ELI5: Why they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why they call it low cost? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy did the Russians never land on the Moon?Would it have been possible to have sent the Space Shuttle around the Moon?Why does Pluto have a molten core and the Moon does not?Would an asteroid collision affect Moon's orbit, and what consequence would that have for Earth?Was there a Moon landing mission that the astronauts had to land by hand?Why not land Red Dragon on the Moon?Why don't we have a base on the moon?With today's technology, how much would it cost to put a man on the Moon again?Did NASA remove four major photographic atlases of the Moon from its Technical Report Server? Gone for good, or just hype?Why did China land a rover on the moon?

What force causes entropy to increase?

Is there a way to generate a uniformly distributed point on a sphere from a fixed amount of random real numbers?

How do I free up internal storage if I don't have any apps downloaded?

Why did Peik say, "I'm not an animal"?

How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?

Loose spokes after only a few rides

If climate change impact can be observed in nature, has that had any effect on rural, i.e. farming community, perception of the scientific consensus?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

Old scifi movie from the 50s or 60s with men in solid red uniforms who interrogate a spy from the past

How can I have a shield and a way of attacking with a ranged weapon at the same time?

How do you keep chess fun when your opponent constantly beats you?

Keeping a retro style to sci-fi spaceships?

Variable with quotation marks "$()"

Likelihood that a superbug or lethal virus could come from a landfill

Why don't hard Brexiteers insist on a hard border to prevent illegal immigration after Brexit?

Why can't devices on different VLANs, but on the same subnet, communicate?

Output the Arecibo Message

Will it cause any balance problems to have PCs level up and gain the benefits of a long rest mid-fight?

How do PCB vias affect signal quality?

Dropping list elements from nested list after evaluation

How to type a long/em dash `—`

"as much details as you can remember"

Did Scotland spend $250,000 for the slogan "Welcome to Scotland"?



ELI5: Why they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why they call it low cost?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy did the Russians never land on the Moon?Would it have been possible to have sent the Space Shuttle around the Moon?Why does Pluto have a molten core and the Moon does not?Would an asteroid collision affect Moon's orbit, and what consequence would that have for Earth?Was there a Moon landing mission that the astronauts had to land by hand?Why not land Red Dragon on the Moon?Why don't we have a base on the moon?With today's technology, how much would it cost to put a man on the Moon again?Did NASA remove four major photographic atlases of the Moon from its Technical Report Server? Gone for good, or just hype?Why did China land a rover on the moon?










1












$begingroup$


In the news they say that




Israel hoped to become the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon. Only government space agencies from the former Soviet Union, the US and China have made successful Moon landings.




E.g. haaretz, BBC



Why they don't mention the Indian Chandrayaan-1?



The BBC article that I quote here even provides a picture from NASA with the list of successful moon landings that includes a station from India.



Another question: why they call it low cost? According to the same BBC article,




The project has cost about $100m (£76m) and has paved the way for
future low-cost lunar exploration.




Wikipedia says that the cost of the Chandrayaan-1 project was US$54 million.



Disclaimer: I am not an Indian.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    2 hours ago















1












$begingroup$


In the news they say that




Israel hoped to become the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon. Only government space agencies from the former Soviet Union, the US and China have made successful Moon landings.




E.g. haaretz, BBC



Why they don't mention the Indian Chandrayaan-1?



The BBC article that I quote here even provides a picture from NASA with the list of successful moon landings that includes a station from India.



Another question: why they call it low cost? According to the same BBC article,




The project has cost about $100m (£76m) and has paved the way for
future low-cost lunar exploration.




Wikipedia says that the cost of the Chandrayaan-1 project was US$54 million.



Disclaimer: I am not an Indian.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    2 hours ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


In the news they say that




Israel hoped to become the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon. Only government space agencies from the former Soviet Union, the US and China have made successful Moon landings.




E.g. haaretz, BBC



Why they don't mention the Indian Chandrayaan-1?



The BBC article that I quote here even provides a picture from NASA with the list of successful moon landings that includes a station from India.



Another question: why they call it low cost? According to the same BBC article,




The project has cost about $100m (£76m) and has paved the way for
future low-cost lunar exploration.




Wikipedia says that the cost of the Chandrayaan-1 project was US$54 million.



Disclaimer: I am not an Indian.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




In the news they say that




Israel hoped to become the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon. Only government space agencies from the former Soviet Union, the US and China have made successful Moon landings.




E.g. haaretz, BBC



Why they don't mention the Indian Chandrayaan-1?



The BBC article that I quote here even provides a picture from NASA with the list of successful moon landings that includes a station from India.



Another question: why they call it low cost? According to the same BBC article,




The project has cost about $100m (£76m) and has paved the way for
future low-cost lunar exploration.




Wikipedia says that the cost of the Chandrayaan-1 project was US$54 million.



