India's Space Sector [Archive]

kronik

May 17th, 2005, 04:00 AM

And now a message from the President of India. This is a longer piece in which he talks about the ISRO, the DMRC, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India and the Department of Telecom. Here is the portion on space. But check out the rest.

Technologies for societal transformation (http://www.hindu.com/2005/05/16/stories/2005051602701000.htm)

Twin satellite mission

It was a beautiful experience for the nation and for me when the sixth in the successful series of Polar Satellite Launch Vehicles (PSLV) lifted off with two spacecraft from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota on May 5, 2005. When CARTOSAT-I was injected in a polar orbit of 618 km, it became a world-class earth mapper. The mission of PSLV from take-off to injection of the satellites in the required orbit was achieved within 18 minutes with precision. The satellite has a control capability to revisit any part of our country within five days and transmit data in the X-Band mode. A unique feature of this satellite is that it has onboard compression and encryption with RF system of phased array antennas with 64 elements. CARTOSAT-I with its stereoscopic imaging capability along the track will provide the country 3-D digital mapping capability.

CARTOSAT-I will find applications related to land, water, and environment management and provide disaster management support. It will enable the generation of large-scale base maps, thematic maps, a national level digital elevation model, a digital terrain model, contour interval mapping to the extent of about 10 meters. Data from CARTOSAT-I in conjunction with other IRS satellite data will be useful in applications such as mapping of settlements, urban utility mapping, and delineation of watershed. The digital terrain model with improved accuracies will find applications in inter-river basin studies pertaining to interlinking of rivers and urban and rural infrastructure development such as rural road connectivity and alignment of national railway lines.

Another important application will be in the area of disaster management to determine the extent of damage and the type of emergency assistance needed. This has been made possible by our space scientists using high-resolution stereoscopic imagery from CARTOSAT-I. I am very happy to know from our space scientists that on May 7 and 8, the cameras onboard the satellite were tested and they reported excellent performance. Further, ISRO scientists have reported that the fine-tuning of the path of the satellite in orbit is progressing in circularisation and inclination needed with respect to the equator. This successful mission of CARTOSAT-I has definitely provided global leadership to our country in earth mapping technology. We can look for another mission from ISRO in September 2005 — the launch of CARTOSAT-II.

HAMSAT is a micro satellite for providing satellite based amateur radio services to the national as well as the international community of amateur radio operators (HAMs). Launched as an auxiliary payload along with CARTOSAT-I, the 42.5 kg HAMSAT will meet the long-felt need of amateur radio operators in the South Asian region who possess the required equipment, and to operate in the UHF/VHF band based satellite radio communication. One of the transponders of HAMSAT has been developed indigenously involving Indian HAMs, with the expertise of ISRO and the experience of AMSAT-INDIA. The second transponder has been developed by a Dutch amateur radio operator and graduate engineering student at the Higher Technical Institute, Venlo in the Netherlands.

HAMSAT is India's contribution to the international community of amateur radio operators. This effort is also meant to bring ISRO's satellite services within the reach of the common man and popularise space technology among the masses. This satellite will play a valuable role in the national and international scenario by providing a low cost, readily accessible and reliable means of communication during emergencies and calamities such as floods and earthquakes. Besides, it will stimulate technical interest and awareness among the younger generation by providing them with an opportunity to develop their technological projects including offering a platform. I would like to refer to the programme of micro satellite development by ISRO and Anna University as a cooperative mission. This event of micro satellite in space will definitely ignite the minds of the Indian academic community towards space research.

centralized pandemonium

May 17th, 2005, 04:05 AM

Nice pics Amit. Do you happen to work at ISRO by any chance.

Amit

May 17th, 2005, 05:49 AM

Nice pics Amit. Do you happen to work at ISRO by any chance.

Ha ha.. well no, I am a PhD student in US. But I could work at ISRO in future :)

centralized pandemonium

May 24th, 2005, 04:51 AM

One more launch of GSLV by year-end: ISRO chief

ISRO in the process of clearing payloads from EU, the US, says Madhavan Nair 70 pc work on third flight of GSLV complete, says Madhavan Nair

http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=2730

centralized pandemonium

June 28th, 2005, 12:18 AM

ISRO close to playing role in global navigation systems

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/06/28/stories/2005062801330400.htm

anurag_rulz

June 28th, 2005, 03:44 PM

nice pics amit..thanks so much
doesnt the indian flag on it make u feel sooo good??

anurag_rulz

June 28th, 2005, 05:20 PM

"India's maiden hypersonic wind tunnel under construction"
http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=92154&cat=Business

http://tinypic.com/6gwqza.jpg

29A

June 29th, 2005, 04:57 PM

@anurag_rulz,
Ahhh.... another indication of the Genius of Indian scientists. I will find some appropriate thread on the main page to put this news on..
We must make an active effort to create a better image of India.

p2p4

June 30th, 2005, 05:57 AM

I may add - that our space development programme began at a humble pace and humble scientists. You will see a number of pictures of our scientists in simple attire - a far cry from the pin stripe suited & booted nut-crackers of the west.

Way to go India.. way to go !

Cheers India
p2p4

@anurag_rulz,
Ahhh.... another indication of the Genius of Indian scientists. I will find some appropriate thread on the main page to put this news on..
We must make an active effort to create a better image of India.

Amit

July 2nd, 2005, 01:32 AM

nice pics amit..thanks so much
doesnt the indian flag on it make u feel sooo good??

Yeah.. and INDIA & ISRO written on the GSLV looks even better :)

Amit

July 2nd, 2005, 01:45 AM

"India's maiden hypersonic wind tunnel under construction"
http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=92154&cat=Business

That is a very interesting news. However, it is not the first hypersonic wind tunnel in India. VSSC (ISRO) and Department of Aerospace engineering, IISc have one hypersonic wind tunnel each already. So this will be the Third in India.

http://www.aero.iisc.ernet.in/facilities/aerodyn_facil_detail.html

anurag_rulz

July 6th, 2005, 04:29 PM

Village Resource Centres will guide economy: Kalam:-
Chennai | July 06, 2005 7:40:11 PM IST

Chennai, July 6 : President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Wednesday launched the Amrita-ISRO Satellite Network of Village Resource Centres (VRC) at the Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetam (AVV) in western Tamil Nadu.

The President is on a two-day visit to the district.

ISRO Chairman G. Madhavan Nair said VRCs are to deliver benefits like tele-education, telemedicine and disaster warning and management. The success of VRCs in Tirunelveli, Dindigul and Rameswaram made the government extend them to 200 more clusters.

The programme, launched at Ettimadai, about 500 km west of Chennai, is jointly executed by India's premier space organisation Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and AVV, a university run by the Amritanandamayi Math.

Kalam told his student audience: "It is very important to have physical connectivity, electronic connectivity and knowledge connectivity to make economic connectivity strong.

"70 percent of our people live in villages. Now the time has come for villages to become the hub of competence and VRCs will be the catalytic agent for transforming villages."

VRCs in coastal villages should also serve as comprehensive calamity warning centers, Kalam added.

http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=94528&cat=Business

Jai Jawan Jai Kisan Jai Vigyan

anurag_rulz

July 13th, 2005, 03:57 AM

India's latest remote sensing satellite Cartosat-1 has started sending signals and it is expected to be declared operational in six weeks, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chairman, G Madhavan Nair, said on Sunday.

The two advanced high-resolution panchromatic cameras on board the spacecraft have been switched on and it has started sending encoded signals. "We will need a day or so to see the result," Nair told the agency in Bangalore.

He said final sequence operation had been completed as planned and Cartosat, designed for mapping applications, was now in its designated space slot.

"We now have test and evaluation programme which would take five to six weeks, after which Cartosat-1 will be declared operational," Nair said. "All the systems are functioning normally."

According to ISRO officials, the 1560-kg satellite has been placed in a sun-synchronous polar orbit of 620 km, and it has a revisit capability of five days.

The Rs 248.49 crore satellite was launched by PSLV-C6 from the spaceport of Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh on May 5. The two cameras have a spatial resolution of 2.5 metres, which means it can take pictures of any object that is 2.5 metres in size on the earth's surface.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1353002,00040006.htm

centralized pandemonium

July 17th, 2005, 06:35 AM

Ground test of cryogenic stage for GSLV in October

http://www.hindu.com/2005/07/17/stories/2005071709500100.htm

kronik

August 16th, 2005, 01:19 AM

Why is this beautiful, technological thread rusting?

Preparing for space stations (http://www.flonnet.com/fl2217/stories/20050826002409200.htm)

THE first flight of the Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)-Mark III is expected to take place by the end of 2007. "We are at the midpoint of the systems development of this beautiful vehicle. When it becomes operational, India will have the capability to build space stations," S. Ramakrishnan, Project Director of GSLV Mk III, said.

An operational GSLV-Mk III would ensure that India did not depend on the Ariane vehicle of the European Space Agency to launch the INSAT-class of satellites, which weigh more than 2.5 tonnes, in geo-synchronous transfer orbits. GSLV-Mk III can put a satellite weighing between four and five tonnes in the geo-synchronous transfer orbit, which has an apogee of 36,000 km and a perigee of 180 km.

According to ISRO officials, the PSLV flight, which will take place next year, will put into orbit an Italian satellite called Agile and India's 500-kg Space Recovery Experiment (SRE) capsule. After its payloads perform their experiments lasting several weeks, the SRE will fall into the sea and will be recovered by Indian naval ships.

Three air-drop tests of the SRE from a helicopter were conducted in the Pulicat lake near Sriharikota, Andhra Pradesh, in June and August 2004. An air-drop of the SRE into the Bay of Bengal was done some weeks ago and the SRE was recovered successfully.

The SRE is seen as an important precursor to manned missions to space.

Naga_Solidus

August 16th, 2005, 03:44 AM

Why is this beautiful, technological thread rusting?

Preparing for space stations (http://www.flonnet.com/fl2217/stories/20050826002409200.htm)

An All-Indian space station?!?!? HELL YEAH LET'S PUMP SOME MORE MONEY INTO GSLV BABY!!!

Seriously tho, we need to get human space lanch capabiliteds first, which can be dome really easily.

Luckystreak

August 18th, 2005, 08:01 AM

India gearing up for Moon mission 'Chandrayaan'

India is gearing up for its planned Moon mission 'Chandrayaan' two years from now, with top scientists from the country gathering in Hyderabad to discuss the design system of the 32 metre diameter deep space network ground station antenna for the mission.

"This antenna will serve as an important component system of the ground support and is currently being finalised at a meeting organised by ECIL and ISRO and top scientists from the field of space and technology," ECIL Chairman and Managing Director, GP Srivastava, told reporters in Hyderabad on Wednesday.

"The first of its kind antenna in the country will send signals to the moon mission which will be four lakh kilometres above earth. The moon mission aims at filling information gap that exists about the geology and origin of the moon", Srivastava said.

A K Gupta Director, ECIL, SK Shivkumar ISRO Telemetry Tracking and Command Network (ISTRAC) who were present at the press conference said that Chandrayaan is the first Indian mission to the moon for undertaking high resolution remote sensing of the lunar surface aimed at determining the evolutionary process of the moon by studying the mineral and chemical structure of its surface.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1464929,00040005.htm

...

Naga_Solidus

August 18th, 2005, 05:57 PM

Chandranarayan's stil on? YAY!

kshatriya

August 18th, 2005, 06:05 PM

Chandranarayan's stil on? YAY!
erm its chandrayaan. :|

anurag_rulz

August 19th, 2005, 09:20 AM

29A

August 21st, 2005, 07:39 AM

Damn! our own space station! This is great! We must seriously think of putting a man into space very very soon. This is even more important that chandrayaan.. It will create an impact all over the world FAAARRR more than the chinese launch did..

Naga_Solidus

August 21st, 2005, 07:50 AM

centralized pandemonium

September 20th, 2005, 07:36 PM

ISRO vision: Rs 3000 cr, 12 satellites, 4 yrs

India is planning to launch 10 to 12 communication satellites in the next four years with an investment of over Rs 3,000 crore, Chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation G Madhavan Nair said today.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1236632.cms

MachuPichu

September 21st, 2005, 01:15 AM

Big Bucks From Space

India earned Rs 300 crore by exporting its launch and satellite building expertise last year.

By M.G. Radhakrishnan

August 15, 2007. Indian and US space scientists cheered as they watched the polar satellite launch vehicle (PSLV) carrying the moon orbiter, Chandrayan 1, lift off into space from the Sriharikota launch pad in India. On board the orbiter was NASA's specially created moon mineralogy mapper that would, for the first time, provide the US scientists with detailed maps of the moon's surface geology and mineral composition. -The Washington Post

The above news item would seem like moonshine if it weren't for the fact that the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is currently negotiating with NASA for just such a launch. The world's premier space power is not the only one knocking at ISRO's doors for launch facilities. While German, Korean and Belgian satellites have already piggybacked on PSLV, lining up are nations from the Far East and Europe, as well as big players in the satellite-launch business like Hughes, Matra Marconi and World Space. Last year, India earned Rs 300 crore from the export of capabilities for launching and building satellites and the market is growing at 30 per cent annually.

ISRO has come a long way. From launching India's first indigenously built satellite launch vehicle, slv3, on June 18, 1980, to undertaking its 20th launch mission in space last year, the organisation has grown at a frantic pace. Surprising, as the flawless launches-where the margin of error is less than .00001 per cent-go hand in hand with leaking faucets and loose wires in five-star hotels. The dichotomy may amaze the space giants, but India has irrefutably arrived as a space power.

"We are only a few steps away from becoming one of the most capable members of the space club," says G. Madhavan Nair, chairman, ISRO. In 1980, India joined the exclusive five-member space club with the launch of slv3, which was capable of putting a 40 kg satellite into a low earth orbit. On May 5 last year, ISRO launched the pslv-c6, which ejected cartosat-1, the 1,560 kg remote-sensing satellite, into a polar orbit. Being put together at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) is GSLV, Mark III, which is capable of putting a four-tonne satellite in a geosynchronous transfer orbit. "With Mark III to be launched from Sriharikota in 2007 we will be self-reliant in launching communication satellites," says B.N. Suresh, director, VSSC. The communication and remote sensing satellites (INSAT and IRS) have revolutionised India's communication system, meteorological studies and natural resources management.

Yet, ISRO continues to aim higher. In the coming 25 years, it plans to develop a new generation of recoverable, reusable launch vehicles travelling at hypersonic speeds. "We should aim for the moon, which would be an industrial station, and Mars, a habitable destination," said President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam at the silver jubilee celebrations of the slv3 launch. As project director of the launch, he had led India into the space club. Today he is the first citizen-an apt metaphor for India's achievements in space.

From Aug 22nd Issue of India Today

We'll have to wiat and see. ISRO is currently launching like one rocket a year. With a lot of demand, it needs to launch more in a year. Actually, ISRO has been damn slow with its space program. But that can be attributable to funding. ISRO needs to first launch a satellite a quarter from its own vehicle to prove to the world that it can consistently launch satellites. Consistency of launches over shorter periods is required (like Ariane launches) before customers will flock in for major satellite launches. The US is developing a reusable vehicle to go to the moon. So they'd probably be doing only very minor work with ISRO. The Indian newspapers once again hype things way too much. India's launch costs are probably lower than the rest of the world. But the question is: will the launch costs remain low even when infrastructure needs to be built to achieve several successful launches in a clanedar year.

Frankly, the world will take note of India when 25% of India's population have purchasing power greater than USD 10000 per person. Nothing else will interest the world. Just like the world does not see India in poorer light when a country of 1 billion people fails to produce Olympic level performances, so will the world be not concerned about its space programs. You have to make a big difference for the world to notice you - not small increments.

Actually, we need more Indian private companies getting into the space race and building satellite products. Clearly the laucnh business is not a profitable business yet and hence we see no private players in this space. ISRO's goal should be to be able to privatize launches and move onto next steps in R&D.

MP

blrBird

September 21st, 2005, 03:06 AM

Indian private companies getting into the space race and building satellite products. Clearly the laucnh business is not a profitable business yet and hence we see no private players in this space. ISRO's goal should be to be able to privatize launches and move onto next steps in R&D.
MP

Couple of years ago there was a talk about privatising PSLV? Do any one of you know what happened on this front?

drwho

December 19th, 2005, 01:31 PM

India set to launch Insat-4A

India set to launch Insat-4A

India is set to launch their telecommunications satellite, Insat-4A [Indian National Satellite-4A] this coming Thursday. The preparation of this important launch is entering in the final phase in the European spaceport of Kourou in French Guiana. This satellite is the heaviest ever built in the country and it consists of high-powered transponders set to give an impetus to direct-to-home television services.

This is also the first of the Insat-4 series and the nation would be sending many more following this launch. ISRO [Indian Space Research Organization] officials said in a statement about the launch of Insat-4A: “It will be shot into space with European meteorological payload MSG-2 on board ‘’Ariane-5′’ generic rocket of European satellite consortium Arianespace early on December 22.”

Indian television viewers can see the launch live on Doordarshan at 04.03 a.m. [local time] on the launch date. The launch would see the presence of Top Indian Space Research Organization officials, including its Chairman Dr G. Madhavan Nair, and Director of ISRO Satellite Centre Dr K.N. Shankara. Insat-4A weighs around 3,080 kg has a design life of 12 years.

The satellite cost the nation around Rs. 300 crores and would provide coverage over the Indian subcontinent.

http://news.techwhack.com/2713/191207-india-set-to-launch-insat-4a/

MachuPichu

December 20th, 2005, 12:06 AM

Naga_Solidus

December 20th, 2005, 02:42 AM

This is also the first of the Insat-4 series and the nation would be sending many more following this launch. ISRO [Indian Space Research Organization] officials said in a statement about the launch of Insat-4A: “It will be shot into space with European meteorological payload MSG-2 on board ‘’Ariane-5?’ generic rocket of European satellite consortium Arianespace early on December 22.”

Great news. However, is there a reason why then decided to send it using Eurpoe's Ariane instead of India's own stuff?

pding

December 20th, 2005, 03:17 AM

MP:

never heard of satellites being launched by private companies anywhere in the world.
may be i'm wrong. explain in a little more length, what do you mean by commercial launches.

Sridhar

December 20th, 2005, 07:09 AM

MachuPichu

December 20th, 2005, 08:00 AM

MP:

never heard of satellites being launched by private companies anywhere in the world.
may be i'm wrong. explain in a little more length, what do you mean by commercial launches.

A, Why do what the world is doing? Why do you have to say something like "the world is not doing it, so we shouldnt as well"? Why follow anybody? How do you know the world is right?
B. The reason rpivate enterprises are not there in space is become they are not commercially feasible like someone pointed out the Boeing example. Just like the Internet needed a killer app called the WWW to take off, space launches need a killer app. Can we find this killer app? Space tourism is a long way off or mining other planets etc.
C. Satellite laucnh demand. I believe there is an oversupply here. Not many satellites need to be launched as the world already has enough. To me there seems to be virtually no demand for space services and satlletie launches. So governments need to keep the program going.
D. telecom: Better conducted through under sea cables than space communications. Despite hollywood hoolas, space as an industry is unviable today.

Since it is already unviable, private sector can play a key role in innovating a killer app. You see government bodies like ISRO are incapable of dreaming big and realizing what it takes for people to start using space based services. A private funded enterprise will have more pressing need to make launches commerically viable as they know they'll go down under if this werent the case. Innovations or a mass application that spurs demand for space based services is needed. Unfortubnately none exists and none is expected in the foreseeable future (i dont think we are colonizing Mars anytime soon). So I thought private laucnhes would be better. But the dilemma is, space launches and other space related activities are very unviable today. Cheaper alternatives exist. So I think the government would be better at controlling it as well. In the finanl analysis, I think PSLV tech should be transferred to private sector as well to spur innovation and the government should keep doing R&D as well. Lets all hope that space launches will have some commercially viable purpose soon.

MP

MachuPichu

December 20th, 2005, 08:05 AM

Arianespace is a commercial venture, but with massive participation of Government organizations (it was set up by European Governments) and hence cannot be truly called a 'private sector entity'. Boeing also has a space launcher division, but which is in deep losses due to economic reasons. There are some emerging small launchers which are being built by private investors (e.g. Richard Branson), but these are at least currently not likely to make any dent in the commercial satellite launch market. They are fringe players, mostly focussing on space transportation for individuals. Things could change in the future, but as of now, they are unlikely to be of major consequence.

Space has been largely a Government enterprise even in the most capitalistic of countries. For instance, the same question could be asked of NASA - why have they not transferred their launchers, including the space shuttle to the private sector? The PSLV has a lot of private sector participation for various subsystems, including entire engines. But the launcher, compared to individual subsystems, is just too complex to privatize, given private sector capabilities in India. This is despite the proven reliability of the launcher.

Yes. I agree with this analysis. And I stand corrected. Given that space launches are an unvaible business, no private enterprie would want to do this. I dont see any viable use for space based launches in the next 100 years. It doesnt fill any gap. Maybe the rich of the world would go want to live in a superdome in Mars. But I doubt it. Space venturing is missing one key technology - the ability to fly at 0.6 or 0.7 times the speed of light. Unless we can achieve this technology, there is really no point in sapce faring. I hope the next biggest invention of human beings is the ability to achive such travel speeds.

MP

VaastuShastra

December 20th, 2005, 06:23 PM

Great news. However, is there a reason why then decided to send it using Eurpoe's Ariane instead of India's own stuff?

Largest Indian sattelite = too big for PSLV unfortunatly. Hopefully the GSLV-III will be able to put stuff of this size in orbit from 2007.

Ajaypp

December 21st, 2005, 08:44 AM

Largest Indian sattelite = too big for PSLV unfortunatly. Hopefully the GSLV-III will be able to put stuff of this size in orbit from 2007.

^^ - The INSAT is a geo-stationary satellite while PSLV is a Polar Satellite launcher. Our own GSLV is still in its roll-out phase and GSLV- I and II do not have the capacity to lift this latest satellite into orbit. Currently only the US, EU and Russia have the required heavy-lift launchers. Hopefully, new GSLV variants will have the capability, like you said Vaastu. :)

Sridhar

December 21st, 2005, 08:58 AM

Add China to the list of countries with existing heavy-lift launchers.

INSAT-4D will hopefully be the first 3T+ class satellite launched using an Indian vehicle - the GSLV-MK3, which is currently under development. The GSLV can currently launch a 2T satellite into Geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), while the GSLV-2 (with a more powerful cryogenic engine than the current Russian one) is planned to launch 2.5T to the same orbit. GSLV-MK3 will have a capability of 4T to GTO, which is potentially expandable to 6T with the addition of two more solid booster engines (taking the total number of boosters to 4). This 6T launcher has sometimes been referred to as the GSLV-MK4.

I personally believe that GSLV-MK3 is not an appropriate name for the launcher. It is a completely different class of launcher from the GSLV and is being designed from scratch. I have, in the past, suggested the name HLV (Heavy Launch Vehicle) if they want to retain the 'LV' part of names, that are distinctive to ISRO. Or perhaps they could give a different name altogether. Currently, less informed people just think of it as a tweak on the GSLV to increase payload capacity somewhat. But it is a completely new bird and this fact is lost with the use of the GSLV-MK3 name (On asn aside, the name reminds me of Ambassador MK4 introduced in the early 1980s - which was essentially the same car as the one introduced in the 1950s, with minor cosmetic changes).

VaastuShastra

December 21st, 2005, 06:25 PM

^^ - The INSAT is a geo-stationary satellite while PSLV is a Polar Satellite launcher. Our own GSLV is still in its roll-out phase and GSLV- I and II do not have the capacity to lift this latest satellite into orbit. Currently only the US, EU and Russia have the required heavy-lift launchers. Hopefully, new GSLV variants will have the capability, like you said Vaastu. :)

Oops, I meant the GSLV-I/II ;-) I cant wait to see the first launch of the GSLV-III, ill be watching NDTV when it happens :-) Also a couple more boosters on the GSLV-III, assuming they will be making a GSLV-IV, and it will be even more of a beast.

