% off of the real U.S figure.

The only thing the countries you named have in common is they all reside in a continent with a name that ends with America.


RE: Translation
By FITCamaro on 11/18/2008 5:57:06 AM , Rating: 1
Love it how you got rated down for this.


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Translation
By Sahkuhnder on 11/17/2008 9:06:45 PM , Rating: 2
Speaking out against racism is fine. Creating up make-believe numbers to support your arguments is not.

Care to back up your "Less than 40% of United States citizens are white" statement with a link?

That is why you are rated -1.


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/2008 9:28:55 PM , Rating: 2
See retraction above.


RE: Translation
By 67STANG on 11/17/2008 4:03:59 PM , Rating: 3
ROFL.

I was thinking "Squishy-1" would have been more fitting, since we are stereotyping.


RE: Translation
By snownpaint on 11/17/2008 5:39:54 PM , Rating: 3
other names:

Itgosplat-2
Createacrator-1
2-moonnbust


RE: Translation
By JonnyDough on 11/17/2008 7:37:24 PM , Rating: 2
See, this is the problem with my fellow Americans today. They have no respect for other cultures and people. It's easy to make fun of other people until you realize your economy is not #1 and you have no friends in the world. Even if they do it to us Americans (and rightly so, we generally are fat lazy bastards with lame foreign policy), at some point you just have to learn to be the bigger man and show respect. This is why I constantly think DT readers are all 12. Even half the 40 year olds on this site act like a bunch of dried snot nosed punks sometimes. It really is pathetic.


RE: Translation
By pxavierperez on 11/17/2008 10:22:41 PM , Rating: 2
If you haven't notice in DailyTech's forums, Americans are just as likely to make fun of themselves as they would towards other nationality. It's all done in jest.

But yes, there are certain threshold to jokes we should be minded of.


RE: Translation
By 67STANG on 11/17/2008 10:24:29 PM , Rating: 5
...and the other half have absolutely no f'ing sense of humor.

Let me guess, your the guy at work that no one tells jokes to because you report everyone to the HR department? Spare us.


RE: Translation
By Jim28 on 11/18/2008 10:58:24 PM , Rating: 3
Hit the nail on the head there. Seems like a humorless guy. Way to caught up in racism.


RE: Translation
By Targon on 11/17/2008 10:28:29 PM , Rating: 2
There are many different aspects of how the USA is viewed by those in other countries. The general perception of the USA is tarnished by our current president, "Georgie". This is a part of why so many people supported Obama in the election, because it will be nice to have a president who is respected by world leaders, even if others may not like him.

So, perception is a large part of the problem, as well as the lack of a government that is actually concerned with the negative direction the country has been going in. This is the change that people have been looking for.

Now, the people in the USA are probably more diverse due to the size of the country than many people think about as well. You have a good portion that are as ignorant as many people try to portray, but there is also a large percentage that has a solid grasp of the problems, as well as trying to show the positive side of this country.

So, please think again about your perceptions, because if you look at George W. Bush as an example of ALL people in the USA, you would be mistaken.


RE: Translation
By Jim28 on 11/18/2008 11:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
Regan was not loved by foreign leaders, and yet Carter was.
Which was the better President for the US? (Not that fool Carter.) World leader's opinions of our president do not matter. (Unless they think he is weak.) What matters is that we elect him, and what happens to the country during his watch. How many other Presidents had so many things happen on their watch? Maybe, Lincoln, FDR, Truman?
How many stupid idiots and hacks have been elected worldwide? To many to count.


RE: Translation
By sld on 11/26/2008 10:19:52 AM , Rating: 2
from the 2nd and 3rd replies to your post... it seems the USA will continue to have few friends for years to come. ;)


RE: Translation
By rudolphna on 11/17/2008 11:00:37 PM , Rating: 2
I laughed out loud at that.


Um. What?
By foolsgambit11 on 11/17/2008 3:49:57 PM , Rating: 5
So, they sent this probe to gather information? Really? They gathered information on:

a. The gravity of the moon.
b. The atmosphere of the moon.
c. The topography of the moon.

Nobody told them about Google? Quick search here:
Acceleration due to Lunar gravity: 1.6m/s^2
Atmospheric pressure at surface: 3 × 10-15 atm
Topography: http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/Teams/Geomatics/photo...

Waaaay cheaper than sending a probe to find this out. I know, their results will be more precise, but the information they want is out there to the level of detail they desire. I know, these missions also allowed them to gain valuable experience, but I'm just saying. Why not drop the ruse that they're going to get anything valuable out of their measurements and just say they're doing it for the experience. Why put instrumentation in the probe? Why not put a raw egg in, turn it into the ultimate science project - the 3100 MPH egg drop. Then they need to put a rover or manned mission up there to see if the egg broke or not. So it would guarantee continued funding for the space program!




RE: Um. What?
By Smilin on 11/17/2008 4:10:12 PM , Rating: 5
Seriously?

You mean these guys could have just used google? What a bunch of rocket scien.. wait a second. They ARE rocket scientists. Are you?

Why don't you go read what the mission was actually doing. You spent more time googling some wisecrack response than you did informing yourself about the mission.

Here is a hint: they're were looking for something that is vitally important to long term human existence on the moon.


RE: Um. What?
By vapore0n on 11/17/2008 4:53:31 PM , Rating: 3
Based on the article linked here, their mission was to crash on the moon.

A pen, paper, Google, and some good ol physics equations and they could have simulated the whole event plus save a ton on spacecraft insurance.

Maybe what they really wanted was to imprint their flag on the moon.


RE: Um. What?
By foolsgambit11 on 11/17/2008 5:15:58 PM , Rating: 2
Wait, wait, wait.... they were looking for pretense? They should have sent you to the moon. As in, boy, are you pretentious.....

I think you're confusing the impactor portion of Chandrayaan 1 with the rest of this Indian lunar mission, anyway. The M3 (Moon Mineralogy Mapper) is capable of finding minerals, and even ice, if it is there. But it's on the main satellite, not on the impactor. And it incidentally, was provided by NASA for the mission.

Here's the deal: sending 64 pounds worth of sensors to the moon and then letting it crash for 25 seconds-worth of data seems like more of a hyper-masculine 'boo-ya!' than a valuable portion of Chandrayaan 1's mission. Sending 64 pounds to the moon costs more than a half-million dollars (at least, if the U.S. does it - I'm not sure of India's costs).


RE: Um. What?
By Spinne on 11/17/2008 6:50:56 PM , Rating: 1
Carried at no cost for NASA would be a more accurate statement. No component of Chandrayaan was supposed to soft land on the moon. So why hard land anything? Because you have the extra payload capacity to do so - so why the heck not? There's no harm in crashing something into the moon today and then trying to soft landing something tomorrow. Chandrayaan II is slated to fly by 2011 with a rover - if it fails, by all means go poke fun at the Indians, but hold onto your horses in the meantime.
Now you're going to point out that for a developing country like India to spend 80 million on a lunar probe is madness when they have so many hungry people etc.... etc.... - last time I looked, the US has no shortage of bums either. In any case, one has to learn about connections before attempting to come up with a brand new solution to the field equation, even if other people have already studied connections before.


RE: Um. What?
By foolsgambit11 on 11/17/2008 7:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
No, I think this portion of the mission would have been a waste for America to do today, too. I have no problem with the majority of Chandrayaan I's mission. But this probe is just an excuse to play tag with the moon. 'We went this far, we may as well touch it.'

You're telling me they couldn't have come up with any better use for 65 pounds of payload capacity? Or that they could have just made the probe without that capacity, and saved some money in development and launching costs? Of course, they didn't even fill up the capacity they had on the satellite - the US, the ESA, and others provided many of the sensors - so the idea they would have filled the capacity with other sensors is moot, I guess.

To be clear, I support India having a space program, and I understand that they must crawl before they walk, and walk before they run. But since they have to crawl, they should at least crawl in the right direction.


RE: Um. What?
By wordsworm on 11/17/08, Rating: -1
RE: Um. What?
By 67STANG on 11/17/2008 10:30:55 PM , Rating: 5
Correction: A bum sits around and does nothing (like most Presidents in the world). Ours does stuff, granted... usually it's the wrong thing to do.


RE: Um. What?
By Smilin on 11/18/2008 9:49:03 AM , Rating: 2
So the guy who says he can do with google what a space agency does with a lunar probe is calling someone pretensious. That's rich.

Doing some further research to cover your earlier statement of ignorance that you got called out on does little good if you are still wrong.

The most valuable science obtained from the MIP on Chandrayaan 1 was obtained just after the impact, not leading up to it.

Face it, the Indians had a great mission. They are true rocket scientists not some little intarwebs thread nargler who's proud he knows how to google. A little respect for them isn't that much to ask.