Disclaimer: I am not an Indian.







the-moon






share|improve this question







New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 hours ago









Vladislav GladkikhVladislav Gladkikh

1063




1063




New contributor




Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
    $endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
It's a good point you make. Presumably they are talking about soft landers, not impactors, though.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
2 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Chandrayaan-1 hit the Moon at high speed and did not survive its "landing", which would have been much more difficult to engineer. (Its successor, Chandrayaan-2, which will actually land, is expected to cost $125 million and has taken more than ten years so far, as opposed to the three years for Chandrayaan-1.)



As far as cost goes, besides India's own (still unlaunched) soft lander that costs $25 million more than Israel's attempt, compare the costs of the US Surveyor program. NASA spent $469 million in the mid 1960s to launch seven probes, five of which successfully landed. Most of that money went to developing the technology needed for all the probes to work, and each probe cost a small fraction of that to actually build. Adjusting that amount for inflation, you get almost $3.8 billion in 2019 dollars. So if we had to start from 1960s technology and launch a new probe to land on the Moon, the cost would probably be somewhere around there. That's nearly forty times the pricetag on Israel's project.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "508"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );






    Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35475%2feli5-why-they-say-that-israel-would-have-been-the-fourth-country-to-land-a-spac%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    Chandrayaan-1 hit the Moon at high speed and did not survive its "landing", which would have been much more difficult to engineer. (Its successor, Chandrayaan-2, which will actually land, is expected to cost $125 million and has taken more than ten years so far, as opposed to the three years for Chandrayaan-1.)



    As far as cost goes, besides India's own (still unlaunched) soft lander that costs $25 million more than Israel's attempt, compare the costs of the US Surveyor program. NASA spent $469 million in the mid 1960s to launch seven probes, five of which successfully landed. Most of that money went to developing the technology needed for all the probes to work, and each probe cost a small fraction of that to actually build. Adjusting that amount for inflation, you get almost $3.8 billion in 2019 dollars. So if we had to start from 1960s technology and launch a new probe to land on the Moon, the cost would probably be somewhere around there. That's nearly forty times the pricetag on Israel's project.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      2












      $begingroup$

      Chandrayaan-1 hit the Moon at high speed and did not survive its "landing", which would have been much more difficult to engineer. (Its successor, Chandrayaan-2, which will actually land, is expected to cost $125 million and has taken more than ten years so far, as opposed to the three years for Chandrayaan-1.)



      As far as cost goes, besides India's own (still unlaunched) soft lander that costs $25 million more than Israel's attempt, compare the costs of the US Surveyor program. NASA spent $469 million in the mid 1960s to launch seven probes, five of which successfully landed. Most of that money went to developing the technology needed for all the probes to work, and each probe cost a small fraction of that to actually build. Adjusting that amount for inflation, you get almost $3.8 billion in 2019 dollars. So if we had to start from 1960s technology and launch a new probe to land on the Moon, the cost would probably be somewhere around there. That's nearly forty times the pricetag on Israel's project.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        Chandrayaan-1 hit the Moon at high speed and did not survive its "landing", which would have been much more difficult to engineer. (Its successor, Chandrayaan-2, which will actually land, is expected to cost $125 million and has taken more than ten years so far, as opposed to the three years for Chandrayaan-1.)



        As far as cost goes, besides India's own (still unlaunched) soft lander that costs $25 million more than Israel's attempt, compare the costs of the US Surveyor program. NASA spent $469 million in the mid 1960s to launch seven probes, five of which successfully landed. Most of that money went to developing the technology needed for all the probes to work, and each probe cost a small fraction of that to actually build. Adjusting that amount for inflation, you get almost $3.8 billion in 2019 dollars. So if we had to start from 1960s technology and launch a new probe to land on the Moon, the cost would probably be somewhere around there. That's nearly forty times the pricetag on Israel's project.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Chandrayaan-1 hit the Moon at high speed and did not survive its "landing", which would have been much more difficult to engineer. (Its successor, Chandrayaan-2, which will actually land, is expected to cost $125 million and has taken more than ten years so far, as opposed to the three years for Chandrayaan-1.)



        As far as cost goes, besides India's own (still unlaunched) soft lander that costs $25 million more than Israel's attempt, compare the costs of the US Surveyor program. NASA spent $469 million in the mid 1960s to launch seven probes, five of which successfully landed. Most of that money went to developing the technology needed for all the probes to work, and each probe cost a small fraction of that to actually build. Adjusting that amount for inflation, you get almost $3.8 billion in 2019 dollars. So if we had to start from 1960s technology and launch a new probe to land on the Moon, the cost would probably be somewhere around there. That's nearly forty times the pricetag on Israel's project.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        Nathan TuggyNathan Tuggy

        3,87142638




        3,87142638




















            Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            Vladislav Gladkikh is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35475%2feli5-why-they-say-that-israel-would-have-been-the-fourth-country-to-land-a-spac%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її