VaastuShastra

December 21st, 2005, 06:29 PM

MachuPichu

December 22nd, 2005, 01:47 AM

I guess the naming process only goes on function - if they make the GSLV-IV, really it should be called the AGSLV-III, following the 'augmented' designation for the ASLV.

It would be kinda cool if we could compare Indian launch vehicles to Russian, American, EU, Japanese and Chinese ones - we seem to always be about 10 years behind China - their equivalent of the PSLV was launched 10 years prior to ours, same with GSLV and now GSLV-III. India could do much better seeing as we peobably have better engineers from the IITs.

India could do much better seeing as we peobably have better engineers from the IITs - In my view that is not an approrpiate stement. I do recruit IIT folks for my firm and they are good. They, however, are very theoretical and very less engineering/practical minded - I mean the ability to create useful toys for the world to play with on a scale that will get the toy noticed in the first place.

Enginerring ventures need "engineering-minded" folks. Most US and European technology were developed within 10 to 20 years of the world wars. India has not manageed to do even a fraction of that in 50 years. India's elite colleges just make it ahrder to get in - the skill sets imparted seem to be very different to how we do things in America.

ISRO needs better administrators and CEOs with assembly/mass production expertise. R&D needs to be kept separate from production. Scientists are seldom good engineers. NASA has very practical engineers and then they have great scientists. In India, the scientists are expected to come up with engineering solutions - there is a basic flaw in that approach.

MP

pding

December 22nd, 2005, 03:50 AM

some of those allegations are true. i recently met one of my relatives who is a general manager for production in an infrastructure company. he also feels the same. that is just one example. many ppl have this complaint. you could give those IIT-JEE papers to a sophomore, UG second-year, (or probably higher) at MIT and that person would probably fail all of the papers miserably. but innovation requires practical minds. and that's relly lacking in Indian education.
also, communication skills is another area where Indians lag behind. i'm not talking about having an american accent or anything. but flow of ideas while communicating is poor in most of indian engineers. when i say most, it might even include IITans.

Bombay Boy

December 22nd, 2005, 06:34 AM

the average IITan hardly has any social life from the time they start studying for their entrance exams. they need to get out more and realise there is more to life and succeeding in life besides just knowing the integration of sin x

thalaiva

December 22nd, 2005, 10:09 AM

fred_the_cute_guy

December 22nd, 2005, 11:56 AM

Just to clarify a bit on IITs, though the topic is digressed from Space!

IIT life is and fun hostels are fun, and believe it or not, many IITians study twice in their lives: once to get into IIT and then for GRE/CAT/GMAT. The rest is all "social life" in a sense (the kind of social life a typical Indian middle class student can usually have). But yes, most IITians can analyze better than innovate/synhesize. This is a typical problem well-known even to the IIT Professors and I personally know some of the Professors sad about it... Wish this goes away fast... Btw, the average IITian prides oneself for decent/good communication skills!

MachuPichu

December 22nd, 2005, 08:04 PM

I think you guys are forming prejudiced opinions. IITians are some of the most practical folks that I have seen. At IIT, few people study all the time. Most of the mugging takes place before the exams. We have as much fun as any other college, except of course for the poor male/female ratio. You guys should visit IIT hostels.

Also coming back to the question of practical minds, most startups in Silicon Valley are started up by IITians. So it think it is ridiculous to say IITians are not practical minded. I think we mistake doing things fast and badly to being practical. One can be meticulous and innovative as well as practical. Any monkey can use tools. What separates us from monkeys is our ability to think and innovate.

startups after how many years of US based experience???they started up those not because they were from IIT but because they were in a practical, innovation orieneted economy called the silicon valley and the US in general...i think we were talking about India based engineers..if ISRO can get US returned NASA engineers (IIT or not), then that's a different story...

VaastuShastra

December 22nd, 2005, 08:57 PM

People at IIT are trained to be 'practical' to the extent that they actually do 'real' engineering as part of the course, working with real tools - this is far more comprehensive than anything similar in any US uni... If they are impractical, and just theoretical, then I would imagine most US graduates, or Chinese for that matter, are even worse.

Im pretty sure we could be doing better, but two things to consider are that India's programme must be fairly in the interests of India's people - China on the other hand can launch whatever nationalistic attempt to compete for glory that it desires - and also, it is interesting to note that while their space programme is 10 years ahead, this is exactly the economic lead they have on India too - having made reforms ten years earlier.

Perhaps then it is just a matter of money?

kronik

December 22nd, 2005, 10:55 PM

ISRO planning for indigenous launches (http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/12/23/stories/2005122302450900.htm)

ISRO expects its Insat 4A, now a day old, to be its penultimate satellite that will be flown from outside the country. The indigenous GSLV rocket having qualified to fly the 2-tonne class Insat satellites, ISRO is phasing out costly procured launches, most of which have been on the European Ariane launcher.

As such, Insat 4B, which is slated for around June 2006 will be the last one to be launched from abroad, ISRO spokesman, Mr S. Krishnamurthy, told Business Line.

For the smaller remote sensing satellites that fly at lower altitudes, it has entirely done away with procured launches since 1995. The GSLV flight can now launch an operational satellite. The space agency is making it fully indigenous with a homemade cryogenic engine. This launcher, called GSLV Mk2, is slated to fly by 2006-end. The GLSV-Mk3 for heavy, 4-tonne lifts is expected to be ready by 2008.

The further eight GSLV programmes (GSLV F4 to F 11) recently got a boost with the Centre's clearance for a five-year spend of over Rs 3,000 crore.

INSAT-4A, ISRO's brand new satellite now a day old in space, is expected to usher in direct-to-home television services beamed from domestic satellites.

The advanced communications satellite will be declared operational in a month's time, after which its entire Ku-band capacity will be handed over to the private DTH operator Tata Sky. The 3.08-tonne satellite has 12 high power Ku band transponders, all of which have been booked by Tata Sky venture.

So far, Doordarshan and the Zee group have been the only two DTH players, both beaming from NSS satellite transponders hired through ISRO. At least three players - including Sun TV, are said to be in the reckoning for space on the forthcoming Insats 4B and 4C.

The regular 12 C-band transponders capacity will also augment the communication and broadcast services, ISRO said.

kronik

December 25th, 2005, 12:30 AM

Quick guide to India's latest satellite (http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/dec/22insat1.htm)

It is the first satellite of the INSAT-4 series, and India's most advanced satellite yet. It is designed for a lifespan of 12 years.

How much did making the INSAT 4-A cost?
Rs 3 billion (Rs 300 crores). And, the launch cost another Rs 2.25 billion (225 crores).

The heaviest satellite in the INSAT bouquet – weighing 3,080 kg at launch-time – will add another 24 transponders to the system.

It will also give Direct To Home cable television services a shot in the arm.

Tata Sky – a Tata and Star joint venture -- has leased the 4A's 12 KU band transponders from the Indian Space Research Organisation. One KU band transponder can beam about 12 channels.

so that means Tata Sky will offer 144 channels in DTH service. I hope they keep the prices down for it to really take off. Its time the people got a better deal from the crappy exploiting cable operators.

kronik

December 25th, 2005, 11:24 AM

ISRO gets Rs 400 cr for naval satellite (http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/dec242005/national19325220051223.asp)

The Central government on Friday granted an additional Rs 400 crore to the Indian Space Research Organisation, which is likely to be spent on India’s first naval satellite.

Though Union Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee said on Friday that the allocation was for space development programmes, it is understood that the resources have been sanctioned for making India’s first naval satellite for which the navy has already prepared the ground work in consultation with ISRO.

According to naval sources, ISRO might take 30 months to make the satellite, which is likely to be used for communication among battleships and surveillance.

cncity

January 3rd, 2006, 02:14 AM

Bangalore: Spacecraft checkout room number one at ISRO’s (Indian Space Research Organisation) Satellite Centre is a scene of hectic activities these days. Inside, young scientists and engineers are glued to their computers, checking data, working round-the-clock, monitoring critical information about a huge satellite. Currently it is undergoing various tests in an adjoining sterile chamber where access to visitors is limited.
The satellite, having a 10-year life span, is the two-tonne Insat-4C which is tentatively slated for launch during the middle of this year.
A communication satellite, it will be placed in the geo-synchronous orbit, 36,000 km above the equator. The rocket which will carry the satellite is the indigenous three-stage Geo-Synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV). It will lift off from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota.
ISRO officials explained to The Times of India the nittygritty of their work and future plans. “We are now in the process of fixing the propulsion system and equipping it with a few other instruments. Soon the complete satellite will be ready with the solar panels. After this we will initiate the ground tests,’’ an official said.
“Within a few months after successfully launching Insat-4A on December 22, 2005, we will be placing another Insat spacecraft in orbit. It will be a major milestone for India’s space programme’’, the official said.
“I will be in the mission control room at Sriharikota monitoring the final phase of the launch countdown. When the satellite is placed in the orbit it will be a moment of triumph for all of us who have worked continuously for its success. These days we work through the weekends and even on holidays,’’ said a scientist.
The cost of launching Insat-4A at Kourou in French Guyana was about Rs 540 crore. An official said the cost for Insat-4C is yet to be worked out.
Along with Insat-4C, Insat-4B is simultaneously getting ready which is expected to be launched towards the end of 2006 by Arianespace’s Ariane-5 ro-cket from the European spaceport of Kourou in French Guyana. This satellite will be flown by an Ariane rocket because it is heavier than Insat-4C.
“After this we do not have any more bookings with Arianespace. Insat-4D and Insat-4E will be carried by our GSLV,’’ the official said.
In spacecraft checkout room number two, a mapping satellite called “Cartosat-2,’’ with an one-metre resolution is getting ready for launch in August-September 2006 from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre. “At the moment the integration of the 600-kg satellite is in progress,’’ said an official. It will be flown by the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV).
In another significant development, India’s moon mission,”Chandrayaan-1,’’ crossed an important milestone last week when a new solid propellent motor was tested which will increase the capability of the PSLV.
“This will improve the capability of the rocket from the present 1,450 kg to 1,600 kg and will be employed in future PSLV flights including the launch of Chandrayaan-1,’’ said a spokesperson of ISRO.

India’s maiden flight to the moon is slated for launch in 2007-08.

muttan

January 8th, 2006, 04:29 AM

Saturday, January 7, 2006 (Chandigarh):

India's moon mission might be ready for take-off by 2008, according to renowned space scientist K Kasturirangan.

"The 21st century is going to be an era of planetary explorations" and the country's moon mission may be ready by 2008, the Director of the National Institute of Advanced Studies at Bangalore and Rajya Sabha MP, formerly ISRO chairman, said.

He said preparations for the unmanned mission were on.

Asked if ISRO was planning to send a manned mission to moon, he said, "as far as I know, as of now, they have no such plans".

Naga_Solidus

January 12th, 2006, 01:13 PM

ISRO Achieves Breakthrough in Supersonic Combustion Technology (http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Jan10_2006.htm)

-"As part of the Advanced technology initiative in the area of Air- Breathing propulsion, the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre of ISRO at Thiruvananthapuram, has successfully carried out the design, development, characterisation and realisation of the Supersonic Combustion Ramjet (SCRAMJET). Through a series of ground tests, a stable supersonic combustion has been demonstrated for nearly 7 seconds with an inlet Mach number of 6 (i.e., six times the speed of sound).

As such technologies are in a very nascent stage of development the world over, ISRO considers this achievement as a major technology breakthrough in Air- Breathing propulsion. Other than USA, which has recently carried out in-flight demonstration of supersonic combustion for a short duration, work related to supersonic combustor designs in other countries like Japan, China, Russia, Australia , Europe and others are either in their initial or ground testing phase."

This is the kind of stuff that we see to hear more of!

From The Hindu (http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/11/stories/2006011101121400.htm)

-It is learnt that an in-flight test SCRAMJET using a rocket was likely to take place in 2007. "In the coming years, ISRO is planning to flight test an integrated SCRAMJET propulsion system comprising air-intake, combustor and nozzle, by using a cost effective, two-stage RH-560 sounding rocket. Development of such a high technology system will come in a big way towards meeting the futuristic space transportation needs of our country." The cost of the current test was about 15 times lower than a similar test in the U.S.

Amit

January 15th, 2006, 03:44 AM

I am working in the area of scramjet engines and hence follow ISRO's reaserch program in this area with a very keen interest. It is great to know that ISRO has carried out initial ground testing of the engine. Flight testing of the engine by 2007 is a very encouraging news indeed.

However, some of the claims made about status of research in other countries is simply NOT correct. The report claims that India is behind only USA in this area and research in other countries is in a nascent stage. The reality is that almost all of the countries mentioned in the report have a more advanced scramjet reaserch activity than India.

In USA, NASA has carried out two flight tests of an airframe integrated scramjet plane called X-43. However, further research in this area has been halted by NASA and they are re-focussing on heavy duty rocket based engines for a manned mission to Moon and Mars.

Scramjet research is quite advanced in Russia, they have flight tested 2-3 times. Infact, they have gone beyond research stage and have already integrated the engine in the final stage of an ICBM missile. The supersonic Brahmos cruise missile co-developed by Russia and India uses ramjet engine developed by Russia, the guidance and control system is developed by India.

Australia has already carried out flight testing of the engine. France and Japan have an ambitious scramjet research program and both are at quite an advanced ground testing stage. Germany and Italy are working with France as the main player in Europe.

China and India are more or less at the same stage and have started scramjet research more recently than other countries.

It is good for the Indian media to encourage research being done by India in high technology areas, and I can definetly understand (and share) their enthusiasm in applauding it. But it should not be based on downplaying the efforts and acheivments of other countries.

If ISRO goes ahead and carries out flight testing of scramjet engine by 2007, then the applause will carry more weight since only USA, Russia and Australia have done it so far. And there is a pressing need for many more flight test data to mature this technology into a reality.

ISRO Achieves Breakthrough in Supersonic Combustion Technology (http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Jan10_2006.htm)

As such technologies are in a very nascent stage of development the world over, ISRO considers this achievement as a major technology breakthrough in Air- Breathing propulsion. Other than USA, which has recently carried out in-flight demonstration of supersonic combustion for a short duration, work related to supersonic combustor designs in other countries like Japan, China, Russia, Australia , Europe and others are either in their initial or ground testing phase."[/i]

VaastuShastra

January 15th, 2006, 09:59 AM

Amit

January 17th, 2006, 11:50 PM

China's space budget is not much higher than India!

I collected interesting data on annual space budget of key countries.

USA $ 16 billion
Europe $ 3.5 billion
Japan $ 1.8 billion
China $ 1.2 billion
Russia $ 900 million
India $ 700 million
Canada $ 300 million
Brazil $ 35 million

Hell yeah..... Great news, thanks Naga :-)

Interesting amit, I though perhaps they were jumping the gun a bit there :-\ Its good at least that on a tenth of China's space budjet, we have done this though :-)

Amit

January 18th, 2006, 12:52 AM

Regarding scramjet research.. although India has started working in this area only recently compared to some other countries like USA, Russia, France and Japan, it has made rapid progress in a short period of time. ISRO started research in this area around 2004, DRDO started a little earlier than ISRO. Now both ISRO and DRDO are planning flight testing by 2007-08. To go this far in just 5 years is indeed commendable! At the same time, having started late, India has benefited from earlier work done in this area over 40 years and hence the learning curve is much shorter.

I am waiting for scramjet engine flight testing to begin in 2007-08! Around the same time, India's Chandrayaan moon mission will be launched, and the more powerful 4 ton GSLV Mk 3 will enter service. Add to this the fact that India's economy is likely to keep accelerating and grow at 8-9% in 2007-08, I can see India occupying news headlines worldwide for its technological achievments in space!!

pding

January 18th, 2006, 02:51 AM

I can see India occupying news headlines worldwide for its technological achievments in space!!

great to see such research activities.

and regarding publicity, don't know about europe but in the US u barely see anything about india. infact, recently when MS made a trip here and the civilian nuclear agreement was signed there was nothing, virtually nothing in the news. not even in CNN. American media is truly way biased than anything i've ever seen. on the contrary, when a school building broke down by fire in Chidambaram in TN some months ago, they showed the people in dhotis and the women crying and weeping (i'm not berating TN) for almost a week. that just shows the extent of stereotype that plays the part in US media.

actually, Musharraf gets more publicity when he visits US or makes any important speeches than MS or other significant people from India.

this should probably go in the media thread. but just felt like posting it. i'll end this topic right here.

kronik

January 26th, 2006, 07:20 AM

India to spend 2k cr on satellite network (http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=115500)

India has proposed to build its own constellation of eight navigational satellites catering to requirements of the Indian subcontinent with an estimated investment of up to Rs. 2,000 crore, ISRO Chairman G Madhavan Nair said.

"It's not a global constellation; it's a regional constellation. We hope we should be able to establish such a system once the government approval comes," he said adding "investment could be from Rs. 1,500 crore to Rs. 2,000 crore."

Bangalore-headquartered ISRO has completed studies on this Indian regional navigational system, which he said "will cater to requirements of the Indian subcontinent and that of our own users."

According to him, India proposed to have its own constellation because of the "main fear that in case of a critical application, any signals from foreign constellation can be diluted or distorted."

"If we have our own system, we can be guaranteed of such signals," Nair said. "If all clearances are available, we can do the job (Build the constellation) in six years."

WillyWick

February 23rd, 2006, 11:13 PM

India making satellite for mobile television

Bangalore, Feb 23: Indian space scientists are designing a new generation satellite with unfurlable antenna for mobile television services -- the proposed spacecraft would have multimedia applications as well.

"Satellite design is going on. It requires a huge antenna to be deployed in space and also high power. So, it's in the process," chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) G Madhavan Nair told newspersons here.

"Unfurlable antenna is one of the major elements in that," said Nair, also secretary in the Department of Space. He said it would take two years before the satellite gets ready for launch.

Director of ISRO Satellite Centre here, Dr K N Shankara said the proposed spacecraft is a 'multimedia' one.

Making of unfurlable antenna needs new technology which ISRO is developing, Shankara told reporters on the sidelines of an international conference on electromagnetic interference and compatibility here today

http://www.chennaionline.com/colnews/newsitem.asp?NEWSID=%7B7301F948-3E2D-4233-B53B-870E4CB0773C%7D&CATEGORYNAME=National

kronik

March 21st, 2006, 08:32 PM

ISRO to outsource satellite production (http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2006/03/22/stories/2006032202220300.htm)

There is a new player in the outsourcing space. National space agency, ISRO, wants to wriggle out of production of communications satellites — both for domestic use and export. It is not yet letting go of remote sensing satellites.

As per a soon-to-be-unveiled roadmap, qualifying industries will get into satellite-making using their manpower and facilities. ISRO will train them at its centres and lend its time-tested design, drawings and testing facilities. It would be part of the first outsourced satellite project, according to one of ISRO's directors.

In the next five years, the space agency foresees outsourcing 8-10 small to mid-sized satellites ranging from 300 kg to 2000 kg, based on market demand. Only in January, it clinched its first joint export order with co-bidder EADS Astrium to make the W2M satellite for EADS of Europe.

Corporate houses such as Godrej, the Tatas, L&T, HAL, MTAR and a host of 500 SMEs are supplying critical systems, parts for the spacecraft and liquid propulsion launch vehicles already. Many more big players could emerge out of this exercise, another official said. The indigenisation programme that began over a decade ago has got larger, the official said.

ISRO has so far built nearly 25 satellites for weather, earth imaging, and telecommunication and broadcasting uses. "In 2-3 years, we want the private industry to take over production of commercial satellites from us, leaving ISRO free to focus on R&D and pursue new technologies," the director told Business Line.

"We don't want our facilities like ISAC (the Satellite Centre at Bangalore) to become a factory. We build, launch, monitor, operate satellites, and do virtually everything. To us, communication satellites have become a routine — it's the same battery, propulsion, solar panel, thermal system and structures; we want to farm it all out."

That is what NASA and its European counterpart ESA do too.

MachuPichu

March 21st, 2006, 10:06 PM

Hell yeah..... Great news, thanks Naga :-)

Interesting amit, I though perhaps they were jumping the gun a bit there :-\ Its good at least that on a tenth of China's space budjet, we have done this though :-)

why do we have to constantly praise our scientists? just give them sufficien credit and move on. for instance, India's staellite or launch vehicle production rate is not all that great...launches are few and far between...ISRO has done the right thing by outsourcing...what ISRO needs is a CEO that is not a scientist but from the private sector or the defence forces...ISRO lacks project management abilities...R&D and continous production are two different animals...while ISRO is good in R&D...it cant produce faster, cheaper and quality-assured at the same time...this needs good manufacturing leadership...ISRO needs to keep R&D and production separate

MachuPichu

March 21st, 2006, 10:13 PM

People at IIT are trained to be 'practical' to the extent that they actually do 'real' engineering as part of the course, working with real tools - this is far more comprehensive than anything similar in any US uni... If they are impractical, and just theoretical, then I would imagine most US graduates, or Chinese for that matter, are even worse.

I am pretty sure what you said is so not true...innovations that happen in US universities are degrees of magnitude more than what happens at IIT...I went to a top 10 university in the US and I can tell you that innovations here are probably matched by only those in other developed nations...IITs simply dont have the money and the infrastructure to do such advanced research or engineering...

dono

March 22nd, 2006, 03:05 AM

I am pretty sure what you said is so not true...innovations that happen in US universities are degrees of magnitude more than what happens at IIT...I went to a top 10 university in the US and I can tell you that innovations here are probably matched by only those in other developed nations...IITs simply dont have the money and the infrastructure to do such advanced research or engineering...

I agree with you. Infact there is no "practical" stuff happening in India, IIT or no IIT (lack of money indeed). And research is done by PHD students, not undergrads. IITs just mass produce undergrads. Graduate schools in US are on entirely different plane of existence.

WillyWick

March 22nd, 2006, 03:54 AM

IITs dont "mass produce" undergrads. IITians dont get hands on expreience on reasearch for whatsoever reasons. But thier problem solving skills, the level of math/analytical skills is extremely high. Thats why IITians in top american grad schools are as much competitive as any other student in that school.

Also, in engineering, after the top 50 american schools, there is almost no difference between american school and indian school. Cant say that they are in a different plane.

dono

March 22nd, 2006, 04:00 AM

Amit

March 22nd, 2006, 06:03 AM

The Times higher education (UK) ranked IITs as 41 in the world. Research was one of the criterias in the rankings. It shows that IITs have more work to do in terms of increasing research activity.

To be fair, they are already moving in that direction. Some prominent research coming out of IITs and IISc come to mind:

This particular forum is about India's space sector. Well.. IISc and IITs have collaborated with ISRO in developing satellites and GSLV rockets.

The Light Combat Aircraft undergoing flight testing and due to enter service by 2010 had DRDO working in collaboration with IISc and IITs.

IIT Bombay has established a Center for Aerospace Design.

IIT Madras is working on Scramjet engine, an airbreathing engine capable of propelling aircrafts at hypersonic speeds.

The widely acclaimed low cost PC 'Simputer' was developed at IISc. It has been licensed for commercial production to Encore and PicoPeta.

Research work in telecommunications at IIT Madras was commercialized to form Midas Communications, a $100 million revenue company supplying broadband internet products. It has an ambitious aim of riding the telecom boom in India to become a $ 1 billion company within few years.

IIT Kharagpur has setup a state-of-art VLSI design and testing lab and has filed for several patents for chips designed at the lab.

An IIT produces about 50 PhDs per year.

While it is true that IITs have to do much more in research, nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that they are already moving in that direction. We should be careful before saying that they only do 'theoretical' research.

(An IIT alumni)

pding

March 23rd, 2006, 12:48 AM

y'all let's not get into the whole IIT students' quality thing. IITs are reputed institutions which have produced many of the best and smartest engineers on the planet. coming to practicality and research, we have not yet reached a stage where we have lot of funding and can do a lot of innovative things. but gov't is making efforts to lure back scientists and increase scientific spending. i'm sure our institutions will undergo the change that is needed to turn them into world-class research universities and colleges.

