India just landed on the Moon for less than it cost to make Interstellar | The Independent::undefined

  • SGG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why is this even a comparison? India only went to the moon, interstellar had to go to other freaking solar systems and a black hole to make their documentary!

  • wabafee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aside from different approaches I think the biggest factor is salary difference. Still impressive though a good example for other Asian nations.

  • scmstr@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s almost as if doing this first, half a century ago, and, pardon my culturism, but probably less recklessly AND in a higher cost of living country would be substantially more expensive.

    But still, a genuine congratulations to India and everybody that worked on that project.

    Edit: I don’t know why I’m being downvoted, it’s a fact. “We did it for SO CHEAP” is not a brag or a flex.

    The cost to realtime process trajectories in 1968 was not the $10USD that a several year old, e-waste used iPhone is now.

    And the yearly salary of NASA engineers now is 100k-150k USD (glassdoor.com) while the Indian space program engineer median yearly salary (payscale.com) looks to be 200k-3M INR (median 800,000), which is $2,400USD-35K USD (median 10,000USD).

    So… Just on labor alone, that’s a factor of 5-50x. Then, take into account the improvements in materials and tech that can be basically gotten off the shelf. You don’t have to R&D reinvent tang anymore.

    Like, yeah, cool, you did it, that’s awesome. But then, trying to be like “oh we did it for so cheap” just makes me wonder how and then instantly realize that making me think about that undermines the very achievement it’s trying to brag about.

    And don’t get it twisted: money is fucked up in the world right now. Just leave it at: You did it, India. Congratulations, one of only four countries in the world have done it.

  • CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cool.

    The average income in India is 25x ish less than that of the US. If we scale the $75 million cost to land on the moon by 25 times, we get $1.8 billion. The Perseverance rover’s cost is estimated at $2.75 billion and that thing landed on Mars.

    It’s incredibly impressive that India has landed on the moon on their 2nd try. Nothing should take away from that, and India should be very proud of their achievement. But geez this is a braindead article. Yes, poorer countries can pay people less do the same amount of work as someone in another country.

    • dejf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I respectfully disagree with you. It’s a bit misleading to compare average incomes like that. I would assume the income disparity is nowhere near as large for valuable scientists and engineers working for a national space program. In addition, you are only comparing labour costs. Some materials can be cheaper in India, but certainly not by a factor of 25 and certainly not all of them. Therefore, I wouldn’t say the article is braindead.