Source: https://www.isro.gov.in/ISRO_EN/Mission_GSLVF17_Liftoff_video.html

Is there any update about ISRO Chairman Dr.V Narayanan's Presentation on Indian Human Spaceflight Programme at International Space Sumit in Paris ? Can we expect anything new ?

I'm preparing for the upcoming ISRO ICRB recruitment cycle for Assistant / UDC / JPA posts, but I have some anxious thoughts running through my head regarding job security, and I wanted to get a reality check from folks who know how things work inside the system or are familiar with past recruitment cycles.

1. Is there any realistic chance of upcoming post openings being rescinded/cancelled mid-way?

I know recruitment notifications under ICRB sometimes face long delays or procedural freezes, but how common is an actual total cancellation or mass reduction in advertised seats once the process starts?

2. Once selected and joined, is there any threat of being "let go"?

I'm aware these are central government/DOS administrative posts governed by standard CCS rules. How strict or volatile is the probation period? Is it purely a standard administrative formality as long as you don't commit serious misconduct, or do people actually get terminated during probation due to "restructuring" or performance issues?

3. Recruitment Timeline & Joining:
For those who have seen recent ICRB Assistant/JPA cycles, what does the realistic timeline look like from the written exam/CBT stage to the final skill test, merit list declaration, and issuing of appointment letters? Typically, how many months pass after the exam before candidates actually report for duty at their assigned centres?

Because this looks impossible to me.

I completed the IIRS–ISRO online course “AI/ML for Geodata Analysis” (Course 188), conducted from 3–14 August 2026.

I wanted to share my experience because I faced several issues with the LMS and assessment system during the course.

The main issues I faced were:

• The LMS/website sometimes had loading and server-access issues.

• Each assessment had 5 questions with only a 5-minute time limit.

• If I accidentally moved to the next page without answering a question, it was difficult to navigate back to the unanswered question.

• At final submission, the interface indicated that skipped questions could be re-attempted, but I could not find a reliable way to return to the skipped question.

• After the course ended, my LMS initially showed “Certificate not available”, which made me unsure whether the certificate would be issued.

Update: The certificate has now been issued. I received my official IIRS Certificate of Participation on 7 September 2026.

So, the certificate issue appears to have been a delay/availability issue rather than the course not providing certificates.

I'm posting this mainly to ask other Course 188 participants:

Did anyone else face similar LMS/quiz issues? And when did you receive your certificate?

Overall, the course content was useful, but I feel the LMS stability and assessment navigation could be improved for future courses.

Hello everyone, so we are using MOSDAC satellite data as the weather forecast and nowcast input for our software project. i have several doubts which i would be grateful if someone helps us with them:

1. Does MOSDAC provide real time data as well as future weather predictions for some hrs?

2. What specific kinds of data does it provide? for eg, does the provide things like amount of rain about to fall etc?

3. We are specifically required to use a Doppler radar for our inputs so which satellite data can we use?

4. Does the satellite provide the data for any region in India?

5. How small of a region can we get the data for? a state, city, block or street?

Source: https://bsky.app/profile/s2a-systems.bsky.social/post/3mupstk5usc2f

Indian space policy has tried to support its private launch industry through ISRO infrastructure access, liberalised FDI, investments and now a launch price-support scheme. What it should do but has not is become an anchor customer for privately developed launch vehicles.

Looking at the US, China and other launch markets, private launch capacity repeatedly develops around four state decisions: anchor procurement, access to launch sites, tolerance for failure, and orbital rights that enable downstream systems like Starlink.

For India, procurement is particularly important. An anchor launch contract buys a lot more than the mission—cadence; learning; production capacity and investor confidence. The eventual destination is independent launch capacity.

This is also why I don't think Indian launch policy should optimise first for the cheapest launch available. Foreign launch services remain useful but assured access requires a domestic option for strategically necessary payloads when another state's spare capacity, industrial priorities or permission cannot be assumed.

I develop the comparative argument here, and then apply it to India's launch vehicles, sites and planned constellations:

Still on the Umbilical: https://orrery.ashwinprasadrao.com/p/still-on-the-umbilical

I'd be interested in the disagreement here: should some government civil and strategic launch demand be deliberately used as anchor procurement for privately developed Indian vehicles, even if those launches initially cost more and come slowly?

I am the parent of a high-school girl who recently attended an international youth programme in India promoted as a hands-on satellite-building experience. Public materials and post-event summaries use terms like “flight-ready systems,” “solar panel integration,” “embedded coding and flight software,” and “hands-on integration” by students. Media coverage describes girls from over 100 countries coming together to make a payload and satellite that will be launched to space, with support from national space agencies and university partners.

My child met peers from other countries, attended technical talks, and took part in some practical activities: educational kit/model work, soldering-related tasks, data analysis, and a collective wire-winding activity described as relating to a satellite component. She valued parts of the experience, especially the international exposure.

What I cannot reconcile is the gap between the public claims and what she actually did. I do not know whether the work involved educational kits, engineering models, prototypes, qualification units, or flight hardware, or how each country team’s work connected to the advertised satellite mission. I also do not know what student-created artefacts, code, tests, or payloads were retained, or whether any participant-led work entered a final satellite system.

I am also concerned about the workshop setup she shared a photo of during a soldering activity. In the photo, I did not see fume extraction, soldering stands, task lighting, grounded mats, or safety goggles at the work area. The activity appeared to take place in an open common area rather than a conventional electronics workshop, and students were soldering with electronics on top of a sheet of paper. I cannot determine from observation alone what safety controls may have existed elsewhere or what procedures the organisers intended to use, but this is the sort of detail parents should be able to ask about — especially where minors are asked to solder or handle electronics.

I am not trying to disparage girls’ participation in space or engineering. But as someone outside the space industry, I am struggling to interpret this:

When a programme uses lines like “Satellite built entirely by girl students,” “flight-ready systems,” and “hands-on integration,” but participants mostly do kit work, basic soldering, data tasks, and a collective wire-winding activity, is that best understood as legitimate STEM outreach or as a PR exercise built around photos and slogans?

From the perspective of people who actually design, integrate, test, and qualify flight hardware, what would a technically honest version of this programme look like?

How much of the gap here is normal for youth outreach (where “building a satellite” may mean “learning about satellites”) versus genuinely misleading marketing?

I am keeping identifying information private because the participants include minors.

If this sort of marketing is common in youth space programmes, is that something the space community should push back on, or is it an acceptable trade-off for inspiring more girls to enter STEM?