mediamates

Wednesday, 20 April 2011

Congrats, ISRO done it

In a morale-boosting success for its space programme after two consecutive GSLV setbacks,India put into orbit its sophisticated remote sensing satellite Resourcesat-2 and two micro satellites carried onboard its workhorse PSLV-C16 rocket from Sriharikota.

In a textbook launch, ISRO's trusted PSLV in its 18th flight hurled the three satellites into an 822-km polar sun synchronous orbit a little over 18 minutes after lift-off in clear skies from the first launch pad of the Satish Dhawan Space Centre, 90 kms north of Chennai.

The 17th consecutive successful launch by the PSLV demonstrated India's capabilities yet again in the lucrative global commercial launch market.

A beaming ISRO Chairman K Radhakrishnan described the mission as a 'grand success'.

"I am extremely happy to announce that the PSLV-C16 Resourcesat-2 mission is successful," he told scientists at the Mission Control Centre as they broke into cheer after anxious moments, particularly in the backdrop of the two successive GSLV failures last year.

The homegrown GSLV F06 carrying communication satellite GSAT-5P exploded mid-air less than a minute after lift-off when the destruct command was issued as the rocket veered from its flight path in December.

GSLV-D3 mission carrying GSAT-4 also failed in April 2010.

Radhakrishnan said the launch of two foreign satellites showed international recognition of the PSLV's reliability.

The 1,206 kg Resourcesat-2 with a space life of five years replaces Resourcesat-1 launched in 2003 and would provide data with enhanced multispectral and spatial coverage on natural resources through three cameras with enhanced imaging capabilities.

The Rs 140-crore satellite would help assess the health of crops, monitor deforestation and water levels in reservoirs and lakes and facilitate a variety of applications including disaster management.

It would also help in catering to the national and global data needs to address multiple aspects of natural resource inventory and monitoring in areas including agriculture, water resources, rural development and bio-resources.

Resourscesat-2 co-passenger Youthsat, weighing 92 kg, is a joint Indo-Russian nano satellite meant for stellar and atmospheric studies.

The launch of the third satellite, 106-kg X-sat, an image applications spacecraft built by Singapore's NanyangTechnological University, is the first by ISRO for the city-state.

In his post-launch media briefing, Radhakrishnan said Resourcesat-2 was a sophisticated satellite with three cameras which will give vital information on natural resources.

He declined to divulge the launch fee paid for Singapore's X-sat.

ISRO Satellite Centre Director T K Alex said Resourcesat-2 had been injected into the right orbit and the solar pannels deployed. "They are working extraordinarily well."

ISRO was planning to switch on the cameras onboard the spacecraft on 28^th April, he said, adding with 15 countries set to use the images of Resourcesat-2 it was a 'global mission'.

Apart from the three cameras with high, medium and coarse resolutions, Resourcesat-2 also has two solid state recorders with a capacity of 200 GB each to store images which can be accessed by the ground stations later.

It also carries Automatic Identification System (AIS) from COMDEV, Canada, as an experimental payload for ship surveillance in VHF band to derive position, speed and other information about ships.

Earlier, as the countdown ended for the launch, a palpable sense of expectancy was writ large on the face of scientists at the Mission Control Centre as they monitored the rocket's performance at each stage.

Silence gave way to a burst of applause as the mission was declared succesful with the rocket injecting all the three satellites into space as programmed.

Summing up the mood, Mission Director P Kunhikrishnan said, "It is a glad moment for the entire ISRO community... It’s a reassurance to the nation that the confidence in ISRO is fully justified."

Saturday, 19 March 2011

Holi Moon

Wednesday, 16 March 2011

SC prefers the word ‘keep’ for a man's lover

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (16-03-2011)dismissed a petition by a women's group seeking withdrawal of the controversial phrase "keep" used by it in a judgement in which it held that a "one night stand" with a man would not entitle a woman to maintenance.

A bench of justices Markandeya Katju and T S Thakur rejected the Mahila Dakshat Samiti's petition on the ground that it had no locus standi (legal right) to question the judgement since it was not a party to the matrimonal dispute in which the judgement was passed.

In the judgement delivered on October 21 last year, the apex court had held "if a man has a 'keep' whom he maintains financially and uses mainly for sexual purpose and or as a servant, it would not in our opinion be a relationship in the nature of marriage."

The country's lone woman Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising and Vinay Bhardwaj, Vice President of the Samiti, expressed dissappointment at the apex court's refusal to withdraw the "derogatory remark."

The bench in a terse order today said "application for permission to file a review petition is rejected. This review petition has been filed on behalf of Mahila Dakshat Samiti seeking review of this court's order dated 21st October, 2010 whereby the appeals were allowed.

"Mahila Dakshat Samiti was not a party before this court or before the High Court or trial court. Having carefully gone through the review petition and connected papers, we see no reason to grant permission to Mahila Dakshat Samiti to file this review petition. Hence, the application for permission to file review petition is rejected."

The apex court in the judgement had ruled that a woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to maintenance unless she fulfils certain parameters and said merely spending weekends together or a one night stand would not make it a domestic relationship.

It formulated the following parameters for a woman in a live-in relationship to seek maintenance.

1. The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses.

2. They must be of the legal age to marry.

3. They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage including being unmarried

4. They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time.

5. "In our opinion, not all live-in relationships will amount to a relationship in the nature of marriage to get the benefit of the Act of 2005 (Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act). To get such benefits, the conditions mentioned by us above must be satisfied and this has to be proved by evidence," the court had said.

6. The apex court had passed the judgement while setting aside the concurrent orders passed by a matrimonial court and the Madras High Court awarding Rs 500 maintenance to D Patchaiammal who claimed to have married the appellant D Velusamy.

Velusamy had challenged the two courts' order on the ground that he was already married to one Laxmi and Patchiammal was not married to him though he lived with her for some time.

Jaising said "the judges have chosen the easy option instead of confronting the issue as would be expected from judges of the Supreme Court."

She said the Samiti was an organisation with an illustrious track record of having worked in the interest of women for the last several decades including formulation of the dowry prohibition act and hence its credibility could never be doubted.

"The issues raised in the review petition do not relate to the parties to the case alone but to women as a class. The issues are use of gender bias language in judgements of the Supreme Court of India.

"It is expected to use gender-neutral language. The objection was to the word 'keep' and expression used only in relation to women in a highly derogatory context," she said adding the apex court had missed a "historic opportunity to correct a wrong."

Bhardwaj said she was deeply disturbed by the judgement as the apex court since the 1980s had played

very progressive roles on womens’ issues.

"As time goes on, the Supreme Court should have taken up positive and progressive views in view of the magnitude of the problems of women. Instead, it has chosen to dismiss the petition," she said.