VaastuShastra

April 12th, 2006, 12:14 AM

You might all know about what im talking about here, but ill go over the story from the start anyway. Launch vehicles, aka rockets, of course operate in stages, which are ejected one after another, allowing the next stage of the rocket to fire. This is opposed to ballistic missiles which try to minimise many of the features that launch vehicles have in the interest of speed of launch and survianility.

http://www.epower-propulsion.com/epower/gallery/RP-Shuttle%20booster%20separation.jpg

Broadly speaking, there are four types of engine technology that can power the stage of a rocket. The most primative is solid-propellants that are ignited just like a firework, but it is worth noting that this technology is used on rockets even today, not least of which the powerfull Space Shuttle boosters (http://www.clipartgallery.com/travel_trans/space/space_shuttle_blastoff2.jpg) in the USA. The next type of engine, used since the first German rockets like the V2, (http://pages.zdnet.com/vancell/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/v2launch.jpg) is liquid engine technology, using some kind of liquid propellant that can burn for longer, be shut on or off once started, and which takes up less weight. Then comes semi-cryogenic technology, where one of the propellants is strored at low temperatures, usually liquid oxygen, and thus more efficient propulsion can be achieved - this is used on stuff like the Saturn V (http://images.art.com/images/products/large/10092000/10092051.jpg) itself. Finally, for all intents and purposes, the most efficient rocket motor consists of cryogenic engines, where all propellants are stored at very low temperatures, as on the Ariane (http://docs.arianespace.com/image_library/photo_library_files/ariane5/print/v164_print.jpg).

http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/img/soyuz-07.jpg

The Russians are still to this day the undisputed champions of liquid rocket motor design, having perfected huge leaps in technology as early as the 50s with their clustered engines on the legendary Soyuz (http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/elvs/elv-images/soyuz_family.gif) seen above. Although some motors are more efficient than others, this, as seen by the different launch vehicles using different motors, does not neccecarily determine the motor that will be used - some might be more cost effective, or easier to produce, or more efficient at certain stages of launch.

http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/2487/24871001.jpg

India is pretty efficient in the design of solid-fuel motors, having used them since day one on every launch vehicle - from primative sounding rockets, to the modern solid stage motors on the latest vehicles - the SLV and ASLV (seen above) were entirely solid-stage infact. For liquid engine technology, India purchased the Viking engine from the French at a time when the French were truely our greatest friends in space - India could have developed the ability itself to a decent degree, but instead managed to clench a great deal for the Viking motor - renamed Vikas when produced in India - it was used on the PSLV, launched in 1993. When it came to develop the GSLV-I, semi-cryogenic and cryogenic engines were considered for the craft.

All throughout India's space program, right back to the 70s, development of proper launch vehicles (as opposed to sounding rockets), was marred by the possibility that the USA would impose sanctions in an effort to cripple the Indian space program, which of course had the capability of providing technology to the ballistic missile program. Thus the ISRO from day one always attempted to indiginise technology, and production facilities to the extent that other countries didnt really have to - and did a damn good job at it. This proved to be a good call, as soon the USA was refusing to even provide catalogues of space-related parts such as gyroscopes, let alone sell anything. But when it came to acquiring the technology for the cyrogenic stage of the GSLV, the ISRO's usual foresight went down the drain. Some people estimated that a cryogenic engine would take 15 years to develop, based on other countries experience (China did in the 8 years), and on the basis of this, the ISRO chiefs, lulled by the amazing Viking deal, wanted to simply purchase the technology, and thus cut development to 6 years. In the meantime, home-development of indiginous cryogenic engines, which had already begun, was cut back and put on hold.

http://www.isro.org/images/hptest_b.jpg

First India approached the French, old partners. In the past, they had actually offered to sell the cryogenic engine of the Ariane for just 1 crore Rs, just when the Viking contract was ending - but now that the Ariane's problems had been overcome, they did not want another competator in the launch buisness, and offered the same engine for 1000 crore Rs. So India went to the friendly Soviet Union to purchase their cryogenic technology for 264 crore. This is where things started going wrong. First, the USA amended its laws around this time, so that breaches of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), would have to be met with sanctions, by law. So the ISRO should have recognised that despite the fact cryogenic technology isnt used on a single ballistic missile because it is impractical, the USA would now impose sanctions on any deal - this wouldnt have mattered if the Soviet Union was still at its fullest strength. Then to compound the trouble - the Soviet union broke up, and the new Rosaviakosmos was doomed to cancel the deal, when faced with the choice of supplying a $150mn deal to India and getting sanctioned, or being welcomed into the global capitalist sattelite business.

And then, using the power of the fact that they are our biggest weapon suppliers, the Russians bribed Indian political babus into simply modifying the deal for the same price, instead of cancelling it, so that it would no longer gain sanction - thus for the same amount of Rs 264 crore, Russia would now only supply a couple of engines, and not the knolwedge of how to build them as well. Additionally, the sum would now have to be payed at dollar exchange rates, instead of the old Ruble-Rupee Indo-Soviet trade, effectively adding Rs 200 crore to the deal.

In all this time, the ISRO had squandered the oppertunity to be developing indiginous capability as they would have in the past, and thus the entire space program has probably been held back by a number of years because of this. As far as I am aware, the GSLV-II which would have an indiginous cryogenic engine, still hasnt been launched, 4 years after it was pridicted, due to the lack of developing an indigious one. ISRo let it slip - perhaps India could have been 5 years closer to the Chinese stage of launcher devleopment (they are 10 years ahead if payload capacity is any judge) if this fiasco hadnt occurred. Also, just goes to show just how much the Americans needlessly screwed about with India:

1). Cryogenic engines are too slow to fuel missiles
2). They require storage of sub-zero chemicals, etc
3). India has missile capabilities anyway
4). It was for the space progam, something which the MTCR allegedly dosent interfear with

Its also a real pity that we didnt grasp the 1 crore engine deal from the French - we would have had the technology very early, and been able to co-develop it with the French in the same way as the Viking, learning it every step of the way. If we had pushed indigionous development from day one, we would have had a GSLV by the late 90s, and the GSLV-III might even be complete - instead the launch market for GSLV-I weight sattelites is drying up, and the GSLV-III will be coming late. Our tallest rocket, and most advanced currently flying, is a failiure. Not of technology, but of management.

Amit

April 12th, 2006, 08:27 PM

VaastuShastra

April 12th, 2006, 08:39 PM

I find the previous article to be needlessly pessimistic.

ISRO's indegenously developed cryogenic engine is beyond the research stage. It is undergoing ground testing, and will be launched sometime in 2006-07.

GSLV Mk 3 will carry 4400 kg in Geostationary orbit. For comparison, Russia's most powerful rocket Proton carries 4700 kg in geostationary orbit. US Delta and Atlas rockets have similar capability. That the upgraded GSLV will be as powerful as Russian and US rockets is an excellent acheivement.

France's Ariane is much more powerful and can carry around 10,000 kg in geostationary orbit, basically 2 heavy communication satellites.

The point was that the ISRO could have already been flying a GSLV with a home-made cryogenic stage by now if not for bad management - and in terms of commercial launching, the bad decisions about the GSLV led us to have a rocket that took years extra to develop, and dosent even have a payload capacity much bigger than the PSLV - effectively making it a dud launcher, that took 200% effort to develop, and is only marginally usefull.

This is not to say that the ISRO has been anything but a successfull space agency, but this one fiasco has hindered the space program in a way that was needless.

The fiasco was a result of typical babu curruption on the part of the Russian contract, and illegal arm twisting on the part of the USA.

pding

April 12th, 2006, 09:06 PM

goog info VS. for me some of that stuff is greek and latin.

Effer

April 12th, 2006, 11:42 PM

India trying to harness outer space: Air Chief Tyagi

April 11, 2006 16:18 IST

In a move that should prove extremely significant in the future, the government is exploring ways and means to harness outer space. Speaking on the sidelines of a symposium on 'Energising the Indian aerospace industry', Air Chief S P Tyagi said, "A debate is on in the country on the ways and means to exploit the outer space and stratosphere in future terms."

Asked whether the IAF is facing an exodus of fighter pilots, who may head for the more lucrative civil aviaton market, Tyagi said this was not a big problem. "We take up the premature retirement requests on a case by case basis," he said.

Earlier, when inaugurating the symposium, Tyagi proposed the setting up of an aerospace commission to prepare a roadmap for sustained development of aviation-related industries. He also mooted joint ventures with global companies as a vehicle for acquiring advanced systems and aircraft.

Tyagi, however, cautioned that such a commission should not be used as a tool for imposing control over the industry, which has 'tremendous' potential to develop, both in civilian and military sectors. "We need a commission to prepare a clear roadmap to energise the sector," Tyagi said.

Endorsing the idea of joint ventures in the aviation field, the air chief said these should not be limited to partnership between private and public sectors in the country, but with global players also for aircraft manufacturing and in other technical areas.

"We have to team up. Join up with whoever has the expertise. Whoever is willing to share their technology. We need to explore and exploit such possibilities," he said. "Our strategy has to be manufacturing other than buying them. Obviously there is a market. We need to develop new models."

http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/apr/11space.htm

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 11:15 AM

Manned Spaceflight Plans For India To The ISS And Beyond (http://www.spacedaily.com/news/Manned_Spaceflight_Plans_For_India_To_The_ISS_And_Beyond.html)

Check out this article, do you think that India should engage in a manned programme? I always have - this weighs some of the benefits, etc.

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 11:17 AM

IMO India SHOULD engage in manned spaceflight and hop into the space tourism sector to boost econommic growth into the double-digit range by increasing income through civilian space launches, for 1/10th or so of what the Russian charge.

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 11:24 AM

Yes, my sentiments exactly - it will provide valuable technical capability, ensure our participation in the future of space research (and the privatisation of space), etc.

Yet you wouldnt believe the amount of times I still hear arguments like 'this is a waste! India should be spending this on the poor' - the ISRO has paid for itself many times over in terms of providing benefits to India, and returns 45% of its profit to industry.

Also, every nation has poor - why dosent NASA get disbanded and its $14bn budget spent on rehabilitating ghetto dwellers? Simple, powerfull nations need space programmes.

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 11:30 AM

Yet you wouldnt believe the amount of times I still hear arguments like 'this is a waste! India should be spending this on the poor' - the ISRO has paid for itself many times over in terms of providing benefits to India, and returns 45% of its profit to industry.

I guess those kinds of people don't understand ISRO's contributions to Indian telecom, which has HELPED uplift the poor.

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 11:32 AM

Not to mention the satellite serivices, technological capabilities that have benefitted defense and industry, etc. Even New Scientist, etc, defended India's space programme. On one forum some people were saying stuff like 'the Indians just copied everything', etc :-\

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 12:07 PM

On one forum some people were saying stuff like 'the Indians just copied everything', etc :-\

Link plz. I'm curious as to the contents of the rest of the discussion.

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 12:31 PM

Actually, it was comments on a news article, I didnt bother replying:

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2005Jan/gee20050127028869.htm

Also, just to show a cross section of the opinions, check this random forum thread out:

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=4713

I guess im not too bothered about the opinions, as people in both threads defended India too - its just that some of the arguments were rather ignorant, and knowing that many people in the USA probably view India as 'caste, poverty and pagan gods', its likely that a lot of them see the ISRO as an unacceptable waste of money for us (as if India's massively larger poverty relief budget would be effected).

EDIT: From the wiki article on ISRO:

Foreign public critisism

Some critical opinion is sometimes aired questioning the relevance of the ISRO in light of the low per capita income of the average Indian citizen, usually from amateaur foreign observers. In response to this, defenders of the Indian space programme point to the fact that it isnt consdiered a waste in other countries, all of which have some measure of homelessness or poverty. Also it is pointed out that the ISRO is unique amongst space programmes for its focus on developmental applications such as educational broadcasting and remote sensing. In addition, the ISRO is arguably the most financially sucessfull space programme, with very cheap development and launch capabilties, and a budget of which 45% spent goes to Indian industry - it is arguable that the ISRO has paid for itself several times over already, not just in terms of success, but also in terms of commercial return. Finally, it seems obious to many that a country the size of India, which is a world economic power, needs independent launch capabilities, and a full spectrum of scientific institutions and industry.

Ballistic missile technology

A critisism of the Indian space programme from foreign governments and military analyists has been the question of how ISRO technology has benefitted India's defence programme, even leading to the alteration of India's cryogenic engine deal with the former Soviet Union and later Russia. Since most space programmes in the world were extensions of ballistic missile programmes anyway, and the ISRO is more than capable of developing the most advanced technology indiginously, it is questionable how legitimate this critisism is. In the instance of the cryogenic engine deal, it was argued that the engine would have been of almost no use in the construction of ballistic missiles, and India could develop the engine very shortly anyway. It is also argued that apart from any non-proliferation action being almost pointless, India is a responsible nuclear power. In the wake of recent political shifts, with India and the USA disgarding old Cold War era political stances, it is likely that no such future critisism of the ISRO from this angle will occur.

The scientific benefits to research institutions and industry is more significant than people realise - if you read the 'Geek.com' article, perpare to be frustrated by some pretty stupid opinions that dont consider any of this, but just see it as a case of "people first and the rest of the universe next. they should get their priorities correct". Another: "Great, rat worshipers in space. I say nuke India and China into smoking holes in the ground BEFORE they build gettos in space and put weapons on the moon." Oh, and my favorite: "The Indian space progam seems to be out to prove a point rather than to do anything useful."

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 01:16 PM

Some of the comments on geek.com cracked me up.

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 01:18 PM

Some of the comments on geek.com cracked me up.

Heh, I dunno about that - some of them can be quite harmfull sources of bigotry.

Anyway, back onto the topic of space, before this thread goes elsewhere:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/269/1

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 01:48 PM

I was laughing at their ignorance.

And these new space co-op things are quite encouraging.

Luckystreak

April 16th, 2006, 03:41 PM

Unfortunately, that is the truth. Most people in the world are so ignorant about India, that they can't digest a small article which belies their opinions. People prefer to base their reasoning on "Amazing Race" than on reality.

Btw, kudos to the guy called "Mike" who gave fitting replies.

Naga_Solidus

April 16th, 2006, 04:34 PM

And so you have people thinking of flying swamis...

I've been living here for 2.5 years now and I still haven't had an elephant ride in the Sunderbans. That goes to show you how valid the world's ignorant orientalists are.

And then when ISRO/AIIMS/HAL/(insert the name of an Indian research and technolocy institution here) does something significant they come out and say "oh they're destroying their culture/oh their proirities are wrong/insert a patronizing orientalist quote here". This used to piss me off a lot but nowadays I just laugh at it.

VaastuShastra

April 16th, 2006, 09:52 PM

And so you have people thinking of flying swamis...

In some places yeah, but it actually takes a greater knolwedge of India than most people have to even come up with that - these days, certian groups have demonised India into a society where its 'repulsive demonic beliefs keep people poor'. Im not even religious, but I hate those groups.

This thread is really heading off topic, lets discuss something more space related...

harsh1802

April 17th, 2006, 03:27 AM

Well guys......i think the best way to go forward on this is to just ignore these idiots and i'm sure the time will surely come soon enough when the rest of the world wld realize the full potential of India's Space Program! :)

Wht say?

B1acksun

April 17th, 2006, 05:17 PM

VaastuShastra

April 17th, 2006, 08:46 PM

When is the next launch by ISRO scheduled for. I dont even remember the last time ISRO launched anything. Must be almost a year. Is it just me or anyone else find the launch frequence to be lower than what was talked about two years ago? I was hoping for more launches with the second launchpad ready. Is the indigineous cryogenic to be launched this year or next?

Yes last year their schedule was pretty open - this year, one PSLV launch, and three GSLV launches are planned.

Next year - three PSLV launches, two GSLV launces, and one GSLV-III launch.

They have launch capacity for 6 a year are Sriharikota, but might rend launch capacity to other nations.

http://www.isro.org/decade_plan.htm

harsh1802

April 18th, 2006, 12:24 AM

:) ISRO inaugurates ISITE complex

According to Outlook,

Indian Space Research Organisation today inaugurated its Satellite Integration and Test Establishment (ISITE) complex, a world class Assembly Integration and Test (AIT) facility.

The complex spanning 100 acres is fully equipped with facilities for complete assembly and test sequence that can enable rolling out of flight worthy spacecraft from the stage of a bare structure, ISRO said.

With the increase in demand for satellite capacity, it has become imperative to increase the size, sophistication and launch frequency of satellites and ISITE is intended mainly to meet these requirements, it said.

Inaugurating the facility, National Security Advisor,M K Narayanan said a totally integrated satellite facility was necessary in the wake of global agencies approaching ISRO for their satellite requirements.

ISITE "epitomises the anticipation of future needs and also virtues of self-reliance which makes it truly spectacular," he said.

Lauding ISRO for launch of INSAT 4A, the "heaviest and most powerful satellite" in 2005, Narayanan said "INSAT 4C is now getting ready for launch." He said ISITE as a world class facility, would reinforce India's place as a global space player.

ISRO Chairman Madhavan Nair said the facility, spanning 100 acres and 300,000 sqft of built-up area, "will look at building six satellites at a time.

My first major post.......

harsh1802

April 18th, 2006, 12:26 AM

Hope with this & the inflow of private sector into this sector in India, finally ISRO cld solely concentrate on Space Sciences from here on......

:)

VaastuShastra

April 18th, 2006, 12:53 AM

My first major post.......

Didnt relaise you were new, welcome to SSC harsh ;-) Interesting development - I wish ISRO had more launch sites and stuff though - we only really have one true sattelite launch centre right now, Sriharikota...

harsh1802

April 18th, 2006, 03:12 AM

Hey ther man....thnks a lot!

Hmmm... i don't think it's gonna make a lot of difference if we have another launch site.....with the present one havin' two :) pads.....we are gud for the future.

And aslo the location of a new site may become a bit of a problem also...

Wht say?

Sridhar

April 18th, 2006, 04:49 AM

The second launch pad at Sriharikota has a max. capacity of about 8-9 launches a year currently (tunraround time at the pad is about 30 days, but the launch window is only for about 7-8 months of the year due to south-west and north-east monsoon activity in the rest of the year). This launch pad is different from the first one, in the sense that vehicle assembly does not happen on the launch pad itself. It takes place in a separate vehicle assembly building and the launcher is then wheeled to the pad. The vehicle assembly building has a turnaround time of 3 months (thus allowing for a maximum of 3 launches), but with more vehicle assembly buildings linked to the same launch pad, one can go up to the full capacity of 8 launches.

In the first launch pad, the vehicle is assembled on the launch pad itself in a mobile service tower, that is then wheeled away before launch. Thus, this launch pad has a capacity of only 3 launches a year.

Therefore, the potential capacity of the current two launch pads themselves is about 12 launches a year (with additional vehicle assembly buildings for the second launch pad), with the current capacity being about 6 launches. The capacity of the vehicle assembly buildings can probably be enhanced by around 50% through process improvements. But the total capacity of 12 is constrained by the launch pads themselves.

If there is need for another launch pad, Sriharikota has enough capacity for further expansion. I don't really see the need to invest in another space launch center, given the huge investments required. The world leader in satellite launches is Europe's Arianespace and it does fine with its one launch center at Kourou. The US has two primary space launch facilities, developed during the cold war and the space war with the USSR. Both Russia and China have more than one space launch center, but then their military and civilian programs are not separate (and their facilities were also developed during the cold war). We also have a military launch center at Balasore, which could potentially be developed for space launches (perhaps for military space launches) if the need arises. And technically, there is a third center at Thumba near Thiruvananthapuram, which is of course used only for sounding rockets.

Overall, SHAR is good enough for our needs for quite some time to come. If and when the need arises, we could potentially think of a new space center, perhaps in the Andamans, or if the situation in Sri Lanka stabilizes and they allow it, in the south of that country due to locational reasons. SHAR has a good location for geostationary launches, but a somewhat suboptimal location for polar launches. Both Sri Lanka and the Andamans are more optimal locations, though they will involve the setting up of transport facilities from the mainland to these locations.

harsh1802

April 18th, 2006, 06:29 AM

HEy thnks shridhar....for correcting me!

Appreciate u're thoughts on this!

VaastuShastra

April 18th, 2006, 07:00 AM

harsh1802

April 23rd, 2006, 07:10 AM

Step to determine future of India’s space programme :)

Step to determine future of India’s space programme

Express News Service

Pune, April 21: Sometime next year, Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) will carry a payload to 800 km above the earths’ surface, which will determine the future missions of the Indian space programme. The rocket will put into orbit a payload which will then re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere. The objective of the mission, titled ‘Payload Recovery Experiment’ is to bring back the payload in an intact condition.

The experiment is important because future missions of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) will involve re-useable vehicles, which have to endure high temperatures while re-entering the atmosphere. ‘‘The success of this experiment will be crucial for missions like Chandrayan, where the space craft will have to be recovered,’’ said honorary director of ISRO-University of Pune center MC Uttam at a lecture in Agharkar Research Institute on Friday.

According to him, ISRO has already chalked out its plans for the next 25 years and the ultimate objective is to design a single or double stage re-usable vehicle, which will use air breathing technology to power itself in the lower atmosphere. Uttam fondly recalled the initial days of the Indian space programme, when the President APJ Abdul Kalam and his colleagues prepared payloads for sounding rockets with their own hands.

Uttam pointed out the trust, faith and freedom that the government had bestowed on the ogranisation. He credited scientists like Vikram Sarabhai, Homi Bhabha, and Satish Dhawan, who gave the programme the focus and direction: ‘‘When ASLV rocket failed, the in-charge of the programme took up the responsibility in front of the media. He did not mention Kalam’s name, who was the project manager. When it came to credit, he always put his juniors before him.’’

:)

kronik

April 26th, 2006, 07:04 PM

ISRO gets facility for satellite integration, testing (http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?storyflag=y&leftnm=lmnu2&leftindx=2&lselect=1&chklogin=N&autono=223878)

Chennai/ Bangalore April 26, 2006

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) on Monday inaugurated a fully-dedicated facility for satellite integration and testing. The ISRO Satellite Integration and Test Establishment (ISITE), as the facility will be known, has the capacity to integrate and test at least four satellites of the Insat class at different stages, at a time.

“We are looking forward to building up at least half a dozen of satellites at a time and payback what the nation has invested in this,” Nair added.

This houses four chambers for assembly, integration & test (AIT) clean room, a comprehensive assembly & test vacuum chamber (CATVAC), comprehensive assembly and test vibration facility (CATVIB) and a compact antenna test facility (CATF).

The AIT clean room which is of the size of 55x34 metre and with a height of 60 metre, has the capacity to build satellites of 6.5 metre height integrating at least 800 elements. The complete airlock chamber will have temperatures ranging from 1 degree C to 22 degree C and the cleanliness level is 1 lakh class (1 lakh particles permissible per cubic metre).

CATVAC will test the working performance and the balance testing. The CATF is a fully-automated chamber for spacecraft and antenna testing that will ensure the increasingly travelled path of the radio frequency (RF) energy to find out if the antenna is going to cover the geographical location or not.

harsh1802

April 30th, 2006, 11:40 PM

ISRO to sign MoU with NASA on May nine for Chandrayaan payload (http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200604300310.htm)
Bangalore, April 30. (UNI): Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) will sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on May nine here with NASA on the US payload for Chandrayaan-1, the first Lunar Mission of India to be realised in 2007-08.

NASA Chief Dr Michael Griffin would be visiting ISRO to sign up the MoU, under which NASA would be providing two payloads--Minature Synthetic Aperture Radar and Moon Mineralogy Mapper operating in 0.7-3 micrometre band, ISRO sources told UNI here on Saturday.

Besides the US, Chandrayaan satellite would have payloads from Bulgaria and European Space Agency (ESA). The 500 kg satellite (lift off weight 1304 kg) would have a host of Indian payloads, which would take up chemical mapping of the entire lunar surface, besides helping to prepare a three dimensional atlas of regions of scientific interest.

The payloads include a Moon Impact probe for future landing missions, a high energy x-ray spectrometer, a lunar laser ranging instrument with a height resolution of five metres, a terrain mapping camera with stereo imaging capability and a five metre spatial resolution and a hyper spectral imager operating in 0.4-0.95 micrometre band with a special resolution of 15 manometre, a spatial resolution of 80 metre, sources said.

To be launched by the proven Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) that had eight consecutive launches till May last year from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota, the Satellite would initially orbit the moon at a polar height of 200 km and later be guided to a 100 km lunar orbit. It would have a mission life of two years.

The Rs 386 crore maiden planetary exploration project of India was approved by the Government in September 2003. Besides the satellite, the project also envisaged setting up of a Deep Space Network to be located near Bangalore with a 32 m diameter x/s band antenna.

An Indian Space Science Data Centre to process the scientific data transmitted by the Satellite would also be established, sources added.

:)

gud to hear this....but wld be grt if ISRO comes out with the exact date or atleast the month of launch!

:wallbash:

harsh1802

May 5th, 2006, 02:22 AM

Smooth sailing for ISRO mission

BANGALORE: India's moon mission Chandrayaan-1 is progressing steadily on four important fronts meeting both time and result-bound objectives. The mission will set sail as per schedule in 2007-08.

Eleven instruments are already in their first stages of development. The instruments will perform photo-geological mapping of the lunar surface apart from mineral content.

"The instruments were selected based on technical compatibility, purpose of mission, weight and other specifications that Chandrayaan required.

Now that the selection is over, the development of the instruments by the different countries has already begun," say ISRO officials. An MoU is to be signed with NASA in the next couple of days on two NASA instruments to go on board the mission.

Another MoU has been signed with the European Space Agency for three instruments; the Bulgaraian space authorities for one. Design and work have started on the spacecraft. The preliminary design of the spacecraft configuration has been completed and reviewed.

The design went through an open forum/discussion in which a number of sub-systems reports were put together by engineers. The evaluation of the design was done after scrutinising the reports. Concurrent with the design, initial fabrication work on the spacecraft has begun.

Metal cutting, hardware production, production and fabrication of PCBs and work on the mechanical housing of the PCBs. There is also steady progress on the launch vehicle.

Chandrayaan-1 requires an upgraded, new-design PSLV since the existing PSLV will not be able to carry certain weights. The new PSLV that is being designed will carry 12.4 tonnes propellant compared to the nine tonnes propellant that the existing PSLV can carry.

Officials say ground testing of the new version of the PSLV strap-on-motor that can carry more weight has already been done and are happy with the results.

But probably one of the most important components of the Chandrayaan-1 mission is the Ground Station for Deep Space Network. The ground station will house the entire receiving equipment.

Land has been acquired and construction of the ground station that will receive signals from deep space has already begun. The station also requires an antenna 32 metres or 100 sq feet in diameter.

In this regard, the contract for the manufacture of the antenna has been given to an Indian agency - ECIL who will manufacture it with the help of BARC. "For now, some of these stages are on target.

We are happy with the way work is progressing. The world is watching us and understands our credibility. Chandrayaan-1 should launch as planned in 2007-08."

Source: Times of India.

kronik

May 9th, 2006, 03:12 PM

NASA, ISRO deal for mission moon (http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=126464)

ISRO signed an MOU with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration on the inclusion of two US scientific instruments on board Chandrayaan-1, the country's first mission to the moon, opening a new chapter in Indo-US space cooperation.

The two instruments are - Mini Synthetic Aperture Radar (Mini SAR) developed by applied physics laboratory, Johns Hopkins University and funded by NASA and Moon Mineralogy Mapper, jointly built by Brown University and Jet Propulsion Laboratory of NASA.

The first NASA chief to visit India in three decades, Griffin is touring ISRO satellite centre here, Vikram Sarabhai space centre in Thiruvananthapuram and the spaceport of Sriharikota over two days.

The US instruments were selected on the basis of merits of 16 firm proposals from all over the world received in response to ISRO's announcement of opportunity, ISRO said.

'Chandrayaan-1' will also carry three scientific instruments from European research centres.

'Chandrayaan-1', scheduled for 2007-2008, is India's first unmanned scientific mission to the moon.

The main objective of mini-SAR is to detect water in the permanently shadowed areas of lunar-polar region while that of Napper is characterisation and mapping of minerals on the lunar surface.

harsh1802

May 11th, 2006, 06:46 PM

Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System approved

The Union Cabinet has approved the development and deployment of an Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS) that will include an independent, indigenously developed constellation of satellites to provide navigation and timing services for critical national applications recently.

The IRNSS will cost Rs 1,400 crores, with a foreign exchange component of Rs 1,100 crores excluding launch services, information and broadcasting minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi said after a cabinet meeting chaired by prime minister Manmohan Singh.

With IRNSS, the mandate of ISRO's foraying into commercial launch of satellites would be made easy. In Jan this year, two contracts, including one with Italian Space Agency for launching Agile satellite in 2006, have been signed. Also, the ISRO Satellite Integration and Test Establishment (ISITE), was opened on April 17, with this the designing of the new generation satellite with unfurlable antenna for mobile television services would be made easy.

The IRNSS satellites will be launched using India's PSLV, as a part of the PSLV-Continuation Programme. The development and deployment of the IRNSS constellation, the ground infrastructure, navigation, safety and certification and verification software are expected to be completed in five to six years.

Source: televisionpoint.com

:)

harsh1802

May 14th, 2006, 05:15 AM

----

harsh1802

May 14th, 2006, 05:18 AM

ISRO aims beyond Chandrayaan-1

MUMBAI: With India's first mission to moon in place to take off in 2008, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has set its aim high to take up the next challenge after Chandrayaan-1, which could include a spacecraft to Mars, or an asteroid or a comet.

Calling upon scientists to accept the challenge, mission principal scientist Dr J N Goswami on Friday said, “We have to make decisions regarding the next planetary mission in six-seven months.”

Talking to reporters on the occasion of National technology day at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre here on Friday, Dr Goswami, the director of Physical Research Laboratory at Ahmedabad, said the raw data transmitted by Chandrayaan-1 would be collected at National Space Science Data Centre at Bangalore and later disseminated for analysis to collaborators.

The unmanned Chandrayan-1 mission will carry out a physical and chemical mapping of the moon. It would carry five Indian instruments and three developed by the European space agency and one from Bulgaria.

Besides, two payloads of National Aeronautic Space Agency (NASA) will also be flown on the mission. A MoU to this effect was signed on Tuesday between ISRO and NASA.

The first payload will look for polar ice on the moon and the other will study the moon's surface mineral composition. The Chandrayan-1 mission envisages placing a 525-kg satellite in a polar orbit 100-km above the moon.

The satellite will be launched using a modified version of India's indigenous Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV). The spacecraft will initially be launched into geo-synchronous transfer orbit, and subsequently manoeuvred into its final lunar orbit using its own propulsion system.

Chandrayan-1 is expected to be the forerunner of more ambitious planetary missions in the years to come, including landing robots on the moon and visits by Indian spacecraft to other planets in the solar system.

Source: Newindexpress.com

:rock: :cheers1:

pding

May 14th, 2006, 07:44 PM

harsh1802

May 14th, 2006, 09:16 PM

kronik

May 15th, 2006, 02:07 AM

good to see ISRO thinking ahead and more innovatively. PM is talkin' about unmanned weapons systems, robotics, and other advanced sensor technologies and weapons. hopefully they give more thrust for innovation to our Defence arsenal. but such news shouldn't be sensational as it will spread to other countries. Pak now can justify it's increased spending on Defence. they should keep such developments in the low.

I think its a very wrong way of thinking. Let Pakistan or any nation spend as much as they want on defence. Its their money.

India needs to spend as much as it deems necessary on itself as it expands its world view and reaches out. If somebody wants to match it penny for penny, well, more power to them.

This thread is for ISRO and Indian space, not India's weapon's systems. It has been reiterated time and again that ISRO is a civilian agency and they are not working on ICBM'. Its not their responsibility. While there might be plenty of theories about what India is doing behind closed doors, I think we shouldn't discuss those here.

harsh1802

May 17th, 2006, 09:13 PM

Byalalu to moonlight, get a place in history

BYALALU (BANGALORE RURAL): An hour's drive from the IT city, this nondescript tiny hamlet off the Bangalore-Mysore highway hardly has any amenities.

Water is scarce and power supply is erratic, which makes the life of a handful of villagers tough. But Byalalu is all set to rocket into fame.

Hectic activity shows that the village is on its way for etching its name in history. It is here that the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is setting up a Deep Space Network (DSN) centre to track Chandrayaan I, slated to lift off in 2008.

While few here realise the actual importance of the Moon mission, they are nonetheless elated at the prospects of Byalalu becoming famous.

The DSN will consist of two antennas of 18-metre and 32-metre diameter. The 18-metre antenna, which has been imported from Germany, will be installed in six months

The 32-metre antenna, a joint venture of the Electronics Corporation of India and the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, will be put up in 2007.

An ISRO official told The Times of India the land for setting up the DSN, measuring 123 acres,was selected after evaluating various other sites.

"We used a lot of data transmitted by the Indian remote sensing satellites during the site-selection process," he said.

One of the main advantages of selecting Byalalu was its saucer-like shape that will help in blocking radio frequency disturbances, he said.

S K Shivakumar, director of ISRO's Telemetry, Tracking and Command Network (ISTRAC), said Chandrayaan signals will first come to the DSN and then will be relayed to the National Space Science Data Centre at ISTRAC in Bangalore.

R Jayakumar of the private agency installing the 32-metre antenna said the earth work for the project will be completed in the next few days.

"I'm confident of finishing the entire job by the middle of 2007." A little distance away, labourers are toiling hard in the afternoon sun to install the 18-metre antenna, which arrived just a fortnight ago.

The concrete constructions going on in the village are not in harmony with the rest of the landscape,which is dotted with huts and fields. This will, however, change soon.

"Our facility will transform the landscape and I am sure that the villagers will be grateful to us," Shivakumar said.

Source: TOI

:)

pding

May 18th, 2006, 12:09 AM

advanced weapons systems are an integral part of our discussion on the India's capability in the space sector. sorry if i'm wrong. also, if this stuff some how is not related to the forum, then that's fine.

kronik

May 18th, 2006, 04:16 AM

I understand what you are saying pding. I agree ISRO's research capabilities will have an integral part in our next generation weapons. For example, the Mig 25 is retired, and Indian spy satellites are supposed to take their place.

I think there were a few military threads here, but it was decided that it was better if we kept away from such discussion and there were other, more dedicated Indian forums for that. Maybe the mods can shed more light on it, otherwise I say lets start a thread on Indian advanced weaponary.

harsh1802

May 22nd, 2006, 12:18 AM

In an interview to DNA (http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1030525&CatID=5) ISRO Chairman Mr. Nair said the following,

What are ISRO’s other plans for the next few years?

The immediate priority is to have a good Chandrayaan-1 mission. It will give the required confidence and capability to undertake future planetary exploration. Mars exploration is the next logical step for consideration.

Hope they wld get the approval from the government soon!

:)

May 22nd, 2006, 07:39 PM

kronik

May 22nd, 2006, 08:12 PM

harsh1802

May 22nd, 2006, 08:16 PM

I have to hear a lot from "other" people as to how inefficient ISRO is and how much money we are wasting in it. So can some one tell how inefficient it really is compared to other world agencies? We all know it's Indian so it cannot be really efficient but is it really eating too much money?

Wht do u mean by inefficient????

ISRO is one of the most efficient of the lot in the world today. I mean with wht ever funding it gets, it brilliantly accomplishes its objectives. And tht too with a very high success rate.

harsh1802

May 22nd, 2006, 08:18 PM

Thnks kronik for a more sane reply..................... ;)

I was kinda hurt by his ignorance....

May 22nd, 2006, 11:20 PM

I dont have the answer to your question, but I would like to know from 'the others' in which fields, in their minds, ISRO is inefficient, and where exactly is the money being wasted.

And I think you are being too presumptuous when you say ISRO is Indian and hence inefficient. That is just hurtful! Sure we have incompetence galore, but I think ISRO is above that for the most part.

Too much money? I would venture to say that with the amount of funding ISRO gets, most other comparable space agencies (which are but a few) wouldn't even dream of a moon or mars mission.

The ISRO we are talking about is the one that has all the space agencies wanting to be a part of the Chandrayaan. The ISRO we are talking about supplies GPS data for motor vehicle movement in North America. ISRO is on the verge of building its own cryogenic engine, and we will be only the 4th or 5th country to achieve so.
ISRO's edusat is linking the remotest of schools in the country to top-notch educational services. ISRO is also working on our own navigational satellite network, after which we won't have to look to others for data or compromise national security.

So I would really appreciate if those people you talk to can provide some more concrete examples of ISRO's inefficiencies and wastefulness.

meanwhile, heres an interesting read: Department of Space Annual Report 2005-06

http://www.isro.org/rep2006/Index.htm

well how much we really spent on space program? well chinese spend 20% more than us and their space program is so much ahead of us. Even brazilians who are little behind don't even spend half of what ISRO spents. And India has not yet reached moon (and that with a probe!) Ofcourse manned flight cost a lot and china has managed it very well. Some pointed out the fact that you don't spend 700 million a year on rockets and satellites. I mean India still doesn't have good rockets for heavy load and especially for high altitude. So you really think 700 million (I guess thats budget of ISRO while ESA spends like 3 billion USD) is actually getting utilised in most efficient way? If you do, try "mexico's space agency" or something thread in skybar!

pding

May 23rd, 2006, 12:26 AM

in the next 3-5 years, ISRO is handing all the production to private players and only concentrating on R&D. that's their goal: to have only R&D and let private companies handle mass production. it was in an article i think last month. it should be on this thread.
production is prolly the only component ISRO is inefficient at. now when CEOs handle manufacturing and the scientists handle the science, even that "inefficiency" should be successfully wiped out.

Sridhar

May 23rd, 2006, 01:15 AM

ISRO spends less than 25% of what the Chinese spend and has achievements that rival the Chinese program in every sphere except manned flight, on which ISRO has not made any attempt until now (in the coming months, we will see the first step towards a manned mission capability with the sending of the Space Capsule Recovery Experiment). We have larger and better earth-observation and communication satellite systems than the Chinese. Our launcher program is not far behind theirs, and with the GSLV-MK3 going on board in 2-3 years, will match anything the Chinese can field.

Regarding the Brazilians, the comparison is laughable. They are still trying to launch their VLS (which is of the same class as the SLV-3 that we first successfully launched in 1980), with only two spectacular failures to show for it. They have not had a single successful orbital mission till date. It is not even worth the comparison, much less the presumption that 'they are not far behind us'.

ISRO spends less than the Japanese space program and has more to show for it both in terms of launchers and satellites.

ISRO is not a perfect organization. It has made its share of mistakes in the past. The hasty developmental process of the ASLV and the mistakes made on the cryogenic engine deal are examples. But it is also an organization that has learnt from these mistakes. And has built an impressive space program on a shoestring budget. And it cannot be accused of being a white elephant. Almost the entire program has been geared towards meeting some real developmental need of our citizens, with sometimes strategic benefits to boot.

In any case, here are some numbers of the budgets of the civilian space programs of some countries in 2004

USA - $16.2 billion
Europe - $4.5 billion (not including Arianespace, which is a commercial entity)
China - $2 billion
India - $450 million

Source: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2004/063.html

harsh1802

May 23rd, 2006, 02:05 AM

I agree!

pding

May 23rd, 2006, 02:06 AM

i thought we spend about $700 million. at least that's what an article said before in this same thread.

May 23rd, 2006, 04:53 PM

Sridhar/Kronik you guys are giving "detailed answers" to someone who is doing nothing but drive-by farting.

You know a person is not interested in any informed answers/details when they spew gobar gas like the below statement.

"I mean India still doesn't have good rockets for heavy load and especially for high altitude. "

I too unknowingly took him seriously in the recent past. So fellas, a humble request - let the stinky chap pass through, dont fan his farts (or in WWW lingo, ignore his trolling).

Huh! May be you don't know the answer or only response to techno babble like 4500 KG payload or geo-stationary orbit but I think OTHERS got the message. And I doubt you can "throw" anything about space at me which I don't understand. So pardon me if you were taking me seriously before because I was not.

P.S: I really appreciate everyone else's repsonse.

drwho

May 23rd, 2006, 06:25 PM

guys,please do debate in a nice matter,thanks.

pding

May 23rd, 2006, 11:57 PM

praanthan_chaannaan: calm down dude. you're going to the extreme. all that is not necessary.....

Amit

May 24th, 2006, 02:22 AM

Space budget of key countries (2004):

USA $ 16 billion
Europe $ 3.5 billion
Japan $ 1.8 billion
China $ 1.2 billion
Russia $ 900 million
India $ 700 million
Canada $ 300 million
Brazil $ 35 million

Sridhar

May 24th, 2006, 02:47 AM

The $700 million figure for ISRO for 2004 is almost certainly incorrect. The resource allocation for ISRO is on its website (and the same can be verified in the budget documents available on the Finance Ministry website).

Here's the ISRO website
http://www.isro.org/resources.htm

As per this, the actual expenditure in 2003-2004 was Rs. 2268.80 crores, the revised estimates for 2004-2005 are Rs. 2540.78 crores and the budget estimates for 2005-2006 are Rs. 3148.42 crores. Thus, even the 2005-2006 numbers come to $692.67m. The 2004-2005 figures come to $558.97 m at today's exchange rate and the 2003-2004 figures comes to $499.14m at today's exchange rate.

I don't really know where the $450m estimates come from (the link I provided earlier cites estimates provided by the Congressional Research Service of the US Congress for various countries' budgets). But that is closer to the ISRO numbers than the $700m figure. The budget estimate for 2005-2006 is of course pretty close to the $700m figure. That perhaps reconciles the two numbers. It was $450m in 2003-2004 and $700m in 2005-2006.

Now, I don't know about the reliability of the estimates above for other countries. Generally, the Congressional Research Service is pretty reliable, so I would go with that until I see any better source.

Amit

May 26th, 2006, 01:22 AM

Yeah $ 700 million is the 2005-06 budget for ISRO.

I checked the data for the 2006-07 government budget.. ISRO (through Department of Space) has been allocated $ 800 million.

At this rate, ISRO will have $ 1.0 billion budget by 2008.

harsh1802

June 19th, 2006, 07:17 AM

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1657434.cms

On the hyper plane project, Saraswat said that the first test flight using a technology demonstrator (TD) would be carried out in 2009.

The DRDO and the department of space have begun work and developed some systems for the hyper plane which would be capable of flying at speeds of 7 to 10 Mach (7 to 10 times the speed of sound) at altitudes of 15 to 30 km.

Manufacturing the first hyper plane would cost about Rs 15,000 to 18,000 crore, he said.

:)

pding

June 19th, 2006, 06:29 PM

can somebody explain what a hyperplane is?

developing a smart vest which would activate the auto pilot by receiving signals from the physiological pattern.

now, that is some real ass research. detecting if the pilot is unconscious by analysing the physiological signals.......

VaastuShastra

June 19th, 2006, 08:27 PM

Hyperplane refers to hypersonic jet aircraft, which could theoreticaly reach orbit, without tha assotiated costs of a normal rocket - by basically flying out of the atmosphere. At low altitude they operate like a normal jet, but collect fuel from the atmopshere (i.e. less wieght (e.g. scramjet technology)) and burn it when the atmosphere dissapates at higer altitude to reach low orbit.

The ISRO has been developing a re-usable launch vehicle (RLV) based on this principle for a few years - the objective being cheap remote-controlled flights that could put small sattletlies in orbit on an RLV for 1/10 current costs.

Other space agencies no longer seem to favour re-useable craft though, so I wonder how far the ISRO can really go with this - it will probably be more usefull as a testbed. The RLV test demonstrator (RLV-TD) is set to fly in 2008/09 - best place to read about it is the ISRO wiki page.

Basically a scramjet engine dosent require massive fuel, as it collects from the atmosphere, reducing weight/list ratio, etc, and operates more like a rocket than a jet once the air is too thin, by closing the inlets, and burning like a normal rocket instead of an air-fed jet.

Amit

June 20th, 2006, 02:33 AM

Scramjet engine was the topic of my PhD research :)

The development of a hypersonic, airbreathing plane will be expensive; it will be interesting to see how determined ISRO is in pursuing this technology in the long run. Currently it is quite upbeat, having just finished ground testing the scramjet engine, and has plans for flight testing a demonstrator vehicle by 2008-09.

ISRO is not the only space agency working on it. Japan & France are seriously pursuing it, Russia is interested too. In US, NASA has taken a U-turn away from hypersonics, but some people insist that it will revive the program in future.

VaastuShastra

June 30th, 2006, 04:42 PM

So many people are abandoning re-usable launch vehicles in other countries that I dunno yet if this is wise.

----------

Test on GSLV Mark 3 engine successful

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/mmpaper.asp?sectid=4&articleid=63020060390937630200603846500

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/Mirror%5C2006%5C6%5C30%5C4%5C63020060390937630200603846500%5Cimages%5Cimgm1ntn_09.jpg

Nagercoil: The liquefied thrust engine for the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) Mk III, one of India�s most powerful satellite launch rockets, has been successfully tested, ISRO sources said on Thursday.

The test was carried out on Wednesday night by scientists at the Liquid Propulsions Systems Centre (LPSC) at Mahendragiri near Nagercoil in Tamil Nadu.

Thus far, ISRO had been importing this engine. The successful test would enable India to manufacture its own liquid thrust engine in future and help save precious foreign exchange.

India set to launch heaviest satellite

http://www.ndtv.com/template/template.asp?category=National&template=Sciencetech&slug=India+set+to+launch+heaviest+satellite&id=89635&callid=1

India's space agency is set to launch its heaviest satellite, a move that will catapult the country into the multi-billion dollar launch market.

The new communications satellite weighs 2.2 tonne and is due to lift off in mid-July from Sriharikota, country's spaceport on the southeastern coast.

Launches from India is likely to be 30-35 percent cheaper than other countries.

The Indian Space Research Organisation is investing $543 million to upgrade infrastructure for launching heavier rockets to carry satellites weighing four tonne.

harsh1802

June 30th, 2006, 06:17 PM

praanthan_chaannaan

June 30th, 2006, 08:18 PM

^^^ Hmmm...i don't think countries around the world are abandoning reusable-spacecrafts.

Definitely not NASA, they are just phasing out the expensive and too dangerous spaceshuttle by 2010 and looking at the next genseration reusable spacecraft. And even the private spacesector in the US is aggressively into their own versions of reusable spacecraft.

Russia and the EU are, i believe, jointly working on the clipper. The russians have rejuvinated the whole project some yrs bck and are on it since then.

China is looking at such technology....though nothing is known abt how far they reached. I believe they too are looking into it aggressively.

Adding on to Harsh's points, Bush's Mars initiative talks about a CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle) which, though resembles the older conical shape of pre-shuttle crew vehicles, will probably have steerable parafoil tech and re-usability. Early work on X-38 program by NASA was an attempt to have a lifting-body/parafoil combo reusable craft . They cancelled it in 2001, because of reorientation of their future goals(at that time) and also trust in the shuttle's capability. But I am sure they might have regretted that decision after the Feb1 2003 Columbia disaster. Now they are totally dependant on Soyuz tech for crew rescue/transport

The earlier generation dispensible ablative heat shield tech is extremely messy and only China has plans of continuing(atleast from reports till now) in that direction for some more time. Russia/ESA's joint Kliper program does away with ablatives and instead goes the route of thermal shield/blankets and a lifting body shape.

The only reason NASA is retiring the shuttles is because the shuttles' crew/cargo carrying capability are considered way too dangerous. The earlier reasoning for this complex solution was probably based on 1970s Cold-war requirement of carrying out military missions with a military payload, if there is a need. The public reason was of course, "to save money by reusability". But it caused two major disasters, because the mission quality control for this complex system became a nightmare. And it never saved any money! Hence their current decision to separate the crew carrying role from the cargo/other payload for future vehicles.

So all countries who are interested in manned missions are actually moving towards reusability one way or the other, but not necessarity the glider type multi-purpose vehicles of the current shuttle kind.

And India should move in that direction, IF it wants to send folks into space. atleast it already has proven tech (Carbon-Carbon composite heat shields, hypersonic aerodesign expertise etc).

Though I like the exotic tech involved, I am not a great votary of manned flights by India. I would prefer the money well spent if we can develop nano/robotic missions which uses reusable vehicles, instead of the more PR friendly but horrendously expensive and mishap prone manned missions. Already we have a program which gives the best bang for the taxpayer buck. Though not as glamarous as an Orange jumpsuit clad astronaut waving to the cameras, it works.

A post-Coldwar democratic govt need not spend vast sums of money on a showpiece mission to distract the population - they always can pay-off the 'free press' for image creation and is much more cheap :)

VaastuShastra

June 30th, 2006, 08:34 PM

Definitely not NASA, they are just phasing out the expensive and too dangerous spaceshuttle by 2010 and looking at the next genseration reusable spacecraft. And even the private spacesector in the US is aggressively into their own versions of reusable spacecraft.

NASA is actually who I had in mind, seeing as they have abandoned re-useable technology for the forseeable future, instead aiming on maximising the economics of normal rockets with a new generation of cheap and powerfull modular boosters. The shuttle and all systems like it are seen by many practical enthusiasts as a cash cow - they support the development of bigger, cheaper, more efficient rockets instead - i.e. Project Constellation - the 'shuttle derived launch system' - which is basically a cheap rocket that will use the existing shuttle infrastructure and jobs to created rockets.

Then again, many American critics think NASA is the biggest money waster and India one of the best economically viable space programmes, with good launch efficiency and return.

As for Klipper, some people have even said the project is not really being developed, but is being used as a way of diverting attention of the American space program away from where the real economic focus is - giving Russia and Europe an advantage in the launch market, etc...

VaastuShastra

June 30th, 2006, 08:39 PM

Adding on to Harsh's points, Bush's Mars initiative talks about a CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle) which, though resembles the older conical shape of pre-shuttle crew vehicles, will probably have steerable parafoil tech and re-usability. Early work on X-38 program by NASA was an attempt to have a lifting-body/parafoil combo reusable craft . They cancelled it in 2001, because of reorientation of their future goals(at that time) and also trust in the shuttle's capability. But I am sure they might have regretted that decision after the Feb1 2003 Columbia disaster. Now they are totally dependant on Soyuz tech for crew rescue/transport

The earlier generation dispensible ablative heat shield tech is extremely messy and only China has plans of continuing(atleast from reports till now) in that direction for some more time. Russia/ESA's joint Kliper program does away with ablatives and instead goes the route of thermal shield/blankets and a lifting body shape.

The only reason NASA is retiring the shuttles is because the shuttles' crew/cargo carrying capability are considered way too dangerous. The earlier reasoning for this complex solution was probably based on 1970s Cold-war requirement of carrying out military missions with a military payload, if there is a need. The public reason was of course, "to save money by reusability". But it caused two major disasters, because the mission quality control for this complex system became a nightmare. And it never saved any money! Hence their current decision to separate the crew carrying role from the cargo/other payload for future vehicles.

So all countries who are interested in manned missions are actually moving towards reusability one way or the other, but not necessarity the glider type multi-purpose vehicles of the current shuttle kind.

And India should move in that direction, IF it wants to send folks into space. atleast it already has proven tech (Carbon-Carbon composite heat shields, hypersonic aerodesign expertise etc).

Though I like the exotic tech involved, I am not a great votary of manned flights by India. I would prefer the money well spent if we can develop nano/robotic missions which uses reusable vehicles, instead of the more PR friendly but horrendously expensive and mishap prone manned missions. Already we have a program which gives the best bang for the taxpayer buck. Though not as glamarous as an Orange jumpsuit clad astronaut waving to the cameras, it works.

A post-Coldwar democratic govt need not spend vast sums of money on a showpiece mission to distract the population - they always can pay-off the 'free press' for image creation and is much more cheap :)

Thats the point - the CEV is just a glorified Crew Return Vehicle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Return_Vehicle) - it isnt a re-useable launch system - which is exactly what RLV is.

Many people now see RLVs as cash cows that dont deliver - it remains to be seen if India's RLV will be different - although being remote-piloted and only used for sattelite launch - im hopefull.

Afterall - launching sattelites is not like launching expenstively trained astronaughts - a faiure aint life and death. The RLV would give a 1/10 cost advantage to India in light launches.

Also our RLV is a cheap side-project, so no harm in trying.

praanthan_chaannaan

June 30th, 2006, 09:02 PM

Thats the point - the CEV is just a glorified Crew Return Vehicle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Return_Vehicle) - it isnt a re-useable launch system - which is exactly what RLV is.

Many people now see RLVs as cash cows that dont deliver - it remains to be seen if India's RLV will be different - although being remote-piloted and only used for sattelite launch - im hopefull.

Afterall - launching sattelites is not like launching expenstively trained astronaughts - a faiure aint life and death. The RLV would give a 1/10 cost advantage to India in light launches.

Actually even the shuttle is not considered a true RLV (though NASA claims so) - strictly speaking it is just a reusable payload with three really cool engines (I admire the wizards who designed the SSMEs, though not the manufacturers). The Main tank, a big structural element is lost after each launch :)

But your point about the distinction between RLV vs CEV is true. I was speaking more from a payload reusablity POV and your concern was about RLV. Thanks for the correction

I haven't yet heard a serious ISRO proposal for an RLV (except for the late 80's-early 90s study papers on recovering the first stage solid motors of PSLV/GSLV, by providing a blast shield at the stage interface between the first and second stage and a parachute recovery). But reusable craft, I think there are serious ISRO plans.

If I remember news reports correctly, the only thing remotely approaching a true RLV in the Indian context is the Avatar of DRDO. But then NASA with their money-bags and proven tech, cancelled the X-33 due to "technological hurdles" and I really doubt if it is going to be built anytime soon.

Personally, I think this report you pointed out is just breathless reporting of a Journalism major, who dont really give a damn about the news' technological accuracy and dont care to ask probing questions at press conferences.

VaastuShastra

June 30th, 2006, 09:36 PM

Actually even the shuttle is not considered a true RLV (though NASA claims so) - strictly speaking it is just a reusable payload with three really cool engines (I admire the wizards who designed the SSMEs, though not the manufacturers). The Main tank, a big structural element is lost after each launch :)

But your point about the distinction between RLV vs CEV is true. I was speaking more from a payload reusablity POV and your concern was about RLV. Thanks for the correction

I haven't yet heard a serious ISRO proposal for an RLV (except for the late 80's-early 90s study papers on recovering the first stage solid motors of PSLV/GSLV, by providing a blast shield at the stage interface between the first and second stage and a parachute recovery). But reusable craft, I think there are serious ISRO plans.

If I remember news reports correctly, the only thing remotely approaching a true RLV in the Indian context is the Avatar of DRDO. But then NASA with their money-bags and proven tech, cancelled the X-33 due to "technological hurdles" and I really doubt if it is going to be built anytime soon.

Personally, I think this report you pointed out is just breathless reporting of a Journalism major, who dont really give a damn about the news' technological accuracy and dont care to ask probing questions at press conferences.

Actually the AVATAR is what we were talking about - now simpy called the RLV, to fit in line with the other LV designations :)

The RLV is actually still serious - the RLV-TD test demonstrator will be flown by 2008 - the full RLV is going to be a small hyperplane that will theoretically reach orbit with small payloads delivering sattelites for 1/10 cost of other countries....

Sorry for confusion - but thats what I was saying when talking about how other world space agencies have abandoned RLV technology - the X-33 and the shuttle being the best examples. I hate to sound negative, but I am still sceptical that this RLV side-project can succeed where stuff like NASA's x-33 was deemed too technologically unsound...

RLV is gonna be fully re-useable, hence not just rockets being recovered from the sea, etc....

Amit

June 30th, 2006, 10:49 PM

I hate to sound negative, but I am still sceptical that this RLV side-project can succeed where stuff like NASA's x-33 was deemed too technologically unsound...

I guess you are refering to NASA's X-43 program for flight testing the scramjet engine of a hypersonic aircraft. The first flight test had to be aborted prematurely. The second flight test was successful and the engine was tested with aircraft flying at Mach 7. The third flight test was also successful and the engine was tested at Mach 10. This is the fastest any aircraft has ever flown.

The X-43 program was terminated NOT because of technological difficulties but because NASA wanted to focus on already proven rocket technology for future manned Mars missions rather than the hypersonic aircraft in research stage. It may well be revived in the future.

It is extremely challenging to build an aircraft that will fly upto Mach 25 and go all the way to space. No country is seriously looking at doing this in the near future. The practical goal of hypersonic aircraft research is to build a plane that can replace the first stage of a traditional rocket, which is the heaviest stage and carries majority of the oxidiser. The substantial vehicle weight reduction achieved can be used to increase payload weight and hence cut launch costs. A rocket is still needed in later stages to reach orbit.

Amit

June 30th, 2006, 10:59 PM

Just out of curiosity: VaastuShastra, praanthan_chaannaan, harsh1802.. do you have Aerospace engineering background? Seems like it from your posts :)

praanthan_chaannaan

July 1st, 2006, 12:08 AM

Actually the AVATAR is what we were talking about - now simpy called the RLV, to fit in line with the other LV designations :)

The RLV is actually still serious - the RLV-TD test demonstrator will be flown by 2008 - the full RLV is going to be a small hyperplane that will theoretically reach orbit with small payloads delivering sattelites for 1/10 cost of other countries....

Sorry for confusion - but thats what I was saying when talking about how other world space agencies have abandoned RLV technology - the X-33 and the shuttle being the best examples. I hate to sound negative, but I am still sceptical that this RLV side-project can succeed where stuff like NASA's x-33 was deemed too technologically unsound...

RLV is gonna be fully re-useable, hence not just rockets being recovered from the sea, etc....

Actually we are talking about different projects by different agencies. The research seemed to be split by civilian-defense lines, to prevent the dual usage clauses (which caused delays in CUS engine that ISRO faced earlier).

ISRO
- No true RLVs of the first stage to orbit, planned (atleast not yet publicized)
- GSLV MkIII and beyond (Evolved GSLV series)
- experimental reusable crafts (SRE and beyond)
- Experimental projects for retaining an option for a manned module (winged or connical)riding atop GSLV Mk III, depending on national requirements in future.
- Studies on hypersonic designs culminating in a flight test of a sub-scale prototype, carried by a Rohini series sounding rocket (like the X43 carried by Pegasus)

DRDO
- AVATAR design was originally sounding like the X-33 design, carries all the fuel/oxidizer internally(reports in press claim about oxygen separation apart). Never heard more milestones about it.
- Hyperplane (distinct from AVATAR) like the X43, uses scramjet with supersonic airflow etc. This is the second project, which is getting a lot of press recently

So as you see there seems to be two parallel projects for hypersonic air-breathers in both civilian and DRDO side.

DRDO info is hard to come by and they always dabble in even non-viable projects to retain the science edge. But our press reports 'imminent' launches etc :)

I am not sure we will see an air-breathing Hyper vehicle which can do an orbital flight and payload injection anytime soon.

The 2008 first flight I think is for the Rohini-Scramjet prototype combo of ISRO. Never heard a date about the first flight of a parallel DRDO one, yet.

BTW, you are right, if NASA cant figure out a reliable way to fabricate a LOH cryo-tank for X-33 that doesnt get brittle, I am not too optimistic about our chances

Unless we can use the legendary Wootz steel of yore :)

praanthan_chaannaan

July 1st, 2006, 12:21 AM

praanthan_chaannaan

July 1st, 2006, 12:50 AM

Just out of curiosity: VaastuShastra, praanthan_chaannaan, harsh1802.. do you have Aerospace engineering background? Seems like it from your posts :)

I have a "mild interest" in aerospace..... :)
But you are the man (I just saw your PHd post above) :cheers:

I grew up in a place choke full of rocket people(including the current Prez ;) ) and their kids. Even in exile, I try to keep in touch with my old neighbours (and my new neighbours too) :)

harsh1802

July 1st, 2006, 01:10 AM

Hey it's really grt to see informative disscusions on the topic of space sciences guys.

GRRRRRRRRRRT!

@ Amit: I'm a Civil Engineer.....but i have grt interest in the topics related to astronomy and space sciences. :)

VaastuShastra

July 1st, 2006, 10:42 AM

I guess you are refering to NASA's X-43 program for flight testing the scramjet engine of a hypersonic aircraft. The first flight test had to be aborted prematurely. The second flight test was successful and the engine was tested with aircraft flying at Mach 7. The third flight test was also successful and the engine was tested at Mach 10. This is the fastest any aircraft has ever flown.

The X-43 program was terminated NOT because of technological difficulties but because NASA wanted to focus on already proven rocket technology for future manned Mars missions rather than the hypersonic aircraft in research stage. It may well be revived in the future.

It is extremely challenging to build an aircraft that will fly upto Mach 25 and go all the way to space. No country is seriously looking at doing this in the near future. The practical goal of hypersonic aircraft research is to build a plane that can replace the first stage of a traditional rocket, which is the heaviest stage and carries majority of the oxidiser. The substantial vehicle weight reduction achieved can be used to increase payload weight and hence cut launch costs. A rocket is still needed in later stages to reach orbit.

Oops, I got the X-43 and X-33 confused - i.e. the X-33 (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/60/X-33_trio.jpg) was meant to be NASA's next shuttle, they abandoned the project, many seeing RLVs as unfeasable - and the X-43 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-43) hyperplane was abandoned due to similar financial concerns - i.e. it was deemed wiser to focus on existing rocket tech.

The RLV will be a full blown hypersonic spaceplane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_plane), made on a side budget by the ISRO, with no previous experience, where NASA has a budget of 14 billion USD and tons of experience...

Coutesy of wikipedia, here is a full list of RLV systems:

Currently in use

* Space Shuttle (partially reusable)

Planned

* PlanetSpace Silver Dart (partly reusable spaceplane, based on hypersonic glider design)
* SpaceX Falcon 1 (announced as partially reusable; maiden flight on March 24, 2006 failed)
* SpaceX Falcon 5/Falcon 9 (announced as fully reusable; maiden flight scheduled for 1st quarter, 2008)
* Skylon an airbreathing SSTO spaceplane
* Kistler Aerospace K-1 (maiden flight schedule not yet announced)
* Kliper (Russian-European partially reuseable spacecraft to be launched around 2011 for the first time)
* Hopper (proposed reusable European launch system)
* RLV/Avatar (proposed reusable Indian launch system for small payloads)

Historical

* Soviet Union Energia-Buran system (partially reusable)

Just out of curiosity: VaastuShastra, praanthan_chaannaan, harsh1802.. do you have Aerospace engineering background? Seems like it from your posts :)

Nah, I just have a lot of diverse interests - I know my science well enough to know what a scramjet is, what potential space propulsion is being discussed, what subatomic particles there are, where nano-technology is heading, etc, etc, etc, afterall, this sorta stuff is on documentary channels, in science fiction and everything, but I bet a real aerospace person like you would be able to actually do meaningfull stuff like calculate aerodynamic formula from memory :)

Thats the difference between interest in something and doing something I guess - a person interested in biosciences might be able to explain the structure of DNA, but a person performing biosciences would be able to use actual equipment to perform real practical tasks like PCR and genetic engineering.

Actually we are talking about different projects by different agencies. The research seemed to be split by civilian-defense lines, to prevent the dual usage clauses (which caused delays in CUS engine that ISRO faced earlier).

ISRO
- No true RLVs of the first stage to orbit, planned (atleast not yet publicized)
- GSLV MkIII and beyond (Evolved GSLV series)
- experimental reusable crafts (SRE and beyond)
- Experimental projects for retaining an option for a manned module (winged or connical)riding atop GSLV Mk III, depending on national requirements in future.
- Studies on hypersonic designs culminating in a flight test of a sub-scale prototype, carried by a Rohini series sounding rocket (like the X43 carried by Pegasus)

DRDO
- AVATAR design was originally sounding like the X-33 design, carries all the fuel/oxidizer internally(reports in press claim about oxygen separation apart). Never heard more milestones about it.
- Hyperplane (distinct from AVATAR) like the X43, uses scramjet with supersonic airflow etc. This is the second project, which is getting a lot of press recently

So as you see there seems to be two parallel projects for hypersonic air-breathers in both civilian and DRDO side.

DRDO info is hard to come by and they always dabble in even non-viable projects to retain the science edge. But our press reports 'imminent' launches etc :)

I am not sure we will see an air-breathing Hyper vehicle which can do an orbital flight and payload injection anytime soon.

The 2008 first flight I think is for the Rohini-Scramjet prototype combo of ISRO. Never heard a date about the first flight of a parallel DRDO one, yet.

BTW, you are right, if NASA cant figure out a reliable way to fabricate a LOH cryo-tank for X-33 that doesnt get brittle, I am not too optimistic about our chances

Unless we can use the legendary Wootz steel of yore :)

I wasnt actually aware the DDRO were still looking at AVATAR in parralel - I had assumed the projects were one and the same - I follow the ISRO more in the news - for the reason you said, i.e. DDRO secrecy - and also because ISRO is responsible for everything I want to see, i.e. manned spaceflight, etc..

As for wootz - I guess our space scientists should take a cue from the ancient flying machines of the Mahabharata....

:jk:

Amit, no we are referring to the X-33(distinct from X-43), which got canned in 2001 because the Lockheed Martin fabricated LOH cryo-tanks were too brittle after loading with cryo fuel(LOH). It was supposed to be a shuttle replacement program, with conventional LOX-LOH fuels, but unlike the shuttle, the main fuel tanks will be a part of the orbital vehicle and has no Solid boosters, so that it is a true RLV (single stage to orbit and back). The other key difference was that it uses a Linear Aerospike engine, instead of the Shuttles' SSME.

On the other hand, X-43 is a scramjet project and never got canned - rather it accomplished all its goals with three testflights. It uses the air-breathing scramjet that you gave an overview above.

I think we might see a version of the scramjet engine in a military missile before an orbital vehicle.

Dunno about that - in the end, the next phase of the project was put on indefinite hold - which im sure was for economic viability reasons, when NASA cheaper rocket tech more worth their cash...

I have a "mild interest" in aerospace..... :)
But you are the man (I just saw your PHd post above) :cheers:

I grew up in a place choke full of rocket people(including the current Prez ;) ) and their kids. Even in exile, I try to keep in touch with my old neighbours (and my new neighbours too) :)

Aha! You grew up around our rocket heros! Thats great - do you mean around one of the launch facilities like Sriharikota?

Hey it's really grt to see informative disscusions on the topic of space sciences guys.

GRRRRRRRRRRT!

@ Amit: I'm a Civil Engineer.....but i have grt interest in the topics related to astronomy and space sciences. :)

Yeh cool discussion :)

How did everyone here become interested in space tech then? I guess with me, it might have been due to being a sci-fi fan from birth :)

The colinisation of other planets is the single most important purpose that the human race must accomplish in order to survive - clinging to earth whilst planet-killer asteriods whiz past, (not to mention other potential diasters), is not a great way to ensure the long term survival of our species and culture.

harsh1802

July 1st, 2006, 10:51 AM

Me i am a space enthusiast since my childhood. I used to spend hours and hours on the roof of my house looking at stars and thinking abt the origins and all tht stuff.

As i grew up.....everything abt space blew me away.....i mean the new things tht i kept learning abt the universe.

Yeah in a way, watching scifi serials like startrek, thrillers like the x-files too helped in at a quite young age..... :)

harsh1802

July 1st, 2006, 10:52 AM

And ohh....i almost forgot grt info tht u posted man......^^

:cheers:

VaastuShastra

July 1st, 2006, 11:16 AM

Star Trek is especially good because it made a point (or at least the good series like TNG, TOS and DS9 did) of putting science in - I learnt what a quantum singlularity was, and probably a lot of other stuff, at a young age because of that show :)

What is your favorite launch vehicle btw? Being a Kololev fan, I will always love the R-7 derived vehicles best - R-7 ICBM, Sputnik Launcher, Vostok Launcher, Vokshod Launcher and Soyuz Launcher - they have served as a workhorse for almost 50 years where no US LVs older than a decade are still in common use - and they look fantastic. Also the N-1 would have whooped the Saturn V had it been successfull :)

It seems the launch programmes of the future will be something like this - for America the Shuttle Derived Launch System for all official NASA projects like moon landings, the Titan family, Delta family, Atlas family and the the SpaceX Falcon family. Europe's Ariane family, India's GSLV family, China's Long March family, Russia's Angara and Japan's HII family. USA is going for those EELV launchers like Atlas, Delta and SpaceX in an effort to undercut cheap launchers from Russia, India and China, plus Europe's Ariane.

I dunno if you know this, but right now, one of the reasons Russian launches are almost as cheap as Indian and Chinese ones is they are simply getting old ICBMs out of silos and warehouses, which need decommisioning due to age and economy, chopping the nuke off, and fitting them with orbital flight systems - and there are literally hundreds sitting around. So while the Russian space agency does that without having to manufacture much, they can cheaply develop the next generation of Russian systems, such as the replacement for the Zenit rockets.

Krav

July 1st, 2006, 11:19 AM

Vaastushastra,
The colinisation of other planets is the single most important purpose that the human race must accomplish in order to survive - clinging to earth whilst planet-killer asteriods whiz past, (not to mention other potential diasters), is not a great way to ensure the long term survival of our species and culture.

Wow! I completely agree. That is the reason why I believe that ISRO should invest some resources towards a manned spaceflight program.

Maybe solve the technological issues now before we are ready to make a decision about whether it is important for us to have a manned program in the future.

From 2020 (if not earlier) onwards I expect to see regular manned flights to the moon from both the US and China.

VaastuShastra

July 1st, 2006, 11:46 AM

Vaastushastra,

Wow! I completely agree. That is the reason why I believe that ISRO should invest some resources towards a manned spaceflight program.

Maybe solve the technological issues now before we are ready to make a decision about whether it is important for us to have a manned program in the future.

From 2020 (if not earlier) onwards I expect to see regular manned flights to the moon from both the US and China.

Yeh, thats exactly why I fully support the ISRO for manned space - I dunno if we will see regular flights though - really I think the best way to ensure that sapce is exploited, is to encourage privitisation - when people realise that there are asteroids in space that are made out of solid iron, worth billions, capitalism will drive space expansion as companies seek to exploit the resources of the solar system (and beyond).

Amit

July 2nd, 2006, 12:41 AM

The discussion here is quite informative. At the same time, the different programs being discussed here can be quite confusing to a general person:) So let me discuss the various approaches to space launch being tossed around here.

Rockets or airplanes?

Rockets have traditionally been used as a launch vehicle for space access. However, they are very expensive and potentially unsafe. A space shuttle launch costs $500 million. A heavy telecommunication satellite launch costs $80-100 million (India's GSLV Mk 3 will lower the costs:)). Why is it so expensive?? Well.. if the total weight of launch vehicle is 100 kg, then the oxidizer weighs as much as 65 kg. Since fuel and oxidizer takeup majority of the weight, the useful payload weight is only 2-3 kg!!

The solution?? Ultrafast hypersonic airplanes. An airplane breathes oxygen from the atmosphere and hence does away with majority of the weight carried by the rocket. This weight freedup can be used to substantially increase the useful payload weight and hence drive down the launch costs.

Ofcourse the proposed solution has its set of challenges. The most fundamental issue is the development of an engine that can power such an incredibly fast airplane. The fastest a full-size airplane has ever flown is Mach 3.2, and we are talking about hypersonic speeds (Mach no > 5) here. The critical technology that can make this happen is called a SCRAMJET engine. It is radically different from existing jet engines in that it has NO turbomachinery.

Other than the engine, there is the issue of substantial airframe heating of the airplane. The Concorde used to expand by as much as ONE FEET during flight due to thermal expansion, and it flew only at Mach 2! So the proposed vehicle has to be actively cooled by circulating cryogenic temperature fuel under its skin.

Single stage or multi stage?

