Why does it cost India so little to reach the Moon and Mars

India recently announced a number of space projects and approved 227bn rupees ($2.7bn; £2.1bn) for them.

These plans include the next phase of India’s landmark mission to the Moon, sending an orbiter to Venus, the construction of the first phase of the country’s first space station and the development of a new heavy-duty reusable rocket to launch satellites.

It is the largest single share of funding ever for India’s space projects, but considering the size and complexity of the projects, it is far from extravagant and once again reflects the importance of spending on India’s space program.

Experts around the world are amazed at how expensive the Indian Space Research Organization (Isro) Moon, Mars and solar missions are. India spent $74m on the Mars orbiter Mangalyaan and $75m last year history of Chandrayaan-3 – less than $100m spent on sci-fi thriller Gravity.

Nasa’s Maven orbiter cost $582m and Russia’s Luna-25, which crashed on the Moon two days before Chandrayaan-3 arrived. 12.6bn rubles ($133m).

Despite the low cost, scientists say India is punching above its weight in terms of targeting do important work.

Chandrayaan-1 was the first to confirm the presence of water in the lunar soil and Mangalyaan carried the responsibility of studying methane in the atmosphere of Mars. Pictures and data Posted by Chandrayaan-3 are watched with great interest by space enthusiasts around the world.

So how does India keep costs so low?

Retired civil servant Sisir Kumar Das, who oversaw Isro’s finances for more than two decades, says the corruption can be traced back to the 1960s, when scientists first introduced the space program to the government.

India had gained independence from British colonialism only in 1947 and the country was struggling to feed its people and build adequate schools and hospitals.

“Isro founder and scientist Vikram Sarabhai had to convince the government that the space program was not just an ironic hobby that had no place in a poor country like India. He explained that satellites can help India serve its citizens better,” Mr Das told the BBC.

But India’s space program had to operate on a tight budget in a country with conflicting needs and interests. Pictures from the 1960s and 70s shows scientists carrying rockets and satellites in cycles or even in a bullock cart.

Decades later and after several successful interplanetary missions, Isro’s budget remains modest. This year, India’s budget share for its space program is 130bn rupees ($1.55bn) – Nasa’s annual budget is $25bn.

Mr. Das says that one of the reasons why Isro’s work is cheap is that all its technology is made at home and the machines are made in India.

In 1974, after Delhi conducted its first nuclear test and the West imposed an embargo, preventing the transfer of technology to India, the restrictions were “turned into a blessing in disguise” for the space program, he adds.

“Our scientists used it as an incentive to develop their own technology. All the machinery they needed was locally produced – and wages and labor costs were decidedly lower here than in the US or Europe. “

Science writer Pallava Bagla says that unlike Isro, Nasa outsources the manufacturing of satellites to private companies and also insures its operations, which adds to their costs.

“Also, unlike Nasa, India does not make engineering models that are used to test the project before the actual launch. We only make one model and it is intended for flying. It’s risky, there are chances of crashing, but that’s the risk we take. And we are able to take it because it is a government program.”

Mylswamy Annadurai, chief of India’s first and second lunar missions and the Mars mission, told the BBC that Isro employs too few people and pays low wages, making Indian projects less competitive.

He says he has “led small dedicated teams of less than 10 people and people often worked extra hours without being paid for overtime” because they loved what they were doing so much.

Tight budgets for projects, he said, sometimes take them back to the drawing board, allow them to think outside the box and lead to innovation.

“For Chandrayaan-1, the budget allocated was $89m and that was right in the initial configuration. But after that, it was decided that the spacecraft would carry the Moon impact probe which means it added 35kg.”

Scientists had two choices – use a heavier rocket to carry the mission, but that would cost more, or remove some hardware to reduce the load.

“We chose the second option. We reduced the number of thrusters from 16 to eight and the pressure tanks and batteries were reduced from two to one.”

Reducing the number of batteries, Mr Annadurai says, means that the launch should take place before the end of 2008.

“That would give the spacecraft two years while orbiting the Moon without seeing a long solar eclipse, which would affect its ability to recharge. So we had to maintain a tight schedule to meet the launch deadline.”

Mangalyaan is less expensive, Mr Annadurai says, “because we used most of the hardware we had already designed for Chandrayaan-2 after the second Moon mission was delayed”.

Mr Bagla says that India’s system that comes at such a low cost is “an amazing feat”. But as India rises, the cost may rise.

At the moment, he says, India uses small rocket launchers because they don’t have a powerful element. But that means the Indian spaceship takes longer to reach its destination.

So, when Chandrayaan-3 was launched, it orbited the Earth several times before being launched into lunar orbit, where it orbited the Moon several times before landing. On the other hand, the Russian Luna-25 escaped Earth’s gravity quickly aboard a powerful Soyuz rocket.

“We used the gravity of Mother Earth to propel us to the Moon. It took us weeks and a lot of creative planning. Isro has mastered this and done it successfully many times.”

But, Mr. Bagla says, India has announced plans to send a human mission to the Moon by 2040. and it would require a powerful rocket to fly astronauts there quickly.

The government recently said The work of this new rocket was already approved and would be ready in 2032. This Next Generation Launch Vehicle (NGLV) will be able to carry more weight but also cost more.

Also, Mr Bagla says, India is in the process of opening up the space sector to private players and it is unlikely that costs will remain low once that happens.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter again Facebook.