upvote
To launch a starlink style system, you need to be able to rapidly design and produce hundreds of thousands satellites and launch them within relatively short period of time with extremely high success rate. only the largest industrialized nation on earth can do that. india is 30-50 years away from such achievement.

To give you some quick ideas - for the total of 330 space launches in 2025, the US had almost 200, China had close to 100 launches, Russia had 17 launches, the rest of the world had the remaining 20 in total.

reply
India was the first country to reach Mars on its first attempt. ISRO is a highly capable org, and cost effective. India also was #4 to land on the moon after the USSR, USA and China - beating Japan to the punch. SpaceX is yet to deliver a payload to the moon or Mars - orbit or lander.
reply
> the first country to reach Mars on its first attempt

Well doing it decades later than others did help with that.

reply
How did that help them?

And how does it matter why they succeeded when the question is "are they capable of doing a Starlink?"?

reply
How many[1] others? Not many countries can claim that achievement, industrialized or not, which is telling.

1. The answer is 3.: USA, USSR, and the European Space Agency

reply
How many countries can claim the achievement of developing nuclear weapons? Does that make North Korea somehow an inherently more successful country than Germany?

Spending money on a space program while hundreds of millions of your citizens are living in extreme poverty is obscene (unless it provides significant economic value)

reply
> Spending money on a space program while hundreds of millions of your citizens are living in extreme poverty is obscene

Why? According to Wikipedia they spend like $1.4b annually. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISRO That's like an extra $10 for each of these citizens living in "extreme poverty".

And what's the cutoff? Like 10% of the US population is under the poverty line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States. Is NASA "obscene" too? Granted that's not the same as "extreme poverty" but it's still a bad look in the richest country in the world, right?

> unless it provides significant economic value

Investments in science and technology generally do. Rich countries are advanced in science and technology.

reply
> Does that make North Korea somehow an inherently more successful country than Germany?

Your argument is all over the place. This thread is about if India could tackle LEO comsats, but perhaps you're seeing it through a lens of prestige/success.

> Spending money on a space program while hundreds of millions of your citizens are living in extreme poverty is obscene

You'll love Gil Scott-Heron's classic that wrestled the same ideas in the 1960s USA, titled Whitey on the Moon

reply