The existing rockets deliver the payload in orbit by launching in 2-3 stages. One single vehicle can do the same thing, be it a rocket or an airplane. But it will be EXTREMLY heavy. It is much lighter, hence cheaper, to launch in stages. No wonder the NASA X-33 program being discussed here didnot materialize (if I understand correctly that it was a single stage rocket).

Even the hypersonic airplane discussed above is intended to replace only the first, and heaviest, stage of a traditional rocket-powered vehicle. Then it needs to fly only upto speeds of, say, Mach 10. The objective of substantially reducing the vehicle weight is still achieved. A rocket (much smaller than stage 1) is still needed to reach orbital speeds of Mach 25.

Oh boy.. it seems like I am writing the Introduction chapter of my thesis again :)

Amit

July 2nd, 2006, 01:24 AM

DRDO started research on hypersonic aircraft earlier than ISRO and is probably further ahead in this technology. DRDO plans flight testing by 2007-08, ISRO plans the same by 2008-09.

USA, Russia, France, Australia, China and India have active hypersonic research programs aimed at missile development. USA, Japan, France, India (and maybe others) are also developing this technology for space access. Japan is outstanding in the sense that it is committed to using hypersonics ONLY for civilian purpose.

As a testament to the darker side of human nature, the hypersonic technology will find application as an ultra-fast missile first and as a space launch vehicle later. The rocket technology was used to make intercontinental ballistic missiles first and sent satellites and humans to space later. An aircraft was used to fight wars first and transport people later. Atomic energy was used to make atom bombs first and for electricity generation later.

I understand that defense is important in today's world, but part of me doesnot like it.

harsh1802

July 2nd, 2006, 04:18 AM

I dunno if you know this, but right now, one of the reasons Russian launches are almost as cheap as Indian and Chinese ones is they are simply getting old ICBMs out of silos and warehouses, which need decommisioning due to age and economy, chopping the nuke off, and fitting them with orbital flight systems - and there are literally hundreds sitting around. So while the Russian space agency does that without having to manufacture much, they can cheaply develop the next generation of Russian systems, such as the replacement for the Zenit rockets.

Ohh i was unaware of this man......it seems to be a grt way to cut down on u re unnecessary arsenal....and also drastically cuts u re costs for space launches.

Thnks for the info man. :)

VaastuShastra

July 2nd, 2006, 11:05 AM

Ohh i was unaware of this man......it seems to be a grt way to cut down on u re unnecessary arsenal....and also drastically cuts u re costs for space launches.

Thnks for the info man. :)

Yeh - a great way of disposing old technology that would otherwise need to be left, sold or decommissioned - I think I read somewhere that this stock of old rockets will last another 10+ years, and until then, the Russians can effectively earn money for nothing. If they want to launch a small sattelite for a private company, all they have to do is bust out a small ICBM that would have launched a few kilotons, and use it :)

The discussion here is quite informative. At the same time, the different programs being discussed here can be quite confusing to a general person:) So let me discuss the various approaches to space launch being tossed around here.

Rockets or airplanes?

Rockets have traditionally been used as a launch vehicle for space access. However, they are very expensive and potentially unsafe. A space shuttle launch costs $500 million. A heavy telecommunication satellite launch costs $80-100 million (India's GSLV Mk 3 will lower the costs:)). Why is it so expensive?? Well.. if the total weight of launch vehicle is 100 kg, then the oxidizer weighs as much as 65 kg. Since fuel and oxidizer takeup majority of the weight, the useful payload weight is only 2-3 kg!!

The solution?? Ultrafast hypersonic airplanes. An airplane breathes oxygen from the atmosphere and hence does away with majority of the weight carried by the rocket. This weight freedup can be used to substantially increase the useful payload weight and hence drive down the launch costs.

Ofcourse the proposed solution has its set of challenges. The most fundamental issue is the development of an engine that can power such an incredibly fast airplane. The fastest a full-size airplane has ever flown is Mach 3.2, and we are talking about hypersonic speeds (Mach no > 5) here. The critical technology that can make this happen is called a SCRAMJET engine. It is radically different from existing jet engines in that it has NO turbomachinery.

Other than the engine, there is the issue of substantial airframe heating of the airplane. The Concorde used to expand by as much as ONE FEET during flight due to thermal expansion, and it flew only at Mach 2! So the proposed vehicle has to be actively cooled by circulating cryogenic temperature fuel under its skin.

Single stage or multi stage?

The existing rockets deliver the payload in orbit by launching in 2-3 stages. One single vehicle can do the same thing, be it a rocket or an airplane. But it will be EXTREMLY heavy. It is much lighter, hence cheaper, to launch in stages. No wonder the NASA X-33 program being discussed here didnot materialize (if I understand correctly that it was a single stage rocket).

Even the hypersonic airplane discussed above is intended to replace only the first, and heaviest, stage of a traditional rocket-powered vehicle. Then it needs to fly only upto speeds of, say, Mach 10. The objective of substantially reducing the vehicle weight is still achieved. A rocket (much smaller than stage 1) is still needed to reach orbital speeds of Mach 25.

Oh boy.. it seems like I am writing the Introduction chapter of my thesis again :)

Nice write up :) This is why it might just be better to develop cheaper and cheaper staged rockets instead for now - and that is what ISRO is doing anyway.

DRDO started research on hypersonic aircraft earlier than ISRO and is probably further ahead in this technology. DRDO plans flight testing by 2007-08, ISRO plans the same by 2008-09.

USA, Russia, France, Australia, China and India have active hypersonic research programs aimed at missile development. USA, Japan, France, India (and maybe others) are also developing this technology for space access. Japan is outstanding in the sense that it is committed to using hypersonics ONLY for civilian purpose.

As a testament to the darker side of human nature, the hypersonic technology will find application as an ultra-fast missile first and as a space launch vehicle later. The rocket technology was used to make intercontinental ballistic missiles first and sent satellites and humans to space later. An aircraft was used to fight wars first and transport people later. Atomic energy was used to make atom bombs first and for electricity generation later.

I understand that defense is important in today's world, but part of me doesnot like it.

To be honest, it wont make much of a difference - we already have supersonic cruise missiles, etc, so another undetectable technology wouldnt do anything to the 'balance of terror'.

----------

There was an article earlier in the thread about how Sriharikota is ideal as a launch location (http://www.spacedaily.com/news/Manned_Spaceflight_Plans_For_India_To_The_ISS_And_Beyond.html) - and how India could use it to participate in the ISS, launching cheap supplies on the GSLV, etc - now this article claims that:

Next to French Guiana, SHAR may emerge as the most favoured launch destination (http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/02/stories/2006070200081300.htm)

11 missions consecutive successes; spaceport has capacity to launch commercially

http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/02/images/2006070200081301.jpg

Sriharikota: With the past 11 missions being consecutive successes, Sriharikota may soon emerge as the most favoured destination to launch satellites, after French Guiana.

"We are working on a scheme which will facilitate four launches — two Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicles (GSLV) and two Polar Satellite Launch Vehicles (PSLV) — a year. This is the ideal launch frequency," said M. Annamalai, Director of the Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota.

Sriharikota, popularly known as SHAR, had more facilities than French Guiana. The Indian spaceport had the capacity to launch commercially. "We are optimising on the cost factor with each mission. This year, with the next PSLV scheduled for September/October, we will be launching a satellite (Lapan) from Indonesia."

World-class launch pad

India was the second best destination for the eastern launch. "French Guiana is five degrees from the equator and SHAR is 13 degrees, which is pretty close. This means the vehicles can take more load. As one moves away from the equator, one has to ensure that the payload in the launch vehicle is not much for, to get into the right orbit, more thrust is required. We are reliable as we have a history of 11 successes. Also, the second launch pad is world-class. It will also prove cost-effective compared to French Guiana," Dr. Annamalai said.

Recovery experiment

Along with the Indonesian satellite, the Indian Space Research Organisation is sending the Satellite Recovery Experiment (SRE).

The 650-kg recoverable satellite will be allowed to go into the orbit for 20-30 days. "It is an experiment to study the recovery aspects. The challenge is to ensure that the satellite does not burn out during re-entry," said an ISRO official.

The SRE would try to move the satellite away from the orbit and measure microgravity. "The data will be recovered when the capsule is recovered. The SRE will also test the thermal systems, deceleration system, guidance, etc," he said.

New facilities

For supporting the GSLV Mk III programme, a number of new facilities are being set up at SHAR.

Under the Rs. 2,500-crore programme, a new plant is being set up with state-of-the-art facilities to process heavier class boosters such as an S-200 booster (with 200 tonnes of solid propellant).

The other facilities include a solid stage assembly building, a technical complex, a spacecraft preparation facility for handling 4T class spacecraft, an S-200 hardware storage building, a flight hardware storage building, extension of the rail track from the existing vehicle assembly building to the proposed solid stage assembly building, earth storable and cryo propellant storage and filling systems and propellant servicing facilities.

Officials at SHAR said the range instrumentation system would be augmented with new facilities including radars, optical tracking systems, a mission control centre, real time computers and wind profilers.

"Most of the civil works under the project have been completed. We will have a trial of the booster in a few months. The project cost includes a substantial amount towards infrastructure development," said Dr. Annamalai.

Mk III programme

N. Satyanarayana, Project Director, Mk III, said the programme was slated for takeoff in 2008-09. More than 50 per cent of the works were completed at SHAR. The solid propellant plant was nearing completion. "It will be ready by the end of this year. The trials of propellant production will start soon, probably October onwards."

Industry participation

Over the past few years, SHAR had been encouraging industry participation, Dr. Satyanarayana said.

It had also floated tenders for setting up a few facilities. "ISRO will handle critical operations, while non-critical operations will be outsourced."

----------

Low-cost space odyssey (http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1038975)

SRIHARIKOTA: Saturday’s Discovery journey is coincidental. India’s new dream is to build space shuttles and rockets that hurl heavier satellites into orbit at one tenth of what it costs now and even send a man in space.

Space scientists are metamorphosing the vintage satellite launch vehicle (SLV) rocket into a shuttle that may pave the way for a future Indian manned space mission. But at the moment, the scientists are more focused on bringing down the cost of a satellite launch to $2,500 per kg from the existing $25,000 per kg.

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) expects the first technology demonstrator of the modified SLV rocket to fly by 2009, but a bigger reusable launch vehicle, which can place heavier satellites regularly, is nearly a decade away.

Unlike Discovery, the NASA space shuttle that is strapped to a rocket and released to fly once in space, the Indian shuttle will perch on top of the SLV rocket. Once it crosses the earth’s atmosphere, it will cruise in space, hurl satellites and return back to earth.

President APJ Abdul Kalam, as then project director of SLV, had led India’s first successful rocket mission that put in orbit a mini-satellite weighing 35 kg in 1980. “We are making modifications to the SLV to use it for a reusable launch vehicle (RLV),” said M Annamalai, director, ISRO’S Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC).

ISRO will also embark upon building larger space shuttles that can be put in space by its other rockets such as ASLV and PSLV. The technology for re-entry into earth’s atmosphere, guidance and landing would be tested when the 600-kg cone-shaped capsule of the space capsule recovery experiment (SRE) will be launched and brought back later this year.

While the space shuttle journey has just begun, ISRO is perfecting its own cryogenic engine, which uses liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, for the third stage of the indigenous geo-synchronous satellite launch vehicle (GSLV), to be fired next year.

Three GSLV rockets that have placed communication satellites 36,000 km in space and the one that is due to carry a two-tonne satellite by July 15 have the imported Russian cryogenic engine.

ISRO is investing Rs2,500 crore to build a 629-tonne rocket, GSLV-Mk-III, by 2008, with the ability to launch heavy four-tonne satellites and a 10-tonne manned space capsule in lower earth orbit. “These new technologies will make space transportation much cheaper,” Annamalai said.

praanthan_chaannaan

July 3rd, 2006, 10:56 PM

Aha! You grew up around our rocket heros! Thats great - do you mean around one of the launch facilities like Sriharikota?

Nope, not SHAR. SHAR is the place where work done in lot of other places in India gets assembled and launched under media glare :)

I grew up in Trivandrum, where the two ISRO centers, VSSC and LPSC are sited. These two places did most of the theoretical and engineering works on LVs, controls and engines of all of the launchers. Those school visits to VSSC is always fun - they really let us run around amongst the departments, followed by the mandatory parting gift of "launcher family" stickers :)

Heroes they most certainly are!! Still can't believe those tired looking men and women carrying a cloth bag of groceries, returning from their work did stuff that was truly amazing. That too on a budget that would probably barely cover NASA's Media Department budget.

A lot amongst us did not have faith in them (and there will still be a lot who will mock them, if a launch goes bad) because they never shifted blame around nor dressed themselves in "button-downs". Often times, the skeptics neither had the patience nor the technical background to understand the complexity of the problems.

But to me, they along with the equally modest DAE folks, did more than any to raise India's tech-capability image amongst policy makers around the world. Though the more media-savvy IT industry loves to take credit of that fact often, IMO :)

praanthan_chaannaan

July 3rd, 2006, 11:24 PM

Yeh, thats exactly why I fully support the ISRO for manned space - I dunno if we will see regular flights though - really I think the best way to ensure that sapce is exploited, is to encourage privitisation - when people realise that there are asteroids in space that are made out of solid iron, worth billions, capitalism will drive space expansion as companies seek to exploit the resources of the solar system (and beyond).

Manned missions are cool - but I believe right now, we should retain it only as an option. If the need arises (due to rapid progress by other nations in manned mission applications), then we should go ahead.

But the media's current fascination with Chinese manned missions (utilizing less than inspiring third-party technology and having no tangible benefit other than good PR for the Politburo) is putting on a lot of pressure on ISRO. To me, that is bad news because Indian politicians too will jump in if this campaign gets popular.

A man-rated launcher/orbiter is a huge drain on the budget. But an "autonomous flight capable" (robotic) orbiter with a pluggable habitation module approach might work (indications from ISRO papers point to thinking in that direction and even NASA's CEV concept seems to be moving along on those lines). Erstwhile USSR's Energia-Buran autonomous test flight is a good example of this approach(a promising program cut by lack of funds).

Privatisation is still a long way off, not just because of funds or tech. Even in a free-market place like US, space is considered a "strategic area" and the checks and controls are something akin to Indian industry situation during the "permit-babu" era. Very difficult for a "human orbital flight" level breakthrough (might change soon, but am not too optimistic) in the purely private sector due to governmental defensiveness.

Amit

July 4th, 2006, 12:57 AM

Heroes they most certainly are!! Still can't believe those tired looking men and women carrying a cloth bag of groceries, returning from their work did stuff that was truly amazing. That too on a budget that would probably barely cover NASA's Media Department budget.

A lot amongst us did not have faith in them (and there will still be a lot who will mock them, if a launch goes bad) because they never shifted blame around nor dressed themselves in "button-downs". Often times, the skeptics neither had the patience nor the technical background to understand the complexity of the problems.

But to me, they along with the equally modest DAE folks, did more than any to raise India's tech-capability image amongst policy makers around the world. Though the more media-savvy IT industry loves to take credit of that fact often, IMO :)

Very well said :)

ISRO scientists are definetly getting due credits now. Indians feel proud of their achievements that have put us in a select league of nations to have mastered such a complex technology that has inspired many science fiction stories.

Regarding the pessimists, the less said the better. If we go back 20 years, they would have laughed at anyone who said that India will be a space faring nation, the IT industry will become a world beater and change the way others perceive us, the economy will grow at 8%, New Delhi will get a modern metro and so on.

They may again doubt India's future today, but time will prove them wrong once again.

VaastuShastra

July 4th, 2006, 01:58 PM

Manned missions are cool - but I believe right now, we should retain it only as an option. If the need arises (due to rapid progress by other nations in manned mission applications), then we should go ahead.

But the media's current fascination with Chinese manned missions (utilizing less than inspiring third-party technology and having no tangible benefit other than good PR for the Politburo) is putting on a lot of pressure on ISRO. To me, that is bad news because Indian politicians too will jump in if this campaign gets popular.

A man-rated launcher/orbiter is a huge drain on the budget. But an "autonomous flight capable" (robotic) orbiter with a pluggable habitation module approach might work (indications from ISRO papers point to thinking in that direction and even NASA's CEV concept seems to be moving along on those lines). Erstwhile USSR's Energia-Buran autonomous test flight is a good example of this approach(a promising program cut by lack of funds).

Privatisation is still a long way off, not just because of funds or tech. Even in a free-market place like US, space is considered a "strategic area" and the checks and controls are something akin to Indian industry situation during the "permit-babu" era. Very difficult for a "human orbital flight" level breakthrough (might change soon, but am not too optimistic) in the purely private sector due to governmental defensiveness.

I believe in what this said though:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/Manned_Spaceflight_Plans_For_India_To_The_ISS_And_Beyond.html

SHAR would be ideal for ISS launches, and if ISRO contructed its own ISS transport, it would be a de-facto member of the project. Also if we wait for others, we miss the start of the marathon...

If we assume that India could build a manned capsule by 2012, then when negotiations on the future of the ISS begin, India could commit to develop its own tranfer vehicle, for launch on the GSLV from SHAR, in exchange for a significant share in the ISS. It would provide valuable experience, etc - the automated or piloted transfer vehicles could be a staple of the space industry, say when space stations become more common, as well as industry - India would become one of the leaders in space tourism for cheap flights to ISS, etc.

I would at least like a primative human flight before ESA and JAXA get theirs. Just a one man capsule, could be done in 5 years, with a human rated GSLV - and I think it would be worth it - its best to develop expertise in crewed flght early, rather than rely on foreign launch services later.

Although its true the Chinese have been using backward engineered Soviet ballistic missiles in the early days, and Soyuz/Vokshod style capsules later, I dont like to discount their program because of it - because frankly, as admirable as India's mostly home-made program is - any advantage is a good one.

I agree with what you say about privatisation - but there has been some progress at least, such as through the SpaceX company.

Nope, not SHAR. SHAR is the place where work done in lot of other places in India gets assembled and launched under media glare :)

I grew up in Trivandrum, where the two ISRO centers, VSSC and LPSC are sited. These two places did most of the theoretical and engineering works on LVs, controls and engines of all of the launchers. Those school visits to VSSC is always fun - they really let us run around amongst the departments, followed by the mandatory parting gift of "launcher family" stickers :)

Heroes they most certainly are!! Still can't believe those tired looking men and women carrying a cloth bag of groceries, returning from their work did stuff that was truly amazing. That too on a budget that would probably barely cover NASA's Media Department budget.

A lot amongst us did not have faith in them (and there will still be a lot who will mock them, if a launch goes bad) because they never shifted blame around nor dressed themselves in "button-downs". Often times, the skeptics neither had the patience nor the technical background to understand the complexity of the problems.

But to me, they along with the equally modest DAE folks, did more than any to raise India's tech-capability image amongst policy makers around the world. Though the more media-savvy IT industry loves to take credit of that fact often, IMO :)

Im glad that in Nehru and some other leaders, we had technophiles, who understood what the problems of rocketary were - the ISRO has sometimes been ridiculed as you say, yet im glad that unlike many other countreis, especially democracies, funding for the ISRO was never cut, and has only ever been expanded.

----------

What do you guys think of the GSLV-III and the possible GSLV-IV with extra boosters? Although for one reason or another, JAXA and the Chinese Space Agency had a head start in launchers, it seems the H-IIB and Long March 5 will all have payload capacities more in line with the latest Ariane/Titan/Delta/Atlas/Falcon/etc..

Krav

July 5th, 2006, 05:47 AM

Amit

July 5th, 2006, 07:09 PM

What do you guys think of the GSLV-III and the possible GSLV-IV with extra boosters? Although for one reason or another, JAXA and the Chinese Space Agency had a head start in launchers, it seems the H-IIB and Long March 5 will all have payload capacities more in line with the latest Ariane/Titan/Delta/Atlas/Falcon/etc..

GSLV Mk-3 will have a payload capacity of 4400 kg for the geosynchronous orbit. In comparison, Russia's most powerful rocket Proton carries 4700 kg. US Atlas/Delta rockets have similar capability.

So the upgraded GSLV will be as powerful as the US/Russian rockets.

VaastuShastra

July 5th, 2006, 08:41 PM

praanthan_chaannaan

July 6th, 2006, 03:04 AM

Also it is important for us to learn from our past mistakes.
Take the case of GSLV for example. Inspite of being technically capable of
having a launcher rated for delivering 4-6 ton satellites to GTO we have had to rely
on foreign launches for most of our INSAT class satellites.

Had we started developing a cryogenic engine in the late eighties (instead of planning
to buy the technology from Russia and their later refusal to supply the same) we would
have had GSLV-III and IV class launchers by the late 90s and would have not had to
depend on the French-European developed Ariane for launching our INSAT class satellites
(not only losing foriegn exchange but also losing on the export market for such launches).

Krav, it was a very unfortunate story, which I agree cost us a lot.

The reason for ISRO going for the unfortunate tech transfer deal with Russia for the CUS has many reasons. Some of the points to consider:

A similar deal with France worked wonderfully in the late 70's(for the tech transfer for Viking engines, which are the Vikas engines in both PSLV and GSLV) and ISRO saved a lot of time in the process.
Engineering difficulties. Though the theoretical aspects of liquid engines were considered solvable at that time, the material sciences area was considered a weak point for ISRO (Midhani, though started in 1973 was doing some good work, but they were not exactly cutting-edge researchers). Particularly, lack of expertise in nozzle throat materials, regenerative cooling, cryo-capable turbo-pump, tank insulation etc. Though valuable experience was gained from the Viking/Vikas engines, it was not considered enough for a LOX-LOH engine.
Lack of understanding by the technocrats of ISRO and MoS on how US industrial/governmental policy makers operate. Nor were they advised of the global politik angle by an integrated body like the present day National Security council. The post-Cold war world scene, with a weakened Russia headed by Yelstin aided the US policy makers tremendously when it came to twisting arms.

So IMO, the Cryo-engine deal with Russia was a great deal at that time, based on past good experience. But once it went sour, ISRO had no alternative but to go it alone. US estimate for the delay was supposed to have been 15 years. But from the recent status, looks like the Russians and ISRO had shown the finger to the US, if you know what I mean ;)

Chinese unlike us started their development efforts in the late 80s and now have almost
the same launch capability as the Europeans.

Manned space flight for India is inevitable in the future. The question is will we start
working towards that objective from now or wait until it is absolutely essential for us to
have it (and endure the growing pains and resultant loss of precious time then).

Hmm..... I dont know about that. I always thought the Chinese were reckless in spending their money and their launch order book doesnt show much to show their equality with Arainespace. Plus, they got a lot of help on LV guidance from US companies in the past (do you remember the names of Hughes Electronics Corp. and Boeing Satellite Systemsl ;) ) because they were having problems with Long March launches.

But Europeans are very single-minded, efficient(compartively) and businesslike. They also take design risks too. They and Russians (not erstwhile USSR) are very careful about their objectives, compared to NASA or China. BTW, purely my personal observation :)

praanthan_chaannaan

July 6th, 2006, 03:28 AM

But not the next gen stuff like Ariane V, Long March 5, Angara, H-IIB, Titan IV, Falcon 9, Atlas V, etc - their largest economical rockets seem to be in the range of 8-10 tonnes to GTO, in comparison to GSLV-III's 4 tonnes... If the GSLV-IV has a 6 tonne GTO capability, it would mean we are still deficient in the heavy lift department of 8 or 10 tonnes...

VaastuShastra,

The reason why the above mentioned heavies of the world have higher GTO capabilities is because they are all designed to slug it out in the commercial market. All of them are intenting to compete with each other for multi-sat launches (to spread launch risk insurance and mission costs).

ISRO will have a tough time explaining to their boss's boss (the people of India), why they need to have a 10 tonne GTO capability. Already enough politicos, editorials and intellectuals are questioning the rationale of having ISRO itself. Particularly the leftist ones, who think these programs are just rich man's entertainment or a "nationalist pass time". Except of course China's which is due to "visionary leadership of the Politburo" :) Sorry for the rant, but I get a little irritated by their double-talk.

