A temporary setback

There will be a lot to learn from Chandrayaan-2 Mission

Although the loss of the Vikram lander has caused deep disappointment, the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) can take away many positives from the Chandrayaan-2 Mission. Attempting a soft lunar landing was an ambitious goal and something going wrong was always a possibility. Two out of every three such attempts failed in the past, including an Israeli mission that crashed earlier this year.

Meanwhile, the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter is functioning well. So it’s not as if the mission has entirely failed. The orbiter itself carries eight instruments designed for different experiments and observations. This is not to deny that the loss of the Vikram Lander and Pragyan Rover are heavy blows, as these carried six key payloads which could have delivered entirely new information.

The moon is a difficult target for soft landings and, indeed, only three nations have ever managed this. Almost half the moon, including the designated landing zone at the Lunar South Pole, is on the far side of the Earth and, hence, not charted. The terrain is difficult, with rocks and craters, much of it covered with 10 metres of dust, where a lander could sink. The plan was for the Vikram Lander to detach from the orbiter at about 100 kms and then apply brake in a multi-phase operation to reduce speed from about 1,680 metres/second (a little less than 6,000 kmph) to two metres/ second as it approached the surface.

The first two phases went well with smooth detachment. The speed had dropped to around 50 metres/second at a height of about 2,100 metres when communication broke down. While there could be many reasons for this, it’s unlikely that the Vikram landed without catastrophic damage.

The orbiter will try to locate the lander (or its wreckage) as it passes over that region in its orbit. Isro’s ground control will also analyse data received for clues as to what went wrong. This will help improve design in the next moon mission. It is abundantly clear that Isro wants to try again, and there is evidence of political support for the next attempt in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s response. Isro must not only carry on; it must be given all the support it needs to plan its next series of missions.

There are several important aspects to space missions of this nature. One is gathering new data and insights. This is blue-sky research, which always pays off eventually in unpredictable ways. The orbiter will carry out experiments and observations that inform us about the topography of the moon and its chemical composition, including the possible presence of water, and other important compounds and minerals.

Other orbiter-based experiments will also reveal more about solar radiation at the moon (which lacks the shield of the Earth’s strong magnetic field and atmosphere), and about the composition of the moon’s very tenuous atmosphere and the presence of electrons. The lander and rover could have told us more about the moon’s surface, but that’s not to be.

Second, every mission of this nature helps scientists and engineers who put it together to develop new technological capabilities. Every nation with space-going ambitions has had to do this on its own. Space exploration and the spinoffs from it have transformed the technological landscape in the last 50 years. A successful landing and rover exploration would have taught Isro a lot about managing such delicate processes. A lot can also be learnt from the failure.

The third factor is impossible to quantify, but it is perhaps the most important. Space exploration inspires people in a way that few other forms of scientific research seems to do. It can trigger an interest in seeking a career in science and technology. Dividends from that will only be visible decades later when children who tracked the Mangalayaan and Chandrayaan missions emerge in their own right as the next generation of scientific researchers.