India cp 1NC

2NC – AT China DA

Current Indian policies mean the impacts inevitable.

NEW DELHI — India launched its first unmanned spacecraft to orbit the moon early Wednesday, part of an effort to assert its power in space and claim some of the business opportunities there. The Indian mission is scheduled to last two years, prepare a three-dimensional atlas of the moon and prospect the lunar surface for natural resources, including uranium, a coveted fuel for nuclear power plants, according to the Indian Space Research Organization. The spacecraft will not land on the moon, though it is supposed to send a small “impactor” probe to the surface. The launching of Chandrayaan-1, as the vehicle is called — roughly translated as Moon Craft-1 — comes about a year after China’s first moon mission. Talk of a space race with China could not be contained, even as Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister, was due to visit Beijing later in the week. “China has gone earlier, but today we are trying to catch them, catch that gap, bridge the gap,” Bhaskar Narayan, a director at the Indian space agency, was quoted by Reuters as having said. The first Indian lunar voyage is carrying two devices from NASA. One, the Moon Mineralogy Mapper, or M3, will assess mineral composition of the moon from orbit. The other, the Mini-SAR, will look for ice deposits in the moon’s polar regions. Chandrayaan-1 was launched from a research station in Sriharikota, a barrier island off the coast of the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. The moon mission, in addition to demonstrating technological capacity, can potentially yield commercial gains for India’s space program. India’s ability to put satellites into orbit has already resulted in lucrative deals; for example, Israel has sent up a satellite by means of an Indian launcher. “It is proof of India’s technical capability in an advanced area of science,” said Dipankar Banerjee, a retired army general who is the director of the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies here. “India wants to be counted as one of the emerging players in Asia. Space is, of course, an important part of power projection.”

Aff – Perm

Perm solves best -- US-India joint cooperation guarantees success.

Dinerman ’09 - author and journalist based in New York City (6/08/09, Taylor, The Space Review, “Should India and the US cooperate on space solar power?”, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1389/1)

Fortunately both India and the US have space programs and technologies that could, if developed together and possibly with other interested nations such as Japan, bring SSP systems into service sometime late next decade or the early 2020s. With its commitment to develop a new low cost reusable spaceplane, the India Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is already working on one of the key technologies needed for an SSP system. Indian participation in both private and public SSP programs should be welcomed by the US. the US government should make an effort to facilitate this by helping with visas and work permits for qualified Indian scientists and engineers. Recent moves towards reforming the notorious International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) should include ensuring that SSP systems are covered by the Department of Commerce regulators rather than by the State Department, which has gained such a sorry reputation in this area. In the near term the new Indo-US renewable energy partnership would seem to be the right place to start this collaboration. Together the partners can identify what will be needed in the way of technological and scientific investments over the next decade in order to make SSP a reality. India has lots of talent that can be committed to this effort and so does the US. In fact, the kind of ambitious idealism that we saw at NASA during the Apollo years could be engendered by this goal. Safe, clean, abundant energy from the Sun is not an impossible dream. The technology has not been perfected and the need for new, low-cost Earth-to-orbit transportation systems is as urgent as ever, but there are no requirements for any scientific breakthroughs. The Space Solar Power Study released by the US National Security Space Office (NSSO) in October 2007 found that since the 1977 “Reference” study, there had been: (a) improvements in PV [photovoltaic] efficiency from about 10% (1970s) to more than 40% (2007); (b) increases in robotics capabilities from simple tele-operated manipulators in a few degrees of freedom (1970s) to fully autonomous robotics with insect-class intelligence and 30–100 degrees of freedom (2007); (c) increases in the efficiency of solid state devices from around 20% (1970s) to as much as 70%–90% (2007); (d) improvements in materials for structures from simple aluminum (1970s) to advanced composites including nanotechnology composites (2007) The 2007 NSSO study showed just how far the technology had come and why space solar power is now a more viable alternative for very large-scale power generation than ever before. India and the US are natural partners in the development of this technology and the opportunity provided by the planned renewable energy partnership is a perfect place to begin.

Aff – CP Fails (General)

India can’t solve -- launch designs, lack of credibility, and no capabilities.

