ISRO missions to Moon and Mars leveraged Sling-shotting (saves on Fuel and weight of the same to be carried). The Russian probe took a more direct approach landing to the moon.

One could say it was somewhat too direct :)

It was a highly successful special lunar operation.

Of all the recent failures of moon landers, Luna 25 is the most intriguing one. It failed simply because the retro-burn continued too long. It was a simple timed operation, unlike all the complex logic that goes into landing. Makes me wonder about the state of the Russian space programme.

The most recent former head of the agency has apparently expressed skepticism about the US moon landings in 1969 and also has a degree in economics. Allegedly the program has been hollowed out by corruption. Perhaps someone more qualified to comment could shed some light on this?

If you mean Dmitry Rogozin, then yeah, he was a total dick (a part of which he has allegedly lost recently in Ukraine) who peddled all sorts of lies and oversaw the decline of Russian space capabilities.

I wouldn't be surprised if he expressed doubt over the Moon landings considering that he was also the one to push the absurd claim that the hole that had been drilled into a Soyuz was sabotage done by a space-crazed American female astronaut.

This wouldn't be the first time that they've lost a major mission due to a similarly simple root cause: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyus_(spacecraft)

The Russian space program is a real mess and a shadow of what it once was.

The constant ISRO fanboyism is annoying. If you didn’t notice, 54 years ago, US put a man on the moon, something far more impressive and no other country has managed to repeat. Good that ISRO has managed to land a rover on the moon, but to put it into perspective, US and China have landed rovers on Mars. (And please don’t bring up cost, SpaceX has you beat on that too)

I don't think space fanboyism hurt anyone, if at all someone feels proud let them be as long as it's in good spirits. Comparison of SpaceX to ISRO or even other organisation seems a bit unfair, SpaceX have access to ecosystem of sensors, components that are restricted by US. Develop something as simple as reaction wheel takes decades. While I don't appreciate fanboyism in general, I also believe there is a world beyond writing a few lines of codes...

Heaven forbid that all conversations should not be about the USA.

He just mad Russia landed on Venus 50 years ago and the USA didn't.

> The constant ISRO fanboyism is annoying

Maybe. But why you complain in response to comment without any of it?

Also, why being excited about lunar mission is supposed to be a problem? People can be excited about things smaller than some large achievement.

And human landings were not so useful anyway.

Any kind of nationalism is annoying when it comes to science.

ISRO missions leveraged Hohmann transfers to gradually raise the orbit. It does save on fuel using the Oberth effect. It also has somewhat less uncertainty. However, they were not gravitational slingshots. Have a look at the tweet linked by the other commenter - the probe approaches moon twice. The first approach causes a rather drastic change in velocity and trajectory. It's unlikely that such a change comes from the probe's thrusters alone. I assume that the second approach and capture is somewhat mild (tangential as the other commenter put it).

In comparison, the Chandrayaan and Mars orbiter missions approached their target only once. And the insertion was also somewhat drastic, with a long retro-burn.

Landing mechanism is cool too. The lander has deformable metallic sponge balls on the legs, hits the soil at its "heel" and tip forward[1].

Official reasons given is it allows reduction of structural margins, physical interferences and tipover risks on inclined surfaces, which seem to make sense. Maybe it's just me that it looks a bit like someone had to have a spacecraft that lands like the Space Shuttle with engines pointing back.

1: https://www.isas.jaxa.jp/feature/forefront/files/201912_1.jp...

That’s pretty much my standard landing method in Kerbal.

Descend vertically to keep from having to worry about balancing a bunch of thrusters.

Then, tip over, hopefully in the right orientation and gently enough to not blow up.

Slingshot analogy animation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrayaan-3#/media/File:An...

yeah but notice the JAXA one is different, since it approaches the moon twice.

It starts sort of the same way, but then it uses the moon's own attraction to project itself much further out and then come back approaching the moon in a different way.

Gravity assist or gravitational slingshot [1] is a specific type of maneuver that's different from the Hohmann transfer that Chandrayaan-3 is seen taking in your video.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist