'ISRO's style is a terrific example of being able to survive, acknowledge failures, and then most importantly of all, learn from them to ensure that subsequent missions are successful.'
Probably the loudest whoops of joy in the United States the moment Chandrayaan-3 landed on the south pole of the moon on August 23 this year came from Mike Gold, a huge cheerleader for India and its amazing successes in space.
The chief growth officer at Redwire, a US company developing space infrastructure for a projected future space economy, Gold spent several years working at NASA before that.
His last posting with the American space agency was as their associate administrator for space policy and partnership and he therefore has experience in working in both the private and civil sectors of the space industry.
Gold, who worked with India on signing the Artemis Accords*, is a keen and optimistic observer of our country's progress in this sphere, because he feels India and ISRO open a new window to how to operate in space.
"I applaud India for showing the world a path forward to robust and affordable lunar development exploration," Gold tells Vaihayasi Pande Daniel/Rediff.com.
From your point of view, what was the most striking aspect of watching the progress of Chandrayaan-3 as it landed on the moon?
You told The Washington Post that 'India knows how to do more with less'. May I ask you to elaborate on that statement?
My first reaction was: India has done it again.
Yet again. And has done the space community (proud) by accomplishing a tremendous feat of firsts, in so many ways.
It is the first country to successfully soft land on the south pole (of the moon). India's been the first to have that lander actually raise itself and move. It is now the first to gather critical data on the regolith, the lunar dirt in the south pole.
So, my reaction was excitement, pleasant surprise, and just appreciation for how much India has accomplished and their success, while expending relatively little resources.
I've just never been prouder, more excited about India's accomplishments, and more importantly, about India's future on the moon. Chandrayaan-3 is amazing.
I believe that the success will only allow for more robust, more exciting opportunities if India, per the signing of the Artemis Accords, will be a critical partner for the United States and the other Artemis Accords family of nations (some 29 in all) in lunar development.
Again, my reaction was just sheer joy in having India be an important part of humanity's journey to the moon.
How did the world -- specifically those in the space world -- view the successes of Chandrayaan-3?
And where does it put India on this map of countries working towards space achievements?
It puts India at the top of national capabilities, not only for the moon, but in space generally.
If you contrast it to the failure of the Russian system -- and I talk about my surprise candidly -- landing on the moon is so difficult. I'm always surprised, to an extent, when there's a successful mission.
And the fact that Chandrayaan-3 landed and is operating as well as it is -- all the sensors are functioning, it conducted a lift operation -- it's a surprise, a pleasant one.
It demonstrates, again, the skill, the capabilities of India, and its people.
There's such tremendous human capital in India. And you see that when you leverage the innovation, the knowledge, the thirst for discovery in India -- you get tremendous results. And Chandrayaan-3 is an excellent example of that.
And what it tells the space world is that India is here and that they are going to be making significant contributions to lunar development, to the Artemis program.
It also demonstrates that these activities can be done with lower amounts of investment, if you've got good people, and you spend your money wisely.
I applaud India for showing the world a path forward to robust and affordable lunar development exploration.
Is your view shared by those who work in the space industry? Was everybody sort of surprised?
Maybe surprise is too strong a term.
I think the successful mission confirmed the general impression that the space world has of India as an extraordinarily capable nation that can successfully conduct very difficult space operations.
It confirmed an existing but growing impression of robust Indian capability, certainly on par and exceeding, as we saw, what Russia did, or failed to do, again, with resources that are substantially less than what an American traditional programme would cost.
I think India is a trailblazer now, not only with new scientific information, but (by demonstrating) how successful missions can be run, at relatively low cost.
They're showing a path forward that I hope America and and commercial space companies in the US and throughout the world will follow.
India has shown what can be done.
Do you think India is on the path to sending a manned mission into space?
Yes, I think soon India will join China, Russia and the US in this elite group of countries that can send their citizens to space.
I (feel) that is a welcome and important development. Whether it's low earth orbit, or the moon, it's important that we not only send our spacecraft or astronauts to space, but our values as well.
Seeing India, being the world's largest democracy, develop in space, and bring your diversity, innovation, freedom, liberty and democratic principles (along). It's what makes me so excited, as an American and a friend of India.
A lot has been said about the admirable way in which ISRO runs. You've already touched on the fact that they pull off these missions with meagre budgets.
The teams at ISRO are quite unfazed by failure, even though it's a pretty rocky road at times. It seems like their failures have been their best lessons.
I think failure is the most important part of space development. And ISRO's style is a terrific example of being able to survive, acknowledge failures, and then most importantly of all, learn from them to ensure that the subsequent missions are successful.
It's important, obviously, not to repeat failures, but also not to be deterred, or turn away from space. And I think India has hit an ideal balance of learning from the mistakes of the past to build successes of the future.
Former ISRO chairman Dr K Sivan, in an interview to Shobha Warrier of Rediff.com told us that the work for Chandrayaan-3 started the day Chandrayaan-2 failed.
Is that attitude characteristic of India? Or that's basically the attitude that most space missions run on?
It's interesting, and a great question, because I (believe) there are more similarities between the American commercial space sector and the Indian civil space sector, than there are between India and other space agencies.
India has very entrepreneurial attitude, and is able to accommodate and acknowledge failure, far better than some other national space agencies, where they are more risk averse, and less are able to deal with failures.
This entrepreneurial (aspect) is more akin to a private sector entity than a traditional space agency, which I think is a really good thing, and a demonstration of how valuable that attitude is now on the surface of the moon.
Another former ISRO chairman G Madhavan Nair, who worked on Chandrayaan-1's launch, told Rediff.com that Chandrayaan-3's landing was achieved with 'textbook precision'. Would you agree with that?
Absolutely. The data it's generating demonstrates that the systems have been successful in terms of instruments, and that was enabled by the pinpoint accuracy of Chandrayaan-3, which as the previous ISRO chairman pointed out, that was because of the failures of Chandrayaan-2. This is an overnight success, built over decades.
*According to Nasa.gov, 'Artemis Accords non-binding multilateral arrangement between the United States government and other world governments participating in the Artemis programme, an American-led effort to return humans to the Moon by 2025, with the ultimate goal of expanding space exploration to Mars and beyond'.
- PART 2 of the Interview: 'We are looking at flying an Indian into space'
Feature Presentation: Ashish Narsale/Rediff.com
