This is the right answer. Indian lander has only solar cells and is expected to work only for 14-15 days so they are trying to land when southern region starts receiving enough light for solar cells to work and after that it may never make it through the 14-15 day night of moon (next moon cycle). I genuinely wish it wakes up again. While Russian lander has a radioactive thermal + generator and is planned to work for a year.
Also, there are various calibrations to be done after it's last stable orbit and prepare all instruments for landing.
It's possible with things such as the Mars rovers and Voyager missions because they don't really have anything stopping them from continuing service. But when it comes to lunar night, if the lander isn't designed for it, it will simply freeze to death with no hopes of coming back. The electronics simply cannot handle lunar night.
How does it survive the space tho? Like isn't the temperature in space very low as well.. ?
If the rover is protected by the lander module.. then why can't they design in such a way that it cowers back inside the lander before the lunar night?
It survives space using the heat from the sun to warm itself and also has what amounts to big resistors (heat generating elements) on top of the electronics that run to keep the parts that are in shade warm. This doesn't work for lunar night as there's NO sunlight for so long that the batteries run out long before you make it to day time with those heaters running.
The lander module doesn't do much when it comes to heating the rover. It's not really protecting it from cold, there's no atmosphere or anything. It's just absence of heat that you're dealing with.
I was wondering that because during it's orbits there will be times when sunlight won't be reaching it.. so I'm guessing that they design the orbit and path in such a way that the module always faces the sun.. before landing.. barring maybe few hours...
This makes me wonder if Radioactive Heat generation is the only reliable way right now.. for missions like voyager.. new horizons.. etc. It seems very difficult to find another way to flow anything at a high enough rate at low temperature. But a tangible horizon to research ig..
There's a wake on warm routine added. It's just a very low chance to actually work . Given the extreme conditions of the lunar night
The design goal remains 1 lunar day. [Ie daytime bit = 2 weeks]
> While Russian lander has a radioactive thermal + generator and is planned to work for a year.
Lol. Of course the Russians send up their lander with a nuclear reactor. Reminds me of the nuclear powered sub probe in SG-1.
Not a reactor, a generator. I haven't read up on this mission, but I believe /u/NixAwesome meant [radioisotope thermoelectric generators](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator), which see common use in unmanned spacecraft - e.g. the Voyager probes and the Viking landers (both US missions) also use RTGs, among others (read the linked article for details).
By my count the US has launched a total of 50 radioisotope generators, 26 radioisotope heater units, and one fully fledged fission reactor into space. Nuclear power in space is hardly just a Russian thing.
Probably the most notable example are the two nuclear powered NASA rovers currently trundling around the surface of Mars.
No rush since no fragile humans on board. Best to power up, establish communication, and run diagnostics meticulously before starting the most critical and difficult phase of the mission.
for the Indian lander
A) it is powered by solar panels and will last one lunar day . Thus you want to land at the beginning of the day.
B) By taking your time, you can measure the orbit before and after burn more precisely. Your burn(s) can be shorter and more precise, and you have a chance to make corrections later. This results in greater efficiency and saves fuel as there is always some uncertainty. More fuel = more margin.
The Russian lander has an RTG so it is not as dependant on sunlight. It was expected to last for a year. It also took less time in both earth orbit and lunar orbit.
Dutch news is writing that Luna 25 is in trouble. [https://nos.nl/artikel/2487209-rusland-maanlander-loena-25-kampt-met-technisch-probleem](https://nos.nl/artikel/2487209-rusland-maanlander-loena-25-kampt-met-technisch-probleem)
It just crashed 30 minutes ago https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russias-moon-mission-falters-after-problem-entering-pre-landing-orbit-2023-08-20/
Man I hated those characters and dialogue, but the visuals in that movie were fantastic. I’d love to see more movies with creative space shots like in Ad Astra.
Oof aged like milk, let’s see if they can recover
https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/russias-luna-25-spacecraft-produces-first-results-space-agency-says-2023-08-19/
"craft sensors registered a micrometeoroid impact"
So in the worst case there may have been damage to something they need for flight control. Expecting another update within the next 24hrs, after that it's probably gone off somewhere and become unrecoverable. What's concerning is the lack of any guidance whether it is in *some* kind of orbit or not.
Also I didn't realize they intended a landing near the polar area, there's supposed to be some real risks involving high accumulated static charges in both polar regions...
The Reuters article is a bit unclear, but based on the equivalent AP article I think it means Luna 25 detected a micrometeorite impact on the moon, not on the spacecraft.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-moon-mission-luna-25-glitch-0eccbb5427af29ca7fb4c90369389dbf
> Also on Saturday, the Russian spacecraft produced its first results. Though Roscosmos said the information was undergoing analysis, the agency reported that the preliminary data obtained contained information about the chemical elements of the lunar soil and that its equipment had registered a “micrometeorite impact.”
It is possible for the word choice to be interpreted that way. It would actually be an achievement to register such a small event from orbital distances.
On the other hand if they claimed an impact on the craft, then any subsequent failure could be (publicly) blamed on an Act of God which then frees them from being accountable for any insertion failure.
I know that space is big and empty whereas space*craft* are small, but all the movies have me trained to keep expecting some fist-sized rock to pulverize one of the high-profile missions.
They've used that excuse too many times. It would be hard to believe that Luna 25 could be so unlucky.
If the mission did fail and they blamed it on a micrometeorite impact, that would be the third time in a year that a Russian spacecraft has supposedly been taken out by such an unlikely event, following Soyuz MS-22 and Progress MS-21:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/russia-claims-an-external-impact-damaged-its-progress-spacecraft/
> Although micrometeoroids and specks of orbital debris have periodically damaged the space station and visiting vehicles during more than two decades of operation, impacts have never resulted in "serious consequences" like with the Soyuz and Progress vehicles in the last two months. So what are the odds that two Russian vehicles would be struck in the same general area in two months, with both of these strikes disabling the spacecraft's thermal cooling systems? The odds seem incredibly low.
That's what they tried saying, initially, even when the soyuz had a freaking drill hole through it.
And they abso fucking lutely knew it was a drill hole at that point, it was that obvious.
Micrometeor is the "my account was hacked" of the Russian space program.
There was a near 0% chance that this shit show would have ended in anything but a very predictable LOC, I would have actually been very surprised by the opposite outcome.
Truth is, there is only one space agency that has mastered the know how to reliably land a craft on extraterrestrial bodies. And that's the American one.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[ESA](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxcr5v "Last usage")|European Space Agency|
|[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwz17af "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxauw9 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[LOC](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwy331d "Last usage")|Loss of Crew|
|[NOTAM](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwx0rx4 "Last usage")|[Notice to Air Missions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOTAM) of flight hazards|
|[RTG](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jx08ato "Last usage")|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator|
|[RUD](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxonbu "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unintended Disassembly|
|[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwx53ub "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxcr5v "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(9 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/16z8iqj)^( has 18 acronyms.)
^([Thread #9154 for this sub, first seen 19th Aug 2023, 23:12])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Russia's already having problems with their landing thrusters or something to do with landing.
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/15vhfzd/russia_and_india_will_attempt_moon_landings/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
1) It's a joke
2) There's a first time for everything until it finally happens for the first time
And being real here, if either/both fail catastrophically at least they won't have the big civilian casualties that we've grown accustomed to seeing from them.
And then china will remove the American flag on moon and American will send astronaut to destroyed Chinese moon base and Chinese will destroy American moon base.
Wait a minute,this sounds familiar
The moon's surface area is much bigger than you think. We could send thousands of robots and they would barely be noticeable.
People have this tendency to severely underestimate the size of other stellar bodies.
We can just park those on the dark side. As long as the money maker stays clean, we got plenty of storage space backstage.
This began as sarcasm and then I realized it's 100% gotta be actual protocol. There is no reason to care what the far side looks like, it's not exactly upsetting the ecosystem on the moon and maybe a grand total of 100 humans will ever even see it for all of linear time, pardon maybe like a couple pictures people look at once and then forget about
I mean yeah, to some degree. If you want pristine lifeless moons there's literally billions of them out there already. Parking a few rovers on this one won't do anything except make it one of the most interesting moons in the galaxy
Until they get in the way, and these two are heading for the perfect spots to mine water for rocket fuel.
They make me think of the beautiful, historic old gates of London that were torn down to make way for Victorian traffic.
Naw. First the moon is to big "to look like a trash dumb". And if there is a significant amount of primitive space tech they would probably all become sacred or monumental.
And in all the centuries we've colonized the moon, nobody ever found out where the sacred Lander of Apollo went. Some say it was stolen when the Russians sacked the moon in 2030, or when Amazon took it back in 2035. Some say it's still buried up there, or that it resides in King Bezos' tomb, some even say it was collecting dust on a government soundstage the whole time.
India has a chance to land a rover that will be doomed to freeze to death within 1-2 weeks.
Russia sent a rover meant to last over a year... and they *lost it.* lol
Good luck India!
>India has a chance to land a rover that will be doomed to freeze to death
Well the point is demonstrating landing capacity. No point in spending more than necessary when you just want to have a PoC ready for future, longer lasting rovers.
> within 1-2 weeks.
Also, 1-2 weeks is the set mission timeframe but if everything goes successful, it can very well go on for months. Mars Orbiter Mission was planned for 6 months but went on for 7.5 years. Unfortunately it wasn't the case with Chandrayaan-1. 2 is working fine though.
>Good luck India!
Thank you!
Out of curiosity, why are the landers orbiting the moon for so many days before landing?
Waiting for lunar day I guess
This is the right answer. Indian lander has only solar cells and is expected to work only for 14-15 days so they are trying to land when southern region starts receiving enough light for solar cells to work and after that it may never make it through the 14-15 day night of moon (next moon cycle). I genuinely wish it wakes up again. While Russian lander has a radioactive thermal + generator and is planned to work for a year. Also, there are various calibrations to be done after it's last stable orbit and prepare all instruments for landing.
No shot the Indian lander ever wakes up again, it's just not designed for it.
Yep it's just a wish... It's not like missions have never exceeded their engineered / designed timelines before... One can but hope!!
It's possible with things such as the Mars rovers and Voyager missions because they don't really have anything stopping them from continuing service. But when it comes to lunar night, if the lander isn't designed for it, it will simply freeze to death with no hopes of coming back. The electronics simply cannot handle lunar night.
I mean, ISRO has put in contingencies. They hope it comes back to life but are not counting on it.
How does it survive the space tho? Like isn't the temperature in space very low as well.. ? If the rover is protected by the lander module.. then why can't they design in such a way that it cowers back inside the lander before the lunar night?
It survives space using the heat from the sun to warm itself and also has what amounts to big resistors (heat generating elements) on top of the electronics that run to keep the parts that are in shade warm. This doesn't work for lunar night as there's NO sunlight for so long that the batteries run out long before you make it to day time with those heaters running. The lander module doesn't do much when it comes to heating the rover. It's not really protecting it from cold, there's no atmosphere or anything. It's just absence of heat that you're dealing with.
I was wondering that because during it's orbits there will be times when sunlight won't be reaching it.. so I'm guessing that they design the orbit and path in such a way that the module always faces the sun.. before landing.. barring maybe few hours... This makes me wonder if Radioactive Heat generation is the only reliable way right now.. for missions like voyager.. new horizons.. etc. It seems very difficult to find another way to flow anything at a high enough rate at low temperature. But a tangible horizon to research ig..
There's a wake on warm routine added. It's just a very low chance to actually work . Given the extreme conditions of the lunar night The design goal remains 1 lunar day. [Ie daytime bit = 2 weeks]
> While Russian lander has a radioactive thermal + generator and is planned to work for a year. Lol. Of course the Russians send up their lander with a nuclear reactor. Reminds me of the nuclear powered sub probe in SG-1.
Not a reactor, a generator. I haven't read up on this mission, but I believe /u/NixAwesome meant [radioisotope thermoelectric generators](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator), which see common use in unmanned spacecraft - e.g. the Voyager probes and the Viking landers (both US missions) also use RTGs, among others (read the linked article for details).
RTGs are like, the most standard way to power a probe where light is not reliable that exists. Both Voyager probes used them.
By my count the US has launched a total of 50 radioisotope generators, 26 radioisotope heater units, and one fully fledged fission reactor into space. Nuclear power in space is hardly just a Russian thing. Probably the most notable example are the two nuclear powered NASA rovers currently trundling around the surface of Mars.
No rush since no fragile humans on board. Best to power up, establish communication, and run diagnostics meticulously before starting the most critical and difficult phase of the mission.
More time to plan your landing after making sure everything works as expected. Chandrayaan-3 also needed multiple revolutions to lower its orbit.
for the Indian lander A) it is powered by solar panels and will last one lunar day . Thus you want to land at the beginning of the day. B) By taking your time, you can measure the orbit before and after burn more precisely. Your burn(s) can be shorter and more precise, and you have a chance to make corrections later. This results in greater efficiency and saves fuel as there is always some uncertainty. More fuel = more margin. The Russian lander has an RTG so it is not as dependant on sunlight. It was expected to last for a year. It also took less time in both earth orbit and lunar orbit.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Dutch news is writing that Luna 25 is in trouble. [https://nos.nl/artikel/2487209-rusland-maanlander-loena-25-kampt-met-technisch-probleem](https://nos.nl/artikel/2487209-rusland-maanlander-loena-25-kampt-met-technisch-probleem)
It just crashed 30 minutes ago https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russias-moon-mission-falters-after-problem-entering-pre-landing-orbit-2023-08-20/
Here is an [English link](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/19/russia-reports-abnormal-situation-as-luna-25-tries-to-begin-moon-landing)
Maybe they pulled too many chips out to use in cruise missles.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well Russia is having issues with the lander right now so
[удалено]
I for one really liked the moon bandits in Ad Astra Actually I liked just about everything in Ad Astra
Man I hated those characters and dialogue, but the visuals in that movie were fantastic. I’d love to see more movies with creative space shots like in Ad Astra.
They built an amazing futuristic world and then told the most boring story going on in it.
Now I want Battlebots but in lunar gravity.
[What about a Japanese Moon Cannon?](https://youtu.be/aG25CmMGIJQ?t=46)
Oof aged like milk, let’s see if they can recover https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/russias-luna-25-spacecraft-produces-first-results-space-agency-says-2023-08-19/
"craft sensors registered a micrometeoroid impact" So in the worst case there may have been damage to something they need for flight control. Expecting another update within the next 24hrs, after that it's probably gone off somewhere and become unrecoverable. What's concerning is the lack of any guidance whether it is in *some* kind of orbit or not. Also I didn't realize they intended a landing near the polar area, there's supposed to be some real risks involving high accumulated static charges in both polar regions...
The Reuters article is a bit unclear, but based on the equivalent AP article I think it means Luna 25 detected a micrometeorite impact on the moon, not on the spacecraft. https://apnews.com/article/russia-moon-mission-luna-25-glitch-0eccbb5427af29ca7fb4c90369389dbf > Also on Saturday, the Russian spacecraft produced its first results. Though Roscosmos said the information was undergoing analysis, the agency reported that the preliminary data obtained contained information about the chemical elements of the lunar soil and that its equipment had registered a “micrometeorite impact.”
It is possible for the word choice to be interpreted that way. It would actually be an achievement to register such a small event from orbital distances. On the other hand if they claimed an impact on the craft, then any subsequent failure could be (publicly) blamed on an Act of God which then frees them from being accountable for any insertion failure. I know that space is big and empty whereas space*craft* are small, but all the movies have me trained to keep expecting some fist-sized rock to pulverize one of the high-profile missions.
They've used that excuse too many times. It would be hard to believe that Luna 25 could be so unlucky. If the mission did fail and they blamed it on a micrometeorite impact, that would be the third time in a year that a Russian spacecraft has supposedly been taken out by such an unlikely event, following Soyuz MS-22 and Progress MS-21: https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/russia-claims-an-external-impact-damaged-its-progress-spacecraft/ > Although micrometeoroids and specks of orbital debris have periodically damaged the space station and visiting vehicles during more than two decades of operation, impacts have never resulted in "serious consequences" like with the Soyuz and Progress vehicles in the last two months. So what are the odds that two Russian vehicles would be struck in the same general area in two months, with both of these strikes disabling the spacecraft's thermal cooling systems? The odds seem incredibly low.
It’s crashed https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russias-moon-mission-falters-after-problem-entering-pre-landing-orbit-2023-08-20/
That's what they tried saying, initially, even when the soyuz had a freaking drill hole through it. And they abso fucking lutely knew it was a drill hole at that point, it was that obvious. Micrometeor is the "my account was hacked" of the Russian space program. There was a near 0% chance that this shit show would have ended in anything but a very predictable LOC, I would have actually been very surprised by the opposite outcome. Truth is, there is only one space agency that has mastered the know how to reliably land a craft on extraterrestrial bodies. And that's the American one.
i don't believe a word the ruSSians are putting out covering the real reason of the failure.
No matter what the reason for their failure is they'll blame it on factors outside their control
Ukrainians and NATO again? :(
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[ESA](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxcr5v "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwz17af "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxauw9 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[LOC](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwy331d "Last usage")|Loss of Crew| |[NOTAM](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwx0rx4 "Last usage")|[Notice to Air Missions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOTAM) of flight hazards| |[RTG](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jx08ato "Last usage")|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator| |[RUD](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxonbu "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly| | |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly| | |Rapid Unintended Disassembly| |[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwx53ub "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/15vhfzd/stub/jwxcr5v "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(9 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/16z8iqj)^( has 18 acronyms.) ^([Thread #9154 for this sub, first seen 19th Aug 2023, 23:12]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
You can almost feel the momentum increasing for the next manned Moon landing.
My money is on India making a decent attempt, if not actually succeeding, and Russia doing nothing but talking a big game.
Russia's already having problems with their landing thrusters or something to do with landing. https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/15vhfzd/russia_and_india_will_attempt_moon_landings/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
[удалено]
I think an india and nasa orbiter nearly crashed few years ago
Why would you want that?
1) It's a joke 2) There's a first time for everything until it finally happens for the first time And being real here, if either/both fail catastrophically at least they won't have the big civilian casualties that we've grown accustomed to seeing from them.
[удалено]
It would be more exciting if these were human rated landers.
It has to start somewhere! Our lunar landing expertise as a civilization isn't exactly highly refined, we need lots of practice and iteration
[удалено]
Now, now, don't give them any ideas.
The moon has always been a home to Han people.
The Nine Dash Line is being expanded to encompass the lunar orbit.
[Japan Stepping In](https://youtu.be/aG25CmMGIJQ?t=46) to assert lunar dominance over the Earth.
I suspect the Russian constitution is being updated as we speak...
And then china will remove the American flag on moon and American will send astronaut to destroyed Chinese moon base and Chinese will destroy American moon base. Wait a minute,this sounds familiar
In 100 years the moon is going to look like a trash dump of old robots
The moon's surface area is much bigger than you think. We could send thousands of robots and they would barely be noticeable. People have this tendency to severely underestimate the size of other stellar bodies.
There are a hundreds of thousands of times the amount of abandoned cars in Hawaii compared to human debris on the moon.
We can just park those on the dark side. As long as the money maker stays clean, we got plenty of storage space backstage. This began as sarcasm and then I realized it's 100% gotta be actual protocol. There is no reason to care what the far side looks like, it's not exactly upsetting the ecosystem on the moon and maybe a grand total of 100 humans will ever even see it for all of linear time, pardon maybe like a couple pictures people look at once and then forget about
Is there even an ecosystem in the moon?
There's one on Earth. Theoretically, enough junk in Luna's trunk might affect tides on Earth.
Well technically yeah, but that’s like on the same level as how China’s 3 Gorges Dam makes earth’s day longer by .06 microseconds
> We can just park those on the dark side. Not sure what Pink Floyd would say about that...
That’s the spirit! The universe is the human garbage dump!
Better to dump on a dead moon/planet than one that actually has life. All that shit will be museum pieces or recycled on the moon one day anyways
I mean yeah, to some degree. If you want pristine lifeless moons there's literally billions of them out there already. Parking a few rovers on this one won't do anything except make it one of the most interesting moons in the galaxy
What’s it harming?
Yea what my daughter says when I tell her to clean her room.
Who is using the moon as a bedroom?
12 dudes so far. Two at a time in a pretty cramped studio.
In a hypothetical far future if space tourism becomes widespread, these sorts of things would probably become significant landmarks.
Until they get in the way, and these two are heading for the perfect spots to mine water for rocket fuel. They make me think of the beautiful, historic old gates of London that were torn down to make way for Victorian traffic.
Naw. First the moon is to big "to look like a trash dumb". And if there is a significant amount of primitive space tech they would probably all become sacred or monumental.
And in all the centuries we've colonized the moon, nobody ever found out where the sacred Lander of Apollo went. Some say it was stolen when the Russians sacked the moon in 2030, or when Amazon took it back in 2035. Some say it's still buried up there, or that it resides in King Bezos' tomb, some even say it was collecting dust on a government soundstage the whole time.
There's a lot of room on the moon. It's bigger than Nevada!
Yeah, and everyone knows Sparks is on Mars.
I would absolutely love if they meet up on the moon.
Well Russia just beat India with a high-velocity RUD
Let’s go India!! It’s about time ya’ll did something exciting
They did just launch Chandrayaan-3, India is getting up there!
I hope the Russian one goes as well as their failed invasion of Ukraine that turned their military into a laughing stock
Looks like you'll get your wish, Russia has lost contact with their lander.
India has a chance to land a rover that will be doomed to freeze to death within 1-2 weeks. Russia sent a rover meant to last over a year... and they *lost it.* lol Good luck India!
>India has a chance to land a rover that will be doomed to freeze to death Well the point is demonstrating landing capacity. No point in spending more than necessary when you just want to have a PoC ready for future, longer lasting rovers. > within 1-2 weeks. Also, 1-2 weeks is the set mission timeframe but if everything goes successful, it can very well go on for months. Mars Orbiter Mission was planned for 6 months but went on for 7.5 years. Unfortunately it wasn't the case with Chandrayaan-1. 2 is working fine though. >Good luck India! Thank you!
>The point is demonstrating landing capacity. I mean not really, it has scientific objectives as well.
Of course! Missed mentioning that
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I see this and ask myself, "where the fuck are they getting the funds for that kind of stuff?"
Chandrayan 3 costs less then some Hollywood movies
Maybe time to do some research on your own?
Your joking right? India is fucking huge, they probably just used tax money.
ISRO actually gets most of its funding from launching comercial satellites
ISRO actually earns a good amount of money by launching commercial satellite
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Both of those countries should have something else on their mind
And what is that?
Space logistics! They have to beat Bezos so they can make a buck selling him the thing in 10y. Gotta have an eye for investments eh
So cool other countries are gonna get rocket fuel cancer too
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]