Due to the above reasons the GSLV MkIII and IV designs' GTO capability will be muted by ISRO. Ever wondered why GSLV MkIII is not called something else? Due to its totally different structural design and engines, MkIII had every reason to be called an HSLV or something like that, but I suspect Govt stuck to the GSLV family name for political reasons (how will you justify a simultaneous PSLV, GSLV and HSLV programs to the impatient politicos and the press ? :) ).

If you remember, PSLV's mid-80s "ultimate" target payload was supposed to be 990 Kgs and the first flight payload was around 850 kgs. But the last flight (PSLV-C6) was slinging stuff weighing around 1600 kgs. That is nearly double the original and ISRO folks say it is not the final figure. The key is incremental advances which made it possible.

IMO, GSLV MkIII and IV are going to see a lot of incremental advances, once the launches happen. And the reason they went for the MkIII+ series is to keep the option of manned missions open.

So relax folks! We might yet see "saffronisation of space by India"
(I used to pull the leg of a leftist friend of mine that NASA is "saffronizing the space with their orange jumpsuits" and why is he silent :) )

praanthan_chaannaan

July 6th, 2006, 03:43 AM

I agree with what you say about privatisation - but there has been some progress at least, such as through the SpaceX company.

I am a bit sceptical of Elon Musk. His public statements kinda reminds me of the British Beagle2 Mars probe.

Im glad that in Nehru and some other leaders, we had technophiles, who understood what the problems of rocketary were - the ISRO has sometimes been ridiculed as you say, yet im glad that unlike many other countreis, especially democracies, funding for the ISRO was never cut, and has only ever been expanded.

:) I had touched on the reason in my previous post. This is due to the sheer practicality of ISRO's missions. You cannot argue against a mission "that spreads education" or "to launch satellites cheaper" or "to spread communication networks to remote villages" without appearing like a fool and anti-people.

That is why I am a bit against the manned mission. Till now ISRO has been able to justify 100%, their funding. But in a democracy, if the perception (distinct from reality) grows that the money is being spent on a "low returns" program, the funding will be cut. Once that happens, Uncle Sam will step in massively, to choke all the programs with his warm embrace :)

That is what have happened with Australian, British and Canadian programs. NASA and ESA stepped in to offer cheaper alternatives and their people thought "why should we waste our money on our own research if it doesnt serve us directly and we have a cheaper alternative?". If you read about these erstwhile important agencies, they couldn't justify the costs the same way that ISRO could, because their focus areas did not directly impact the citizens.

VaastuShastra

July 6th, 2006, 03:35 PM

So IMO, the Cryo-engine deal with Russia was a great deal at that time, based on past good experience. But once it went sour, ISRO had no alternative but to go it alone. US estimate for the delay was supposed to have been 15 years. But from the recent status, looks like the Russians and ISRO had shown the finger to the US, if you know what I mean ;)

Hmm..... I dont know about that. I always thought the Chinese were reckless in spending their money and their launch order book doesnt show much to show their equality with Arainespace. Plus, they got a lot of help on LV guidance from US companies in the past (do you remember the names of Hughes Electronics Corp. and Boeing Satellite Systemsl ;) ) because they were having problems with Long March launches.

At the time, our old friends Russia showed us the finger, by playing on Indian babus in parliment to force the ISRO into a bad deal involving the acquisition of their cyrogenic stages for the GSLV-I... It was a sad chapter in our space history indeed - we could have been flying the GSLV-III by now, and developing a nice new modular launcher family akin to Angara/Long March/etc.

My impression of the Chinese space programme is that they operate in a similar way to Cold War Russia and America, i.e. they have ICBM-derived LVs, which they modify into different families of LV, wasting some money perhaps, but not too much - nothing worth critisising their programme on (I think ill read Brian Harvey's book on their programme one day) - I wouldnt say they are reckless, and they are probably more cost efficient than NASA. We on the other hand operate more like Europe and Japan - LVs built for sattelite launch, cost saving in mind, run like a cross between an academic institution and corporation. State/military driven vs academic/corp driven - each seem to do better in different areas - the former being better at mustering exploration projects, the latter being better at practical stuff like commercial sattelite stuff.

VaastuShastra,

The reason why the above mentioned heavies of the world have higher GTO capabilities is because they are all designed to slug it out in the commercial market. All of them are intenting to compete with each other for multi-sat launches (to spread launch risk insurance and mission costs).

ISRO will have a tough time explaining to their boss's boss (the people of India), why they need to have a 10 tonne GTO capability. Already enough politicos, editorials and intellectuals are questioning the rationale of having ISRO itself. Particularly the leftist ones, who think these programs are just rich man's entertainment or a "nationalist pass time". Except of course China's which is due to "visionary leadership of the Politburo" :) Sorry for the rant, but I get a little irritated by their double-talk.

Due to the above reasons the GSLV MkIII and IV designs' GTO capability will be muted by ISRO. Ever wondered why GSLV MkIII is not called something else? Due to its totally different structural design and engines, MkIII had every reason to be called an HSLV or something like that, but I suspect Govt stuck to the GSLV family name for political reasons (how will you justify a simultaneous PSLV, GSLV and HSLV programs to the impatient politicos and the press ? :) ).

If you remember, PSLV's mid-80s "ultimate" target payload was supposed to be 990 Kgs and the first flight payload was around 850 kgs. But the last flight (PSLV-C6) was slinging stuff weighing around 1600 kgs. That is nearly double the original and ISRO folks say it is not the final figure. The key is incremental advances which made it possible.

IMO, GSLV MkIII and IV are going to see a lot of incremental advances, once the launches happen. And the reason they went for the MkIII+ series is to keep the option of manned missions open.

So relax folks! We might yet see "saffronisation of space by India"
(I used to pull the leg of a leftist friend of mine that NASA is "saffronizing the space with their orange jumpsuits" and why is he silent :) )

Yeh, I remember someone once said India is the only country which plays down its achievements in certain areas, to pacify the many critics :-) Might have been Strobe Talbott.

I do hope the GLSV-III/IV will have as much room for expansion as the PSLV has - but then again, a lot of the refinements already made to the LVs dont leave a lot of room for improvement - to change which alloy the LV is made of would require new plant facilities, and to improve the engine a lot would probably require an entirely new design.

I had touched on the reason in my previous post. This is due to the sheer practicality of ISRO's missions. You cannot argue against a mission "that spreads education" or "to launch satellites cheaper" or "to spread communication networks to remote villages" without appearing like a fool and anti-people.

That is why I am a bit against the manned mission. Till now ISRO has been able to justify 100%, their funding. But in a democracy, if the perception (distinct from reality) grows that the money is being spent on a "low returns" program, the funding will be cut. Once that happens, Uncle Sam will step in massively, to choke all the programs with his warm embrace :)

That is what have happened with Australian, British and Canadian programs. NASA and ESA stepped in to offer cheaper alternatives and their people thought "why should we waste our money on our own research if it doesnt serve us directly and we have a cheaper alternative?". If you read about these erstwhile important agencies, they couldn't justify the costs the same way that ISRO could, because their focus areas did not directly impact the citizens.

That is a scary prospect, but we do need to be in the human launch market - perhaps it could be sugar coated somehow, or done on the sly until the last minute...

praanthan_chaannaan

July 7th, 2006, 12:44 AM

First, apologies for the lengthy mail! :)

Probably my last one before I go on a long vacation (so I had some time ;) )

At the time, our old friends Russia showed us the finger, by playing on Indian babus in parliment to force the ISRO into a bad deal involving the acquisition of their cyrogenic stages for the GSLV-I... It was a sad chapter in our space history indeed - we could have been flying the GSLV-III by now, and developing a nice new modular launcher family akin to Angara/Long March/etc.

Actually, over the years, a few 'villains' have been identified for the Indian public in the affair of the CUS engines by Indian media. Though they are right about the US Govt being one of the culprits (the main one being the Sat Launch/National Security establishment of US), the other villains (ISRO, Glavkosmos, Indian DoSpace etc) are at best victims of the situation. It was a strange, "perfect storm" situation, that caused the whole deal to first break, then get partially salvaged. From whatever I could find out over the years, here are my views

US Sat-Launch industry

I am not going into the US's National security establishment's role, but just the industry's role.

The first finger raised was by US launcher lobby against ISRO. By the late 80s and early 90s, they thwarted the Chinese threat of low-cost Long March commercial launchers, citing "dual use of guidance tech from Loral, Hughes and Boeing for improved ICBM targeting". This incident caused the US Govt to issue a blanket ban on Long March launches of US made satellites. Then ISRO started the GSLV program. They felt another threat coming up in the launcher market.

The reason for this defensiveness is probably due to the US Satellite launch industry being in turmoil, after the 1987 Challenger tragedy. They put a lot of eggs (not all though) in the Shuttle basket, when it came to commercial satellite launches. Post-Challenger, that helped Araine to wipe the floor with the US contractors. They had a good story in the Araine IV launcher and the best the US launcher industry can provide are the Delta series and the older Atlas (The Titans are usually DoD launches and were off-limits). I remember the big US contractors were trying all sorts of "Govt subsidy, therefore US need to impose sanctions!!" with Araine too. But Araine prevailed because the US contractors did not yet provide a viable alternative.

That is when ISRO strikes a deal with Glavkosmos for the CUS stage and they sensed (correctly) that Indian launchers will be even cheaper than Araine's and hence they initiated a strike at the deal via "breech of MTCR Agreements by Russia" route.

Post-cold war Russia
Was limping around under Yelstin and was very prone to US pressure. Glavkosmos was overruled and was made to pull out of the tech-transfer part of the RD-56 engines and the KVD-1 stage (which are the GSLV's CUS engines/stage) by Yelstin's govt.

But when ISRO and Indian Govt protested loudly, the Russians probably realized the long term damage to the Russian industry, if the reputation of a deal breaker got stuck on them (and they were still reeling after the breakup of USSR). So as a compromise towards India (who is their #1 market for arms , which gave India Govt an advantage), they probably agreed for providing the fully manufactured stages to India. They were also partially compensated by US launcher engine contracts (like RD-180 etc).

Where they showing the finger at India? No, not really. They tried the best to stick with their part, but their Govt was under intense pressure and the last thing the govt of a then unstable country, trying to get into the open market system, would do is to stand up to the pressure of one of its biggest players. If this incident happened post-2000, and it had been Putin, MAYBE things would have been different. That is why I said it is a perfect storm situation against ISRO's plans

Indian Political leadership's role
I am not sure who you meant by 'Babus in parliament". I thought the term 'Babu' is usually used for a bureaucrat who executes a policy, distinct from "Netas" who are the actual policy-makers. But I think I am on safe territory by saying we all agree on having a very low opinion about the two worthies in almost every sphere of governance and policy. And they earned it over the years :( !

However the ISRO CUS deal had probably the least of the usual trade-mark babu-neta bumbling. The deal was pushed by scientists who knew what they were talking about technically, but had limited idea about changing global equations and were naive about the market forces of the launcher industry. The Neta-Babu combo had probably no clue about rocket engines and they just signed on the Xs marked by Dr Rao (after the usual haggling about "budget" and "what will CAG say?", of course :) ).

As I mentioned earlier, ideally a deal like this, which had such big impact on the national space program should have been vetted by a National Security Council, consisting of experts from a lot of fields. Basically, a thorough risk analysis. This was a lesson learnt by Indian Govt (though it took a couple of administrations to reach even the current stage) and ISRO (who wont be so naive in future) from the deal.

My impression of the Chinese space programme is that they operate in a similar way to Cold War Russia and America, i.e. they have ICBM-derived LVs, which they modify into different families of LV, wasting some money perhaps, but not too much - nothing worth critisising their programme on (I think ill read Brian Harvey's book on their programme one day) - I wouldnt say they are reckless, and they are probably more cost efficient than NASA. We on the other hand operate more like Europe and Japan - LVs built for sattelite launch, cost saving in mind, run like a cross between an academic institution and corporation. State/military driven vs academic/corp driven - each seem to do better in different areas - the former being better at mustering exploration projects, the latter being better at practical stuff like commercial sattelite stuff.

EVERYBODY is cost efficient compared to NASA, because NASA has an iconic status not just amongst the US public, but worldwide. So they can afford that!!

Doubtless, China has a competent space program. And their launchers can launch heavy stuff.

Point 1 As you pointed out, Chinese space program's priorities seem to be set by their Military. The military, though operationally efficient are often the most economically inefficient service of a govt. And rightly so - they have to win a war "at any cost" so they dont scrimp on the budget.

Military should not be allowed to FULLY control the objectives of a space program, rather they should be only one of the stake-holders (along with scientific community and political executive). US and even USSR to some extent had it right. As an example, though the Shuttle and Soyuz commanders are usually military pilots, the mission objectives are mostly a consensus between scientific community and military. Hence you will find civilian 'mission specialists', who concentrate on science while the service-men takes care of mainly the driving(and occassionally takes part in experiments)

Point 2 Politician's use of space successes for manipulating public opinion is kind of a dampner. This is probably one reason behind the "at any cost" programs and also the extreme risk averse nature of the Chinese programs causing them to do more reverse engineering rather than original, but risky work. The general impression one gets from Chinese statements is that they think if there is a bad mission, that is bad for the "image of govt", rather than learn lessons and moving on. This causes them to reverse engineer reliable designs of Soviet era. I admit they do contribute in enhancements like the differences in crew vehicle compared to Soyuz series on which it is based, but to me, they are very small.

BTW, I hasten to add, I am not denigrating any of the achievements of China, just that the way the achievements are projected as a "Politburo success" story is just not kosher for me and I believe they can do much better under a little different system.

Japan surprisingly had quality issues with the HII launchers. I could never make out why a nation, who pioneered industrial quality at cost effective prices were unable to translate that into their space programs. Europeans are on a roll - Araine 5 goof-ups apart. They have the luxury of their reputation build up with Araine 4 series even if a launch or two fail. ESA are indeed much removed from the military as ISRO is (though EADS is a big defense contractor, their objectives seems to be set by civilians). NASA is somewhere in the middle, with DARPA having inputs in some of their programs. The Russians to some extent are becoming like NASA, though Putin might revert that.

Yeh, I remember someone once said India is the only country which plays down its achievements in certain areas, to pacify the many critics :-) Might have been Strobe Talbott.

I do hope the GLSV-III/IV will have as much room for expansion as the PSLV has - but then again, a lot of the refinements already made to the LVs dont leave a lot of room for improvement - to change which alloy the LV is made of would require new plant facilities, and to improve the engine a lot would probably require an entirely new design.

GSLV III+ will improve during its life. It is not just new materials (btw, a new alloy do not always need a new plant :) ). The incremental enhancements could include
- Increased propellant loading
- removal of test flight callibration instruments after certification
- optimized wiring and other electricals
- engine lighting sequences (tinkering with the air-lit sequence of the smaller boosters of PSLV was one of the reasons for the improvement between C series and the earlier D series launches
- stage elongation (cross-sectional changes are probably more tricky)
- newer propellants
- engine clustering

That is a scary prospect, but we do need to be in the human launch market - perhaps it could be sugar coated somehow, or done on the sly until the last minute...

Not really - that is called **LIFE** and ISRO will do ok if (and when), we decide to put another Squadron Leader or a Commodore in space :)

"Sugar coating" of a program objective is required to some extent (but not at a propaganda level as in a military run program), because in a democracy not everybody has the patience to understand long term national requirements.

But if the nation feels there is no need, then the axe comes down, which is ok to an extent - kinda checks a spending spree by scientists and military.

VaastuShastra

July 7th, 2006, 01:45 AM

First, apologies for the lengthy mail! :)

Probably my last one before I go on a long vacation (so I had some time ;) )

Actually, over the years, a few 'villains' have been identified for the Indian public in the affair of the CUS engines by Indian media. Though they are right about the US Govt being one of the culprits (the main one being the Sat Launch/National Security establishment of US), the other villains (ISRO, Glavkosmos, Indian DoSpace etc) are at best victims of the situation. It was a strange, "perfect storm" situation, that caused the whole deal to first break, then get partially salvaged. From whatever I could find out over the years, here are my views

US Sat-Launch industry

I am not going into the US's National security establishment's role, but just the industry's role.

The first finger raised was by US launcher lobby against ISRO. By the late 80s and early 90s, they thwarted the Chinese threat of low-cost Long March commercial launchers, citing "dual use of guidance tech from Loral, Hughes and Boeing for improved ICBM targeting". This incident caused the US Govt to issue a blanket ban on Long March launches of US made satellites. Then ISRO started the GSLV program. They felt another threat coming up in the launcher market.

The reason for this defensiveness is probably due to the US Satellite launch industry being in turmoil, after the 1987 Challenger tragedy. They put a lot of eggs (not all though) in the Shuttle basket, when it came to commercial satellite launches. Post-Challenger, that helped Araine to wipe the floor with the US contractors. They had a good story in the Araine IV launcher and the best the US launcher industry can provide are the Delta series and the older Atlas (The Titans are usually DoD launches and were off-limits). I remember the big US contractors were trying all sorts of "Govt subsidy, therefore US need to impose sanctions!!" with Araine too. But Araine prevailed because the US contractors did not yet provide a viable alternative.

That is when ISRO strikes a deal with Glavkosmos for the CUS stage and they sensed (correctly) that Indian launchers will be even cheaper than Araine's and hence they initiated a strike at the deal via "breech of MTCR Agreements by Russia" route.

Aha - I always suspected NASA had a hand in it - so convienient for them that US laws changed as the GSLV would have been entering the launch competition - great info there.

Post-cold war Russia
Was limping around under Yelstin and was very prone to US pressure. Glavkosmos was overruled and was made to pull out of the tech-transfer part of the RD-56 engines and the KVD-1 stage (which are the GSLV's CUS engines/stage) by Yelstin's govt.

But when ISRO and Indian Govt protested loudly, the Russians probably realized the long term damage to the Russian industry, if the reputation of a deal breaker got stuck on them (and they were still reeling after the breakup of USSR). So as a compromise towards India (who is their #1 market for arms , which gave India Govt an advantage), they probably agreed for providing the fully manufactured stages to India. They were also partially compensated by US launcher engine contracts (like RD-180 etc).

Where they showing the finger at India? No, not really. They tried the best to stick with their part, but their Govt was under intense pressure and the last thing the govt of a then unstable country, trying to get into the open market system, would do is to stand up to the pressure of one of its biggest players. If this incident happened post-2000, and it had been Putin, MAYBE things would have been different. That is why I said it is a perfect storm situation against ISRO's plans

Indian Political leadership's role
I am not sure who you meant by 'Babus in parliament". I thought the term 'Babu' is usually used for a bureaucrat who executes a policy, distinct from "Netas" who are the actual policy-makers. But I think I am on safe territory by saying we all agree on having a very low opinion about the two worthies in almost every sphere of governance and policy. And they earned it over the years :( !

However the ISRO CUS deal had probably the least of the usual trade-mark babu-neta bumbling. The deal was pushed by scientists who knew what they were talking about technically, but had limited idea about changing global equations and were naive about the market forces of the launcher industry. The Neta-Babu combo had probably no clue about rocket engines and they just signed on the Xs marked by Dr Rao (after the usual haggling about "budget" and "what will CAG say?", of course :) ).

As I mentioned earlier, ideally a deal like this, which had such big impact on the national space program should have been vetted by a National Security Council, consisting of experts from a lot of fields. Basically, a thorough risk analysis. This was a lesson learnt by Indian Govt (though it took a couple of administrations to reach even the current stage) and ISRO (who wont be so naive in future) from the deal.

This is where I have heard slightly differently - while I love the Russians, Glasviokosmos was quick to see the oppertunity for a quick buck or two - the USA may have forced them to cancel the transfer of technology, but knowing how the Indian political system worked second only to Indians themselves, they implied that to not accept a radically bad deal involving overpriced ransom of the cryogenic engines for the already half developed GSLV, would endanger defence contracts - thus coaxing the babus in parliment into not complaining when the contract for their supply was made - this was partly rectified of course, but it was cuthroat capitalism at work.

EVERYBODY is cost efficient compared to NASA, because NASA has an iconic status not just amongst the US public, but worldwide. So they can afford that!!

Doubtless, China has a competent space program. And their launchers can launch heavy stuff.

Point 1 As you pointed out, Chinese space program's priorities seem to be set by their Military. The military, though operationally efficient are often the most economically inefficient service of a govt. And rightly so - they have to win a war "at any cost" so they dont scrimp on the budget.

Military should not be allowed to FULLY control the objectives of a space program, rather they should be only one of the stake-holders (along with scientific community and political executive). US and even USSR to some extent had it right. As an example, though the Shuttle and Soyuz commanders are usually military pilots, the mission objectives are mostly a consensus between scientific community and military. Hence you will find civilian 'mission specialists', who concentrate on science while the service-men takes care of mainly the driving(and occassionally takes part in experiments)

Point 2 Politician's use of space successes for manipulating public opinion is kind of a dampner. This is probably one reason behind the "at any cost" programs and also the extreme risk averse nature of the Chinese programs causing them to do more reverse engineering rather than original, but risky work. The general impression one gets from Chinese statements is that they think if there is a bad mission, that is bad for the "image of govt", rather than learn lessons and moving on. This causes them to reverse engineer reliable designs of Soviet era. I admit they do contribute in enhancements like the differences in crew vehicle compared to Soyuz series on which it is based, but to me, they are very small.

BTW, I hasten to add, I am not denigrating any of the achievements of China, just that the way the achievements are projected as a "Politburo success" story is just not kosher for me and I believe they can do much better under a little different system.

Japan surprisingly had quality issues with the HII launchers. I could never make out why a nation, who pioneered industrial quality at cost effective prices were unable to translate that into their space programs. Europeans are on a roll - Araine 5 goof-ups apart. They have the luxury of their reputation build up with Araine 4 series even if a launch or two fail. ESA are indeed much removed from the military as ISRO is (though EADS is a big defense contractor, their objectives seems to be set by civilians). NASA is somewhere in the middle, with DARPA having inputs in some of their programs. The Russians to some extent are becoming like NASA, though Putin might revert that.

Im sure the politburo have as much imput as their Soviet counterparts once did :) I also have misgivings about things like using the space program to pacify the masses, but we arnt really meant to air such misgivings on these forums - and also it will look hypocritical if we ever get a manned mission - people will claim it was a political ploy to divert attention away from domestic affairs, etc.

Ive head the Japanese programme has funding issues, which is what I attribute to the question 'how can such a tech savvy nation not be on par' - after a few fairures in sattelite launch a while back, government funding was cut, and at PPP their budget is lower than that of China and India.

GSLV III+ will improve during its life. It is not just new materials (btw, a new alloy do not always need a new plant :) ). The incremental enhancements could include
- Increased propellant loading
- removal of test flight callibration instruments after certification
- optimized wiring and other electricals
- engine lighting sequences (tinkering with the air-lit sequence of the smaller boosters of PSLV was one of the reasons for the improvement between C series and the earlier D series launches
- stage elongation (cross-sectional changes are probably more tricky)
- newer propellants
- engine clustering

Ya - I remember in some book, a space historian listed many of the thigs which upgraded the PSLV - I dont suppose you have any inside info on new propellants, etc? That would be cool to know :)

Amit

July 7th, 2006, 01:47 AM

I did some research on the capability of various rockets to send payload to Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO).

Atlas V (USA):
8,700 kg (maximum launched so far)
13,600 kg (maximum capacity, not launched yet)

Delta IV (USA):
6,600 kg (medium)
13,100 kg (heavy, partial success on maiden 2004 launch)

Falcon 9 (USA): 9,700 kg (first launch planned in 2008)

Ariane V (Europe):
8,200 kg (maximum launched so far)
10,500 kg (maximum capacity, not launched yet)

Proton (Russia): 6,000 kg

Angara (Russia): 6,400 kg (first launch planned in 2006-07)

Long March 3B (China): 5,000 kg

Long March 5 (China): 14,000 kg (in research stage, estimated completion by 2012)

H IIA (Japan):
4,500 kg (maximum launched so far)
6,000 kg (maximum capacity, not launched yet)

H IIB (Japan): 8,000 kg (first launch planned in 2008)

GSLV Mk-I (India): 2,200 kg

GSLV Mk-III (India): 4,000 kg (first launch planned in 2007-08)

GSLV Mk-IV (India): 6,000 kg (evolved GSLV Mk-III, no launch date yet)

Saturn V (USA), which sent astronauts to moon, is the most powerful launcher ever built. It could send 47,000 kg payload all the way to moon (forget GTO orbit), and is way more powerful than any of the rockets being discussed here.

VaastuShastra

July 7th, 2006, 02:43 AM

Great post Amit :) Wasnt Korolev's N-1 more powerfull than the Saturn V in terms of total thrust? Granted it never porperly flew, and couldnt achieve the same payload, but was built :) Also I would have liked to have seen that monster that Valentin Glushko was developing - the UR-700, or the R-56 for that matter.

Im curious, I wonder what the comparison between the first manned LVs of each nation and the ISRO's current capability would be? Obiously the Redstones were not that powerfull, maybe even less powerfull than the PSLV (granted they didnt achieve a full orbit with Alan Sheperd) - the R-7 derived vehicles are still in service, but considering the R-7 was from the 50s, I bet the GSLV at least is on par, and the LM-2F dosent look so different from the GSLV-I...

----

A few estimates:

Indian LVs

PSLV - 2000 kg to GTO - 3250 kg to LEO
GSLV-I - 2200 kg to GTO - 4500 kg to LEO
GSLV-II - 2500 kg to GTO - 5000 kg to LEO
GSLV-III - 4000 kg to GTO - 8000 kg to LEO
GSLV-IV - 6000 kg to GTO - 12000 kg to LEO

R-7 family human LVs (my favorites of all time)

Vostok - 4725 kg LEO
Vokshod - 5900 kg LEO
Soyuz - 7200 kg LEO

China's first manned mission

Long March 2F - 3370 kg to GTO

America's first manned mission

Redstone - 1300 kg LEO

Monster moon rockets

Saturn V - 130000 kg to LEO
N-1 - 95000 kg to LEO
UR-700 - ?
Ares V - 130 kg to LEO

Shuttle boosters

USA shuttle booster - 31750 kg to GTO
Buran's Energia - 100000 kg to LEO

----

Pictures and stuff:

Russia:

A good site for Russian rocketary:
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html

Angara family:
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/a/angara04.jpg

R-7 derived family:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/GPN-2002-000184.png

Proton family:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Early_Proton-K_rocket_versions.jpg

India:

Diagram of Indian rockets:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/ISRO_rockets.JPG

Bharat Rakshak:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SPACE/Images/launcher-family-big.jpg

New Scientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/2487/24871001.jpg

Japan:

Japan's H-II family:
http://journal.mycom.co.jp/news/2006/01/17/007bl.jpg

America:

Titan family:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1f/Titan_Missile_Family.png

Delta IV EELV:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Delta_EELV_family.png

SpaceX Falcon family:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/SpaceX-FalconRocketFamily.png

Atlas EELV family:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Atlas_EELV_family.png

Ares family (booster derived EELV):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/NASA_launch_vehicle_comparison.jpg/800px-NASA_launch_vehicle_comparison.jpg

Europe:

Ariane family:
http://www.dutchspace.nl/uploadedImages/Business_Fields/Space_infrastructure/Ariane_Launchers/arianefamily-512-ESA.jpg

China:

Long March family:
http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/mwade/graphics/l/lmfam.jpg

Long March family:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/1921/cz_family.gif

----

If these figures are correct, it would mean the GSLV is about as powerfull as the Vostok - nice to know - Vokshod, with its multi-person capsules, was about as powerfull than the GSLV-I/II - and the trusty Soyuz has less lift than the GSLV-III.

Amit

July 7th, 2006, 09:23 PM

the LM-2F dosent look so different from the GSLV-I...

If these figures are correct, it would mean the GSLV is about as powerfull as the Vostok - nice to know - Vokshod, with its multi-person capsules, was about as powerfull than the GSLV-I/II - and the trusty Soyuz has less lift than the GSLV-III.

I was also surprized to know that Soyuz, Russia's trusted workhorse carrying astronauts to the international space station, and Long March 2F, China's manned Shenzou launcher, is not all that powerful. India's GSLV-III will be more powerful than them.

It is interesting to see that sending humans to low earth orbit (LEO) doesnot need a super-powerful rocket. Many rockets carrying heavy satellites to geostationary orbit (GTO) are more powerful than them.

VaastuShastra

July 7th, 2006, 09:46 PM

Yeh - we could probably just give the GSLV one of those pointy ejection systems, and that would be it - just need a vehicle for re-entry.

Amit

July 7th, 2006, 09:58 PM

Nice exhibition pictures I found on the web

http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/8672/indiainspace1re.jpg

http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/6462/gslvfamily17jr.jpg

http://img272.imageshack.us/img272/9456/gslvmkiii3lv.jpg

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/2374/gslvfamily23dr.jpg

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/7646/moonmission9rq.jpg

praanthan_chaannaan

July 7th, 2006, 10:07 PM

Aha - I always suspected NASA had a hand in it - so convienient for them that US laws changed as the GSLV would have been entering the launch competition - great info there.

A NASA hand? Maybe... maybe not. Reason being, NASA acts only in an advisory and problem-solver role in US policy making circles. It rarely takes on the role of a "national/foreign policy maker" or a lobbyist outside its domain, aerospace sciences. Plus being an administrative/research org, I dont think they really care about Indian advances as much as the industry/contractors (who will be directly impacted by cheaper launches) or the national security establishment.

The MTCR regime was invoked by US government establishments, conveniently using the farcical logic of "cryo-engines for ICBM". NASA *might* have been consulted before the decision, though. But the decision was firmly Clinton's/Christopher's

This is where I have heard slightly differently - while I love the Russians, Glasviokosmos was quick to see the oppertunity for a quick buck or two - the USA may have forced them to cancel the transfer of technology, but knowing how the Indian political system worked second only to Indians themselves, they implied that to not accept a radically bad deal involving overpriced ransom of the cryogenic engines for the already half developed GSLV, would endanger defence contracts - thus coaxing the babus in parliment into not complaining when the contract for their supply was made - this was partly rectified of course, but it was cuthroat capitalism at work.

I should point out that the above argument is slightly self-contradictory. BTW, I am neither defending the Russians, who has been really murkying up Delhi decision making, especially during recent times. It is just that they did a face-saving measure (which helped ISRO too) to defend their future prospects.

About self-contradiction, why would the Russians even need to ship the completed stages, when they could have shown the finger properly, by just paying up the contract penalty(US would have gladly reimbursed the whole amount) for breaking the ISRO deal? The deal got renegotiated after India Govt retaliated and put pressure on Russian Govt, probably after advice from ISRO that the only way in which GSLV program can proceed per schedule in this political situation, is to get ATLEAST 7 completed stages.

For ISRO, that was probably the best of a really bad situation. Hence they must have asked for it. ISRO has a lot of clout in Indian policy making circles, because the Space Commission has lot more independance(than say DRDO, which reports to MoD babus) due to the linkage with PMO.

What was Govt of India's leverage over the Russian govt? Russians were probably politely told that it will impact their extensive arms deal realtionship with India. Not vice versa as your source suggested. India had and still has multiple sources for weapons, but not cryo-engines.

Russia's arms export agency, Rosoboronexport's predecessor(they were called something else I think at that time, probably still the good old 'General Engineering Department' of USSR days) and their commercial space services agency, Glavkosomos are quite different entities and I dont think they see eye to eye when it comes to coaxing Indians. Rosoboronexport would be furious that they are going to loose BILLIONS worth of arms deal because of a deal worth just millions (around 300 million$ for the CUS) by another agency (Glavkosmos). And Russian arms will not be bought by US (loss of face for their biggie contractors) unlike rocket engines :)

The Clinton admin thinking on this was defensive and the counter sops they offered ran into billions. For a cash-strapped Russia (check out a Russia policy paper (http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2004/oct/goldgeierOct04.asp#references)) that IS a big deal! Rumour has it that Russian participation in the US lead ISS was a quid pro quo(along with other engine contracts for US launchers).

The joint finger shown to US that I was referring to originally, by both ISRO and Glavkosmos is in the matter of setting up cryo-infrastructure and probably basic engineering consultancy. ISRO has lots of smart people and they figured the rest out, faster than expected by US. Plus cheap computing power evens out a lot of playing fields in high tech engineering.

A Babu/Politician gets bribed if the contract has multi-vendors or has multi-government bids, but in this case there was only one quasi-governmental Russian agency in the field. So I am not sure corruption played any role - other than the garden variety "here is a wad of Rs, now please push the CUS file through" :)

However from what I could make out, the Russian arms deals are a whole different can of worms and I am sure there will be some DLF properties in Gurgaon that became "affordable" to some babus on GoI salaries. ;)

Im sure the politburo have as much imput as their Soviet counterparts once did :) I also have misgivings about things like using the space program to pacify the masses, but we arnt really meant to air such misgivings on these forums - and also it will look hypocritical if we ever get a manned mission - people will claim it was a political ploy to divert attention away from domestic affairs, etc.

Ive head the Japanese programme has funding issues, which is what I attribute to the question 'how can such a tech savvy nation not be on par' - after a few fairures in sattelite launch a while back, government funding was cut, and at PPP their budget is lower than that of China and India.

If any of you remember, in the late 80s, Rajiv Gandhi tried to "pacify the masses" via good old DoorDarshan. I am referring to the DD filler spot where they show his picture and a picture of the first Agni test..... :bash: Thank God that caper dint work up "the masses".

:) I have been insisting that shifting ISRO's focus to human flight, just because "China did it", will cause long term damage to India's space efforts. We should stick with an independant vision, rather than follow someone. As I had been repeatedly saying, however cool it looks, a smiling astronaut is a big blackhole for funds and should be contemplated only if a lot of the space faring countries are making significant advances in human-flight, (which not many are) and we dont want to be left far behind.

Ya - I remember in some book, a space historian listed many of the thigs which upgraded the PSLV - I dont suppose you have any inside info on new propellants, etc? That would be cool to know :)

:runaway:

I NEVER ask for technical details, for I would never want to break any laws nor get them into trouble :)
I am more interested in the thinking behind a certain action/event. The technical details can be gleaned from open sources and published papers.

Even in open sources, we will only know which family of propellants were used (eg: UDMH has a lot of variants and additives)

praanthan_chaannaan

July 7th, 2006, 10:11 PM

Yeh - we could probably just give the GSLV one of those pointy ejection systems, and that would be it - just need a vehicle for re-entry.

:) you really make it sound tantalizingly simple.

Actually from a launcher perspective, it is straightforward, once the reliability of the launcher is established. For a human-module is just another payload for the launcher.

But the launch pad will need a lot of re-work though (along with training, recovery, disaster management etc).

praanthan_chaannaan

July 7th, 2006, 10:15 PM

I was also surprized to know that Soyuz, Russia's trusted workhorse carrying astronauts to the international space station, and Long March 2F, China's manned Shenzou launcher, is not all that powerful. India's GSLV-III will be more powerful than them.

It is interesting to see that sending humans to low earth orbit (LEO) doesnot need a super-powerful rocket. Many rockets carrying heavy satellites to geostationary orbit (GTO) are more powerful than them.

Infact ISRO boss, Madhavan Nair said as much about the capability of GSLV MkIII.

http://www.hindu.com/2004/07/10/stories/2004071013180400.htm

ISRO has a modular approach - if need be, develop a GLSV mkIII human modular payload.

cfloryan

July 7th, 2006, 10:16 PM

Amit

July 7th, 2006, 10:20 PM

Infact ISRO boss, Madhavan Nair said as much about the capability of GSLV MkIII.

http://www.hindu.com/2004/07/10/stories/2004071013180400.htm

ISRO has a modular approach - if need be, develop a GLSV mkIII human modular payload.

Interesting :)

However, I also share the view that we donot need to spend on a manned space program. It is too expensive and doesnot serve any purpose other than satisfying national ego.

praanthan_chaannaan

July 7th, 2006, 10:26 PM

Amit

July 7th, 2006, 10:55 PM

I find it kind of incongruous that a country like India, incapable of providing education, health care, water, and electricity to a sizeable proportion of its population, and owing billions to the IMF, is spending resources on a space program.

I also find it funny how when I was there this winter, the people didn't seem capable of buiding a straight wall or a flat expressway, yet want to launch a man to the moon by 2020 - 2030 (Times of India, January 2006)!?

Is it just me or are a certain country's ambitions beyond its mean?

India's space program has wide acceptance among its people and inspires pride among us. It is a technological achievement that only a select countries have been able to master. From that perspective alone, it is irrelevant and irritating that people from other countries question our space program. I am sure you wouldnot be very receptive if we question and critique the internal policies of UK?

That apart, India's space program is probably more economical and socially relevant than any other space faring country in the world. India's space budget for 2005 was $700 million. It is very much within the reach of a $775 billion economy (0.09% of GDP). In comparison, USA spends $16 billion, EU $3.5 billion, Japan $2 billion, China $1.2 billion, Russia $900 million.

India's space program is directly geared towards meeting the civilian needs of the country. Communication satellites help in TV broadcasting, internet, cellphones, distance education/healthcare. Remote sensing satellites help in weather forecasting, natural resources monitoring. Further, they also bring in valuable foreign exchange by selling these services to other countries. If not for ISRO, India would have been buying these technologies/services from other countries.

To any objective/knowledgable observer, the merits of India's space program are clearly visible.

VaastuShastra

July 7th, 2006, 11:58 PM

Amit, those pictures were cool :)

I find it kind of incongruous that a country like India, incapable of providing education, health care, water, and electricity to a sizeable proportion of its population, and owing billions to the IMF, is spending resources on a space program.

I also find it funny how when I was there this winter, the people didn't seem capable of buiding a straight wall or a flat expressway, yet want to launch a man to the moon by 2020 - 2030 (Times of India, January 2006)!?

Is it just me or are a certain country's ambitions beyond its mean?

Its just you. Actually thats a lie seeing as every time the sapce program is mentioned these sort of opinions start coming out of the woodwork.

These opinions have also been disproven countless times, with basic logic, so ill try to list a few reasons why I find your points invalid:

1). The USA and USSR were hardly without their share of poverty when the space program was engaged. When the USA spends its 14 billion NASA budget on uplifting ghetto dwellers, ill reconsider my opinion on the ISRO.

2). The ISRO provides jobs to thousands, provides good returns, provides Indian industry with technological facilities, enhances our already formiddable scientific community, is essential for defence, is essential for a country of the economic and political power of India, provides communication, connectivity, education, TV, etc, etc, etc.... Too many benefits to list. All of them alone justify the ISRO - New Scientist wrote a nice piece on how usefull the ISRO is: http://www.newscientist.com/special/india/mg18524871.000

3). It would be beyond foolish to not develop our technology just because of povery. A similar stupid policy would be to not build factories and offices (creating wealth and jobs), until every farmer and street urchin has a good wage (which paradoxically cant happen without the aformentioned development).

Is it just me or are a certain country's ambitions beyond its mean?

4). We have the means. Incase you havent notaced we are almost on par with the European space agency after 40 years of cheap innovation and good science.

I also find it funny how when I was there this winter, the people didn't seem capable of buiding a straight wall or a flat expressway, yet want to launch a man to the moon by 2020 - 2030 (Times of India, January 2006)!?

5). Capitalism dosent work that way. Spending fcuk all on a space program will not do a damn thing to the progress of private industry and infrastructure, and might actually encourage its improvement.

6). As Amit pointed out above, ours is the cheapest major space program, yet regarded equally as one of the world leaders like USA, Russia, China, EU, and Japan, and as mentioned offers the most commercial return - more than earning its weight.

VaastuShastra

July 8th, 2006, 12:18 AM

A NASA hand? Maybe... maybe not. Reason being, NASA acts only in an advisory and problem-solver role in US policy making circles. It rarely takes on the role of a "national/foreign policy maker" or a lobbyist outside its domain, aerospace sciences. Plus being an administrative/research org, I dont think they really care about Indian advances as much as the industry/contractors (who will be directly impacted by cheaper launches) or the national security establishment.

The MTCR regime was invoked by US government establishments, conveniently using the farcical logic of "cryo-engines for ICBM". NASA *might* have been consulted before the decision, though. But the decision was firmly Clinton's/Christopher's

I should point out that the above argument is slightly self-contradictory. BTW, I am neither defending the Russians, who has been really murkying up Delhi decision making, especially during recent times. It is just that they did a face-saving measure (which helped ISRO too) to defend their future prospects.

About self-contradiction, why would the Russians even need to ship the completed stages, when they could have shown the finger properly, by just paying up the contract penalty(US would have gladly reimbursed the whole amount) for breaking the ISRO deal? The deal got renegotiated after India Govt retaliated and put pressure on Russian Govt, probably after advice from ISRO that the only way in which GSLV program can proceed per schedule in this political situation, is to get ATLEAST 7 completed stages.

For ISRO, that was probably the best of a really bad situation. Hence they must have asked for it. ISRO has a lot of clout in Indian policy making circles, because the Space Commission has lot more independance(than say DRDO, which reports to MoD babus) due to the linkage with PMO.

What was Govt of India's leverage over the Russian govt? Russians were probably politely told that it will impact their extensive arms deal realtionship with India. Not vice versa as your source suggested. India had and still has multiple sources for weapons, but not cryo-engines.

Russia's arms export agency, Rosoboronexport's predecessor(they were called something else I think at that time, probably still the good old 'General Engineering Department' of USSR days) and their commercial space services agency, Glavkosomos are quite different entities and I dont think they see eye to eye when it comes to coaxing Indians. Rosoboronexport would be furious that they are going to loose BILLIONS worth of arms deal because of a deal worth just millions (around 300 million$ for the CUS) by another agency (Glavkosmos). And Russian arms will not be bought by US (loss of face for their biggie contractors) unlike rocket engines :)

The Clinton admin thinking on this was defensive and the counter sops they offered ran into billions. For a cash-strapped Russia (check out a Russia policy paper (http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2004/oct/goldgeierOct04.asp#references)) that IS a big deal! Rumour has it that Russian participation in the US lead ISS was a quid pro quo(along with other engine contracts for US launchers).

The joint finger shown to US that I was referring to originally, by both ISRO and Glavkosmos is in the matter of setting up cryo-infrastructure and probably basic engineering consultancy. ISRO has lots of smart people and they figured the rest out, faster than expected by US. Plus cheap computing power evens out a lot of playing fields in high tech engineering.

A Babu/Politician gets bribed if the contract has multi-vendors or has multi-government bids, but in this case there was only one quasi-governmental Russian agency in the field. So I am not sure corruption played any role - other than the garden variety "here is a wad of Rs, now please push the CUS file through" :)

However from what I could make out, the Russian arms deals are a whole different can of worms and I am sure there will be some DLF properties in Gurgaon that became "affordable" to some babus on GoI salaries. ;)

Basically whatever article original addressed it said they altered the contract after signing - for example the engines they did provide were apparently sub-standard, not delivering the performance specified.

If any of you remember, in the late 80s, Rajiv Gandhi tried to "pacify the masses" via good old DoorDarshan. I am referring to the DD filler spot where they show his picture and a picture of the first Agni test..... :bash: Thank God that caper dint work up "the masses".

:) I have been insisting that shifting ISRO's focus to human flight, just because "China did it", will cause long term damage to India's space efforts. We should stick with an independant vision, rather than follow someone. As I had been repeatedly saying, however cool it looks, a smiling astronaut is a big blackhole for funds and should be contemplated only if a lot of the space faring countries are making significant advances in human-flight, (which not many are) and we dont want to be left far behind.

I never said anything about doing it just because another space agency did, other than id like to see a manned mission prior to ESA and JAXA... I do believe human spaceflight is important enough that it should be part of the ISRO's vision - it also wouldnt take too much to launch an astronaught in 5 years - it could probably be done for a small part of the budget once Chandrayaan is over - human rate a GSLV, build a capsule, and plonk an air force test pilot in :) Its always good to have the knolwedge on standby, even if we launch one or two capsules and then put the manned program on hold a while.

Although this is just fantasy, if I was in charge of the ISRO and had good money and political support, I would engage the following short term directives:

- Development of Vostok level manned spaceflight
- Engagement in the ISS, perhaps by building a docking capsule
- Development of modular EELV type launch vehicles
- Further solar system probing

:runaway:

I NEVER ask for technical details, for I would never want to break any laws nor get them into trouble :)
I am more interested in the thinking behind a certain action/event. The technical details can be gleaned from open sources and published papers.

Even in open sources, we will only know which family of propellants were used (eg: UDMH has a lot of variants and additives)

Haha, I thought maybe asking for techie details would be unwise :)

:) you really make it sound tantalizingly simple.

Actually from a launcher perspective, it is straightforward, once the reliability of the launcher is established. For a human-module is just another payload for the launcher.

But the launch pad will need a lot of re-work though (along with training, recovery, disaster management etc).

My optimism is infectious obiously :)

BTW, I thought it might be fun to come of with speculative designs for future launch vehicles, so I made this quick Modular Sattelite Launch Vehicle family for fun:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/New_Bitmap_Image.JPG/800px-New_Bitmap_Image.JPG (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/New_Bitmap_Image.JPG)

Fewer stages for enhanced reliability, modular design so same production facilities can be used, and a nice human rated version of the MSLV II with a pointy ejection system :)

Its along the lines of this one I made for wikipedia a while back, which wasnt such a quick job:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/ISRO_rockets.JPG/800px-ISRO_rockets.JPG (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/ISRO_rockets.JPG)

Anniyan

July 9th, 2006, 01:23 AM

The GSLV Mark II is a 49-metre tall rocket weighing around 40 tonnes at lift-off. Its payload is the Insat 4C satellite, with 12 ku band transponders and a mission life span of 10 years.

http://i6.tinypic.com/1zdqhxf.jpg

July 9th, 2006, 02:38 AM

harsh1802

July 9th, 2006, 03:57 AM

harsh1802

July 9th, 2006, 08:47 AM

Agni-3 missile successfully test-fired

Dhamra (Orissa): India's most sophisticated intermediate range ballistic misslie (IRBM) Agni-III was test-fired from a range off the Orissa coast on Sunday.

The indigenously built surface-to-surface nuclear capable missile, with a range of 3,500 km, was test-fired from a fixed platform at the launch complex of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at the Wheeler's Island at about 1105 hours IST, defence sources said.

Described as the most powerful of India's missiles developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Agni-3 has the capability of carrying a payload of 1000 kg.

Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee and his scientific advisor M Natarajan were also present at the launch complex.

Eyewitnesses said the sleek missile roared into the overcast sky leaving behind a trail of thick yellow smoke and fire and vanished into the clouds within seconds.

Fitted with an onboard computer, it took off vertically into space and re-entered again to the splash down point near Nicobar island in the Bay of Bengal, the sources said.

Three sophisticated radars, six electro optical tracking systems and three telemetric data stations were engaged in the main land at Dhamra, Chandipur and Andamans apart from a ship anchored close to the splash down point to monitor the entire trajectory of the missile.

The two-stage missile has solid fuel boosters and can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads.

The 16-metre long Agni-3 has a diametre of 1.8 metres and was shorter than Agni-2 which had a length of 20 metres and diameter of one metre.

Though the DRDO had been technically ready for the test launching of Agni-3, its test firing had been put off repeatedly since November 2004.

Part of the country's Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP), missiles in the Agni series are being test fired since May 22, 1989 from the Integrated Test Range at Chandipur-on-sea in Balasore district.

After the action shifted to the Wheeler Island a few years ago, Agni-1 and Agni-2 had been flight tested from there twice each.

Agni-1, with a range of 700 to 800 kg, and Agni-2 with a range of 2000 km, had already been inducted into the Army.

Boosters for the two missiles had been provided by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

However, Agni-3 is a totally different system with an entirely new booster vehicle.

(With PTI inputs)

Source: IBNLIVE