Kluger 10 — senior writer for TIME, won First Place in the Overseas Press Club of America's Whitman Bassow Award for best reporting in any medium on international environmental issues, staff writer for Discover magazine, writer and editor for New York Times Business World Magazine, Family Circle and Science Digest, licensed attorney, and intermittently taught science journalism at New York University, co-author, along with astronaut Jim Lovell, of Lost Moon: The Perilous Voyage of Apollo 13, (Jeffrey, Dec. 29, 2010, “New Delhi, We Have a Problem: India's Space Woes” http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2040085,00.html)

"The GSLV has had only a 50% success rate," says Ajey Lele, space expert at the Institute of Defense and Security Analysis in New Delhi. "India has wanted to have the technology and the facility [to launch heavy payloads] on its own soil. Now that will not happen in the near future." But with China, Japan, the U.S. and other countries all chasing the same global business with their own fleet of rockets, the near future may be all the time the Indian program has. India has had a big — if unheralded — presence in the space community for a long time. The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) — essentially India's NASA — was established in 1969 with the mission of focusing exclusively on launching communications and Earth observation satellites, programs that have immediate benefits for people on the ground and were seen as the only legitimate business a country as poor as India had in space. ISRO did well with its limited portfolio, but things changed in 1999, when the country — puffed up after a series of successful nuclear tests the year before — decided to aim higher, planning for unmanned missions to the moon and manned missions into Earth orbit. In 2008, the Chandrayaan-1 lunar spacecraft made good on part of that promise, not only successfully orbiting the moon, but making a significant — indeed, landmark— discovery about the surprising quantity of water mixed in with the lunar soil. Meantime, the smaller predecessor of the GSLV was making a name for itself as a reliable commercial launcher, with a string of 16 successful launches against no failures. The GSLV was seen as the next logical step in a rapidly advancing program: a three-stage, heavy-lift rocket suitable for bigger payloads and crews. But the ambitious design of the rocket may be its undoing. The problem that led to the explosion occurred in the first stage — a giant liquid-fueled engine surrounded by four, strap-on solid fuel rockets. Strap-ons, as designers know, are a great way to add oomph to a booster; the more power you need, the more solids you attach. But multiple engines mean increased complexity — not to mention the need to coordinate the exact amount of thrust each motor is producing, the exact moment ignition takes place and the tricky acoustical business of controlling vibrations. The fact that it's that stage that failed this time was not surprising but it was disappointing, since in the April launch it worked perfectly; it was the second, simpler stage that failed that time. Another former ISRO chief called the nature of this most recent accident nothing short of "a national setback." For the moment it's unclear whether it's a setback the space agency can recover from in time. Sorting out multiple glitches in multiple stages is a time-consuming business, and even one more failure could irreparably destroy the GSLV's image. Ultimately, the global market for heavy-lift flight could simply leave India behind. Uncertain too will be the scheduled 2015 launch of the Chandrayaan II, a joint Indian-Russian moon mission that's intended to carry both a lunar satellite and a rover and was slated to be launched on a GSLV. Even less certain is the launch of the first Indian astronauts — or vyomanauts — a mission that did not yet even have a target date and is less likely than ever to get one until the big booster proves itself. India's economic and technological growth have been extraordinary over the past ten years, but as the U.S. and Russia learned over the previous fifty, there is nothing that challenges a country's scientific and industrial base like trying to take those first steps into space. The GSLV may yet recover, and vyomanauts may yet ride it to glory, but the path won't be easy. It never, ever is.
The Indian space program is ridden with failure and a recent explosion derails exploration.

AFP 10 (“Failed rocket launch may damage India's space ambitions, say experts”, December 26, http://www.france24.com/en/20101226-failure-rocket-launch-may-damage-india-space-ambitions-say-experts#)

The explosion of an Indian space rocket is likely to hit the country's efforts to push further into the global market for launching commercial satellites, experts warned Sunday. The unmanned Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) blew up live on television Saturday less than one minute after launch, at the start of a mission to put a communications satellite into orbit. The accident was the second setback for India this year following the crash in April of a rocket that was meant to showcase domestically built booster technology, from the same site in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. On Sunday, scientists at the Indian space project began their search into the cause of the latest failure. "Teams are looking at the data to find out the reason for what happened," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) spokesman S. Satish said. "A failure analysis committee is likely to be constituted in the next one or two days." The GSLV veered from its intended flight path and was intentionally blown up 47 seconds after take-off at a height of about eight kilometres (five miles) over the Bay of Bengal. Experts called on the ISRO to go back to drawing board with the 1.75-billion-rupee (39-million-dollar) GSLV before attempting to offer the rocket as a platform for international satellite launches. They also warned that India's ambitions to send its first manned space flight in 2016 were under threat. "Saturday's failure will certainly produce delays," space scientist M.N. Vahia told the Times of India. "If my payload was being flown on this mission using a GSLV, I would certainly want this rocket to be tested and evaluated more thoroughly. "What happened is unnerving as India's reputation as a reliable space launching country has taken a serious dent."

The CP fails -- bureaucratic messiness.

Singh, 4-19-2011 — staff writer (Seema, April 19th, 2011, “ISRO's Dead End in Space” http://business.in.com/article/real-issue/isros-dead-end-in-space/24132/0)

But then, a culture of openness, leadership and a high standard of accountability are the prescription for cure. And sadly ISRO ranks low in those departments. Take the case of the crash of GSLV-F06 (with an imported cryogenic engine) in December 2010. A Failure Analysis Committee was formed to look into it but experts associated with the exercise say they are not aware if it “is completed and a cohesive report prepared”. The Committee chairman, former ISRO boss G. Madhavan Nair, had given varying explanations as the work was in progress and a final report would have cleared the air. There is a larger review under way and its findings are disturbing. The GSLV Review Committee, led by another former ISRO chief K. Kasturirangan, says there is “no pattern to failures,” and points to a lack of rigour and attention to details. This had not been the case before. When earlier launch systems such as ASLV failed, scientists knew what they didn’t know. The case of the locally made cryogenic engine is more puzzling. To understand and pinpoint the error in the April 2010 experiment, ISRO must adopt a complete mathematical model to simulate the cryogenic system through which it could test the engine under varied, even hypothetical, conditions. For instane, if the booster pump hadn’t worked properly because it was submerged in liquid hydrogen, the test would have revealed it. But ISRO hasn’t done such a test. “Along with empirical understanding [from experiments], you need to have physical understanding [from simulation],” says B.N. Raghunandan, professor of aerospace engineering at Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. The mishandling of situations didn’t stop with technical issues. When news broke in February suggesting that ISRO’s marketing arm, Antrix Corporation, had entered into a deal with Devas Multimedia in 2005 to favour the latter, the space agency dithered and failed to explain the true picture to the public. All that Antrix had done was to resort to “procedural” shortcuts in getting the deal approved by its board. It was done at a thinly attended meeting. Experts close to ISRO say if it had just continued with the traditional INSAT Coordination Committee meetings (it was last convened in 2005), which routinely involved all key science, technology and telecom departments, things wouldn’t have come to this flashpoint. But popular belief held that the deal that involved using Devas’ technology to provide satellite broadband services was the mother of all scams. The whole country was then in a mood to see a scandal in everything. No Space for a Chat Of all the problems at ISRO, insiders say, the lack of communication among its own arms is the most troubling. “They really have a management issue. There are so many good people working for them but they don’t seem to communicate with each other,” says Jayant Murthy, a professor at the Indian Institute of Astrophysics in Bangalore, who worked with ISRO for three years on an aborted project. Murthy was the principal investigator for Tauvex, a joint space observatory project between Israel and India. After a four-year delay, it was finally mounted on the satellite in November 2009, but got knocked off at the last minute when ISRO realised the weight of sundry payloads on the mission exceeded the limit. Despite repeated requests, ISRO never communicated the next launch date. Tauvex was finally sent back to Israel last year. “It’s a result of constantly changing set of priorities at ISRO, which now works in mission mode,” says Murthy, who along with his Israeli counterparts, is contemplating a Russian launch. The new thrust on commercial success may have come at a time when the focus on research is diminishing, say experts. “Instead of doing research, ISRO scientists are becoming large-scale managers,” says Raghunandan of IISc.

Directory: files
files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2
files -> Integer programming and game theory
files -> 4 Integer Programming
files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective
files -> Pop Warner History
files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose
files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d
files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal
files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations

Download 0.56 Mb.

Share with your friends: