Indian Space Programme Discussion

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 29 Oct 2014 12:18

I cannot understand this DRDO is producing nothing and soviet era tickets etc statements. To give it credit Agni series is a success and Soyuz system is one of the most successful systems like it or not.

SaraLax · Post by **SaraLax** » 29 Oct 2014 12:34

anmol wrote:Guess who is responsible for the failure???? Hint:

Such stupidity is to be expected in the comments section of most websites. Previously it would have been Russians and Chinese being blamed for junk tech .. now Indians are also getting added to that list.

I don't know why the Russian/Ukranian technology doesn't come into question by this guy because the actual rocket engine in these ANTARES vehicles seem to be derived from the Soviet era NK-33 type engines ... which are 1970's technology and possibly even built at that time but being used now (some 4 decades later) by Orbital Sciences. It seems Orbital Sciences does have NK-33 engines for use in its stock upto 2016. Who knows how good these rocket engines are these days ... the Russian space launches these days are also more failure prone. Reading further on NK-33 type engines ... it seems these Soviet era rocket engines are no longer produced by Russia.

The other issue now is that due to current geopolitical fight between West (US/Canada/UK & etc in NATO) vs Russia - Russia has stopped giving its various rocket engine variants (RD-180, NK-33) to US companies/NASA for any defence or similar applications usage. Recently Canadian government cancelled one of their Russian rocket launch contract for their satellite & moved it over to an ISRO PSLV launch contract. It also seems US currently doesn't have any rocket engines equivalent to these Soviet Rocket engines and US congress has provided funds to create similar rocket engines. More interesting details on this aspect of US dependency on Soviet/Russian Rocket engines in the linked PDF.

I guess after this rocket failure & blast - the launchpad would have been severely damaged .... and potentially rendered useless for quite some time. The company seems to have another launch site in western seaboard of US though. No idea how this event screws up the launch schedule of the company .... Not many competitors in these types of industries but very dangerous (from perspective of retail investors) for such companies to be listed & traded in any stock markets. Every successful rocket launch would incrementally boost the stock but a single damaging event is good to sink the stock and put the company's revenue earning operations under freeze for a long time.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 29 Oct 2014 13:15

anmol wrote:Guess who is responsible for the failure???? Hint:

Glad we're getting noticed.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 29 Oct 2014 13:16

I cannot understand this DRDO is producing nothing and soviet era tickets etc statements. To give it credit Agni series is a success and Soyuz system is one of the most successful systems like it or not.

csaurabh · Post by **csaurabh** » 29 Oct 2014 18:02

There is private space industry and there is private space industry. Private space industry is not just launch vehicles.

In the 60s era, NASA relied massively on private companies to manufacture their stuff. The Apollo command module was developed by Rockwell , the Apollo lander by Grumman Aerospace. Most of the individual component systems were subcontracted to companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Bendix Corporation ( now Honeywell ), etc. , who then further subcontract their stuff to more smaller companies and so on.

In fact the whole cluster of such organizations forms a gigantic 'military industrial complex' which produces stuff not only for the space program but also the military and other civilian purposes ( aircrafts, etc. ) . Private launch vehicle companies are just the next step of what had already existed in the US for a very long time.

R&D activities were often assigned to corporate research labs. For example, the LRV ( Lunar roving vehicle used in Apollo 15-17 ) was developed by GMDRL ( General Motors Defense Research Labs ). Nowadays, corporate labs are mostly a thing of the past, they have shifted it over to universities - 80% of R&D activities in US now are done in univs.

JPL ( Jet Propulsion Lab ) - associated with Caltech researches, builds and manages nearly all of NASA's space exploration activities. NASA is not very much more than an administration these days. They outsource and subcontract everything, not only to private space companies but also Russians and other countries. There is even a private company for manufacturing spacesuits.

Indian space program is not like that in the slightest. They have not much manufacturing from private companies ( though it is there ), their collaboration with universities is minimal, and their contact with other agencies or govt bodies ( incl. DRDO ) is practically non existent. They are 'getting things done' yes, I just think it is very less compared to what it could achieve with the US model.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 29 Oct 2014 19:04

Genuine Koschan. What is the difference between GSLV D variant and F variants, both in Mk2 and Mk3 ?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Oct 2014 19:22

D is development, F is operational

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 29 Oct 2014 19:23

D signifies developmental flights. F is operational flight like C for PSLV.

venkat_r · Post by **venkat_r** » 29 Oct 2014 23:34

Wonder what prompts such naming for the flights with D and F, I can understand the D6 as it had Indian Cryo engine which was tested and named D6. Does anyone know the reason for others? Seems like some other systems are still being tested on these future flights - as D and F seem to happen in parallel.

Great plan overall, where the focus is still on domestic satellites and related capability, but for jingos like me GSLV II and III plans seems a tad slow - Though GSLV III program mostly depended on the success of the GSLV II which in turn depended greatly on the Cryo engine which got validated this January with GSLV D6 success. So hopefully the program will get momentum now.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 30 Oct 2014 00:01

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-plans- ... 90-11.html

India plans second Mars mission in 2018

Bangalore: Riding on the recent success of its Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM), India plans to revisit the planet in 2018, possibly with a lander and rover to conduct more experiments, a space official said on Wednesday.

"We plan to launch a second mission to Mars in 2018, probably with a lander and rover, to conduct more experiments for which we have to develop new technologies," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) satellite centre director S Shiva Kumar said.

...
"We will be able to take the Mars-2 mission after launching the second mission to the moon (Chandrayaan-2) in 2016 with our own lander and rover, which will help us develop a separate lander and rover for the red planet," Kumar said, ahead of a three-day 'Engineers Conclave-2014' by the space agency with the Indian National Academy of Engineering.

As missions to Mars can be launched only at an interval of two years, the space agency is looking for a slot in 2018 and by which it hopes to have a heavy rocket fully operational to carry a lander and rover with scientific experiments as additional payloads.

...
"GSLV-Mark I-III will be used for Chandrayaan-2, which will have heavier payload than its predecessor (Chandrayaan-1) and later for Mars-2 mission, as both will have a lander and rover in addition to scientific experiments," he said.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 30 Oct 2014 00:24

Unmanned space missions should get priority over manned missions. The latter has much less RoI, except maybe for the medical instrumentation that it might help develop. The latter is more for show. I cannot see how the USA/Russians have benefited from manned missions from a science point of view. IMO, equally challenging engineering issues need to be tackled for unmanned missions.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 30 Oct 2014 04:42

"GSLV-Mark I-III will be used for Chandrayaan-2, which will have heavier payload than its predecessor (Chandrayaan-1) and later for Mars-2 mission, as both will have a lander and rover in addition to scientific experiments," he said."

This is confusing, either bad editing or the DDM again. I don't think anyone in ISRO has said that the GSLV Mark 3 is going to be used for the Chandrayaan-2 mission. The Mark 3 won't be fully operational by 2016, when such mission is scheduled. And forget the Mark 1. No longer in use. It's got to be the GSLV Mark 2, the one that was successfully launched this past January.

Of course, it would be absolutely wonderful if the GSLV Mark 3 were ready for the 2016 moon mission, but that is very optimistic. Before it goes to the moon, they will probably want to use it to launch a heavy communication satellite, won't they?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Oct 2014 07:01

After Mars Orbiter, Indian startup readies for the Moon Sujit John & Anshul Dhamija, ToI

While the excitement of the Mar's Orbiter Mission may have subsided, another space mission is quietly taking shape and could potentially set benchmarks, including cost benchmarks, in India's space odyssey.

Team Indus, comprising of a motley bunch of around 50 youngsters, are ready with a fully-functional prototype of its robotic rover for a Moon Mission, and is in the process of integrating the engineering model (the model prior to the final one) of the lander. The three-year-old Bangalore-based startup is the only team from India in the Google Lunar XPrize, a global competition to land a privately-funded robotic spacecraft on the Moon by December 2015. Till now, Moon landings have been largely government funded.

On September 29, an expert panel chaired by former ISRO chief and Padma Shri recipient K Kasturirangan did a complete tech review of the mission. "We came out with flying colours in that review," says an excited Julius Amrit, co-founder of Team Indus.

He explains: "We have had a series of reviews, component by component, by expert panels, and after each review we went back to the drawing board. But the tech-review that happened on September 29 was a full mission review, where every component of the project was reviewed thread bare."

Among the expert panel was V Adimurthy, professor and dean of research at the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology, who was the mission concept designer for India's Mars Orbiter Mission. The chairman of Antrix Corporation Ltd, the marketing arm of ISRO, was also part of the tech review.

"The entire team was so excited about Adimurthy reviewing our mission and he said such amazing things about us," said Amrit.

Team Indus, co-founded by IITians Rahul Narayan, Indranil Chakraborty and Amrit, was earlier this year named among the five finalists for what are called milestone prizes, teams that have achieved certain technological landmarks and appear closest to reaching the final objective. Considering their rankings in different tech landmarks, the team is regarded to be among the top three.

The team will receive the milestone prize of $1.25 million after a review by Google XPrize judges between November 24 and December 14. Narayan said the lander integration would be complete before that.

"The lander is the main piece of engineering. If we pass the XPrize review, we will just have to replicate the lander with space grade material," he said.

But there are two other major things they need to tie up. They need ISRO's help in using the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) to get their robotic spacecraft off the ground. And then they need funds of about $35 million.

"They funding requirement is huge. It can even be funding in kind," says Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw, CMD of Biocon, who recently interacted with Team Indus and K Kasturirangan. L&T, Sasken and Tata Communications are helping them with expertise and facilities.

Since March 2011, family, extended family, and friends of the founding members of Team Indus have collectively pumped in about a million dollars (Rs 6 crore) into the project. Arun Seth, former British Telecom India head and Alcatel-Lucent India chairman and who has been passionately helping the project, said there's been a significant amount of other angel funding. Narayan said he was hopeful of close the next round of funding before the end of this calendar year.

On the use of ISRO's PSLV, Amrit says, "Dialogues have started and we hope to get the good news soon."

Mazumdar-Shaw says, "They (Team Indus) are a very innovative young group. They made it to the top three, which means that their overall work is very commendable. We need to support such innovation."

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Oct 2014 11:36

GSAT-6 slated for March launch aboard GSLV - Madhumitha DS, The Hindu

GSAT-6, the advanced communication satellite that got ISRO’s arm Antrix Corporation embroiled in a controversy with erstwhile partner Devas Multimedia P Ltd in 2011, is slated for a March 2015 launch.

The S-band GSAT-6 satellite with five special transponders for multimedia services is “all done”, integrated and should start thermovacuum tests in late November, according to ISRO Satellite Centre’s Director, S.K.Shivakumar, whose centre readies all Indian spacecraft in Bangalore.

The 2,000-odd-kg satellite is to be launched on a GSLV launcher from Sriharikota. It was conceived in 2005 along with a follow-on GSAT-6A. The Centre cancelled the contract with Devas in February 2011, reserved GSAT-6 for military use; thereby hangs a hefty arbitration case pressed by Devas in The Hague.

Starting with GSAT-16 on December 5, ISRO has lined up a series of communication and Earth observation satellites over the next two or three years, Dr. Shivakumar told a news conference on Wednesday to announce Engineers’Conclave co-hosted by ISRO.

These satellites promise to fill a much needed demand for satellite capacity and continuation of services for users in the country. Currently, a third of the satellite capacity comes from on transponders leased on foreign satellites.

Among communication spacecraft, the 3,000-kg GSAT-16, as this daily has reported, will be flown on a European Ariane-5 launcher from French Guiana.

It will be followed by GSAT-15 in mid-2015; GSAT-18 [18] at the end of 2015; GSAT-17 in early 2016. (ISRO's satellite numbering order changes often.) All these satellites will be put in orbit on foreign launchers as the ISRO could not yet do it for 3000-class satellites, he said.

Among Earth observation satellites, Cartosat-2C will be the next to be flown in a year's time; it will have the highest ever resolution for an Indian satellite so far, of 62 cm. The best so far has been around 80 cm, but for select users.

“If this is achieved, it will be repeated for CArtosat-2D and 2E also,” Dr. Shivakumar said.

With the GSLV-MkIII launcher set for a test flight in the coming weeks, Dr. Shivakumar said it was expected to launch ISRO satellites of up to 4,000 kg in two years. The GSLV with a 2,000-kg capability is yet to become operational.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 30 Oct 2014 13:52

India and space
After the Mars orbiter underlines India’s self-reliance in its space programme, now its focus shifts to sending astronauts into space.
By T.S. SUBRAMANIAN
http://www.frontline.in/other/data-card ... 537614.ece

bharats · Post by **bharats** » 30 Oct 2014 18:57

India to launch heavier satellite from Kourou on Dec 4
Link: http://www.deccanherald.com/content/438 ... ourou.html

India will launch Dec 4 a heavier and advanced communication satellite (GSAT-16) with 48 transponders on board an European rocket from Kourou spaceport in French Guiana, South America, a senior space agency official said Wednesday. PTI file photo. For representation purpose

India will launch Dec 4 a heavier and advanced communication satellite (GSAT-16) with 48 transponders on board an European rocket from Kourou spaceport in French Guiana, South America, a senior space agency official said Wednesday. "We are getting ready to launch GSAT-16 Dec 4 on an Ariane-5 rocket of the European space agency Arianespace with 48 transponders, including 24 in C band, 12 in Ku band and 12 in extended C-band," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) satellite centre director S. Shiva Kumar told reporters here.

The 3.1-tonne GSAT-16 will be placed at 55 degrees east over India in the geo-stationary orbit, about 36,000 km above the earth. The satellite is the 11th among GSAT series and 24th geo-stationary communication satellite with a lifespan of 12 years. The transponders, which receive and transmit radio signals at high frequency (36MHz), will be used for various communication services, including VSATs (very small aperture terminals), television broadcasting, civil aviation and back-up.

"The transponders will be used by private industry and state-run agencies for their diverse communication needs," Kumar said. As GSAT-16 will be launched from an overseas spaceport (Kourou) using a procured rocket, the space agency has insured it for Rs.865 crore. "GSAT-16 will replace the INSAT-3E, which expired in April," Kumar added.INSAT-3E was also launched from Kourou onboard Ariane-5G Sep 29, 2003.

With a total of 168 transponders in the C, extended C and Ku-bands, the INSAT and GSAT series of satellites provide services to telecom, television broadcasting, weather forecasting, disaster warning and search and rescue operations. The space agency, however, launched GSAT-14 from its spaceport Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh, about 90 km northeast of Chennai, January 5, 2014, using its heavy rocket -- Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV-D5) with an indigenous cryogenic engine. The nearly two-tonne GSAT-14, with six extended C-band and Ku-bandAtransponders and two Ka-band beacons is being used for telemedicine and tele-education services.

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 30 Oct 2014 19:58

Sorry if already posted...but I am sure even we belived the hoax and discussed over it!!!

http://www.thenewsminute.com/news_secti ... cef5111fe6

How Arun a 'scientist from NASA' fooled the Indian media for two years

Nasa 1
The News Minute | October 28, 2014| 6.30 pm IST

Sit down, fasten your seat belts and enjoy the ride.

He had just been recruited by the NASA, the American space organization. In August 2012, news reports appeared in Malayalam newspapers and TV channels with visuals of young people celebrating this success of one of their own. Then, there was no looking back for P.V. Arun from Manimala in Kerala.

He was headline material. Arun claimed NASA had accepted him as a research scientist and he had been admitted simultaneously for a doctoral thesis by the famous scientist Barbara Liskov, faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in January 2013.

A month later, the English media picked up the story

“In search of extraterrestrial life” The Hindu reported on September 19, 2012 and added that Arun will be joining elite scientists in their search for the existence of extraterrestrial life, working from his own workstation at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), U.S.

Many papers including The Hindu interviewed Arun at a felicitation programme organised for him by the Institute of Human Resources Development (IHRD), as he was a student at the College of Engineering, Poonjar, under the IHRD.

“His dreams make a ‘contact’ with ETs” The New Indian Express reported and said, “lucrative job offers from three MNCs did not lure Arun, as the advice of his teachers was ringing in his mind, to scale new heights in research.”

Mathrubhumi said in August 2012 “NASA invited Arun to be a scientist.”

In September 2014, exactly two years later, more reports emerged claiming that NASA had relaxed some of its HR rules like compulsory American citizenship for its employees were set aside to recruit Arun as they were impressed by his intelligence and patriotism.

Mathrubhumi had an extensive report saying Arun was part of a NASA delegation to Delhi, and was the youngest in the delegation. The report said NASA was so impressed that senior scientists conveyed his story to Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh.

In the first week of October 2014, Telegraph reported about the same, adding that Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to know about Arun from the Home Minister and Modi invited the young scientist to a private meeting.

In a report titled 'patriot NASA boy turns hero' Telegraph said the meeting that lasted 30 minutes, “Modi is learnt to have told Arun that the doors of the country’s space research establishments would always be open for him.” (Telegraph's rejoinder on 30/10/2014)

And this is where the cookie crumbled.

Every single detail in these reports was a lie. NASA never recruited Arun. NASA never made any concession for him. There was no NASA delegation meeting in Delhi and he never met Modi.

So how did this 27-year-old from Kerala manage this hoax for two years undetected and how did so many media houses report about him?

Even as Arun was enjoying the limelight, some people started asking questions. His claims were first questioned on a Google Group discussion. Another person who doubted Arun's claims was Jayanath Jayanthan, the Superintendent of Police, Telecommunications, Kerala.

Jayanath also is in charge of a social media group called Netizen police, an initiative by the Kerala police. When he shared Arun’s story with some people on the group, someone at MIT said it was a hoax.

“One group member was at MIT and he expressed his doubts about Arun’s claims as he knew all the Keralites in MIT. Then we enquired about Arun and realized that he has no connection with neither MIT nor NASA,” Jayanath told The News Minute.

“After that I talked to him personally, not as a policeman but just as someone older to him. He confessed to me that everything was a lie, in our enquiry we found out that he worked in Royal University of Bhutan as lecturer between July 2013 to July 2014,” Jayanath said.

According to Jayanath, Arun even got the position of a lecturer in the Bhutan university by showing the English media’s coverage about him. “I spoke to the Bhutan University officials. They told me Arun showed them the news clippings, should we have disbelieved the national paper which reported about him they asked me,” Jayanath said.

So what set Arun on this fictional path? “As a child he always wanted to work in America. While other friends were getting lucrative offers, he did not want to lie that an Indian company had offered him a job, so he told friends about NASA. Working in NASA perhaps was his dream. The story was picked up by media, many fantasies added to it and Arun became a hit,” Jayanath says.

Arun did not respond to our calls, but he told the Deccan Chronicle (which broke the story of the hoax) that he had never met the Prime Minister.

“I am wondering how so many news reports were published, even claiming that he met the PM,” Jayanath said. Though Jayanath had warned him some days ago, Arun went and spoke about his achievements at a police event.

The IHRD which organised a felicitation meet for him now says they were also duped into believing that Arun did get into NASA. "He showed us a news clipping that reported about an MIT press meet about him. We believed him and decided to honour him." says Minu KK, a teacher at IHRD. Even his teachers at IHRD began doubting Arun's claims recently. "He was a brilliant student, he didn't need to do all this. We started getting doubts when he claimed his papers had been published by Nature magazine, but we could not find link."

Though Minu and others met Arun on Tuesday, he stuck to his NASA claim and maintained he will go to NASA office in November 2014.

"Many newspapers have now started reporting about the ‘Arun Hoax’, but should there not be a rejoinder that they themselves were part of this hoax?" asks Jayanath.

(Inputs - Dhanya Rajendran, Haritha John and Vignesh Vellore)

Editor's Note: The News Minute has removed Arun’s picture after a reader pointed out that his family is in distress. The focus of the story is not Arun, but the manner in which news media did not verify facts when pursuing a story.

arun · Post by **arun** » 30 Oct 2014 20:15

^^^ So the below story turns out to be hoax

pankajs wrote:/OT perhaps

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1141007/j ... 901374.jsp
Patriot Nasa boy turns hero
Thiruvananthapuram, Oct. 6: A young Nasa researcher from Kerala whose patriotic stand had prompted the US space agency to relax a citizenship rule was surprised to find himself the toast of New Delhi during a visit last month.

Arun P.V. even received an invite to the Prime Minister’s home after Narendra Modi learnt how the 26-year-old from Kottayam had declined to give up his Indian citizenship when Nasa offered him a job in January last year.

Arun’s Nasa assignment required him to accept American citizenship at a later date. Since that would have meant losing his Indian nationality, Arun declined.

True to its professionalism, Nasa realised his worth, acknowledged his concerns and took him on board without pressing the citizenship clause. It could not be confirmed whether Nasa had made a similar concession for anyone else before.

A Kerala daily had at the time reported the matter without the news creating much excitement. But things got moving when Arun arrived in Delhi last month as part of a US team of scientists to discuss cooperation in the use of space technology for the benefit of ordinary citizens.

A senior colleague in the delegation — which included scientists from Nasa, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the United Nations Development Programme — mentioned the story to home minister Rajnath Singh during a meeting. When Modi heard it from Rajnath, he invited Arun to a private meeting.

Officials said the meeting, held in the first week of September, lasted nearly 30 minutes, the discussions ranging from recent developments in science and technology to India’s Mars Orbiter Mission.

Modi is learnt to have told Arun that the doors of the country’s space research establishments would always be open for him.

Sources in Arun’s family told The Telegraph that the young man had been thrilled at the Prime Minister meeting him personally.

Although a Nasa employee, Arun is now doing a research project on artificial intelligence at MIT.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 30 Oct 2014 23:46

http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report- ... er-2030711

The experimental mission of India's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle-Mark III (GSLV-Mk III) is expected to be launched in the first half of December. "Certain reviews are going on at the moment, we expect by December first half we should be able to have the launch," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chairman K Radhakrishnan told reporters here.

Speaking on the sidelines of Engineers' Conclave-2014, he said the launch date would depend on preparedness, certain analysis and reconformation for the new vehicle and weather which would be bad from October to first week of December. "...Also need to have the recovery of the crew module...., we are getting ready for the launch, it should happen in the first half of December," he said.
The 630-tonne GSLV-MkIII will carry a crew module of 3.65 tonnes. ISRO plans to send astronauts into space eventually.

Radhakrishnan said the integration of the vehicle was complete and it was at vehicle assembly building in Sriharikota, and the electrical tests are going on "at the moment." He said, "We are studying the vehicle because it's configuration is different from what we were flying so far (PSLV) and GSLV. We want to study how it behaves in the atmospheric phase...., several measurements have to be done and performance of the vehicle has to assessed."

On the crew module, Radhakrishnan said as it comes down, there will be lot of heat experienced by the module. "We want to measure that and then as it comes down and splashes we have to locate and recover it also," he said, adding that it is expected to splash down in Bay of Bengal about 450 km from Andaman. Noting that a couple of tests have to be done on the crew module, the ISRO Chairman said, "One is the parachute has to be ejected and it has to reduce the velocity, and we also need to lift the module from the sea using helicopters. These two trials are now going on; today one trial has been done for the parachute...

"The crew module is sitting now in Sriharikota. By end of this month we should be able to have the vehicle and crew module all integrated and tested," he said. On the cryogenic engine, Radhakrishnan said, "That is developing well....This engine is different compared to cryogenic engine used for GSLV. The difference is that it used a staged combustion cycle, and the new one uses gas generator cycle. The difference is that in the gas generator cycle we can test all elements separately. In the previous case we were required to have total stage to have the test." He said thrust level in the new one is to 20 tonne, three times the earlier one (7.5 tonne).

He said the engine-related tests had been conducted. "In another five to six weeks, we should be able to have the first firing of that engine on the ground, which we call hot touch- it will be done in Mahendragiri..."
Radhakrishnan said, "This experimental flight of GSLV-Mark III provides all the inputs required, and then we can have first developmental flight of GSLV-Mark III in two years, that is the schedule at the moment. At that time it will carry a communication satellite. Four tonne is the nominal payload capability. For the first flight we may go with three-and-a- half, and then gradually increase." The first development flight (GSLV Mk-III D1) with an operational cryogenic stage is planned between 2016 to 2017. The second development flight (GSLV Mk-III D2) is planned after one year of GSLV Mk-III D1 flight in 2017 to 2018.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 31 Oct 2014 06:33

Here is what the wiki says "GSAT-6, is a multimedia communication satellite that will offer a Satellite Digital Multimedia Broadcasting (S-DMB) service across several digital multimedia terminals or consoles which can be used to provide information services to vehicles on the fly and to the mobile phones"

this sat is to be placed in Geostationary orbit, and it can still communicate with mobile phones?

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 31 Oct 2014 09:24

vasu raya wrote:Here is what the wiki says "GSAT-6, is a multimedia communication satellite that will offer a Satellite Digital Multimedia Broadcasting (S-DMB) service across several digital multimedia terminals or consoles which can be used to provide information services to vehicles on the fly and to the mobile phones"

this sat is to be placed in Geostationary orbit, and it can still communicate with mobile phones?

Both the Inmarsat and Thuraya satellite telephony services use geostationary satellites.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Oct 2014 20:58

India gets last laugh against America's ‘elite space club’

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 01 Nov 2014 07:29

Seems this is the season for space flight accidents

http://www.thehindu.com/news/internatio ... 554849.ece

Spacecraft for tourists explodes on test flight

The crash area was about 193 km north of downtown Los Angeles and 32 km from the Mojave Air and Space Port, where the flight originated

A winged spaceship designed to take tourists on excursions beyond Earth’s atmosphere exploded during a test flight Friday over the Mojave Desert, killing a pilot in the second fiery setback for commercial space travel in less than a week.

Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo blew apart after being released from a carrier aircraft at high altitude, according to Ken Brown, a photographer who witnessed the explosion.

One pilot was found dead inside the spacecraft and another parachuted out and was flown by helicopter to a hospital, Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood said.

The crash area was about 193 km north of downtown Los Angeles and 32 km from the Mojave Air and Space Port, where the flight originated.

British billionaire Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Galactic, has been the front-runner in the fledgling race to give large numbers of paying civilians a suborbital ride that would let them experience weightlessness and see the Earth from the edge of space. Branson was expected to arrive in Mojave on Saturday, as were investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board.

“Space is hard, and today was a tough day,” Virgin Galactic CEO President George Whitesides said. “The future rests in many ways on hard, hard days like this.”

The accident occurred just as it seemed commercial space flights were near, after a period of development that lasted far longer than hundreds of prospective passengers had expected.

When Virgin Group licensed the technology from Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who put $26 million into SpaceShipOne, Branson envisioned operating flights by 2007. In interviews last month, he talked about the first flight being next spring with his son.

“It’s a real setback to the idea that lots of people are going to be taking joyrides into the fringes of outer space any time soon,” said John Logsdon, retired space policy director at George Washington University. “There were a lot of people who believed that the technology to carry people is safely at hand.”

Friday’s flight marked the 55th for SpaceShipTwo, which was intended to be the first of a fleet of craft. This was only the fourth flight to include a brief rocket firing. During other flights, the craft either was not released from its mothership or functioned as a glider after release.

At 60—feet (18—meters) long, SpaceShipTwo featured two large windows for each of up to six passengers, one on the side and one overhead.

The accident’s cause was not immediately known, nor was the altitude at which the explosion occurred. The first rocket-powered test flight peaked at about 16 km above Earth. Commercial flights would go 100 km or higher.

One difference on this flight was the type of fuel.

In May, Virgin Galactic announced that SpaceShipTwo would switch to a polymide-based fuel a type of thermoplastic. It had been fuelled with a type of rubber called HTPB.

Scaled Composites, the company building the spaceship for Virgin Galactic, had extensively tested the new fuel formulation on the ground, President Kevin Mickey said. He characterized the new fuel as “a small nuance to the design.”

Officials said they had not noticed anything wrong before the flight. The problem happened about 50 minutes after takeoff and within minutes of the spaceship’s release from its mothership, said Stuart Witt, CEO of the Mojave Air and Space Port.

Virgin Galactic owned by Branson’s Virgin Group and Aabar Investments PJS of Abu Dhabi sells seats on each prospective journey for $250,000. The company says that “future astronauts,” as it calls customers, include Stephen Hawking, Justin Bieber, Ashton Kutcher and Russell Brand. The company reports receiving $90 million from about 700 prospective passengers.

Friday’s accident was the second this week involving private space flight. On Tuesday, an unmanned commercial supply rocket bound for the International Space Station exploded moments after liftoff in Virginia.

Virgin Galactic plans to launch space tourism flights from the quarter-billion-dollar Spaceport America in southern New Mexico once it finished developing its rocket ship.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 01 Nov 2014 08:19

1 Dead, 1 Injured After Virgin Galactic Spaceship Crashes During Test Flight Over Mojave Desert
losangeles.cbslocal.com | Oct 31st 2014 4:00 PM

MOJAVE (CBSLA.com) — One person was killed and another suffered major injuries after an aircraft used by Virgin Galactic for space travel experimentation crashed Friday during a test flight, authorities confirmed.

SpaceShipTwo, carried by carrier aircraft WhiteKnightTwo, launched at 9:19 a.m. from a location in the Mojave Desert, according to officials from Virgin Galactic, which is owned by British billionaire Sir Richard Branson.

The aircraft was released by WhiteKnightTwo about an hour later and flew freely by rocket power for the first time since January. Friday’s flight was SpaceShipTwo’s 55th and WhiteKnightTwo’s 173rd, according to the company.

Virgin Galactic then tweeted the spaceship experienced some kind of in-flight abnormality.

KCAL9’s Peter Daut spoke with witnesses at the scene of the crash.

Several law enforcement agencies including the California Highway Patrol and Kern County’s sheriff and fire departments responded to the scene.

“One crew member was treated on the scene and was transported to the Antelope Valley Hospital,” explained Mojave Air and Space Port CEO Stuart Witt.

Kern County Fire Department Capt. Tom Ellison told KNX 1070 NEWSRADIO the aircraft landed in a remote region of the Mojave.

“This is a vast area, and from my vantage point, I’m not even able to see any wreckage,” Ellison said. “I understand that it’s scattered throughout a two-mile area.”

A statement released by Virgin Galactic on Twitter read: “Virgin Galactic’s partner Scaled Composites conducted a powered test flight of SpaceShipTwo earlier today. During the test, the vehicle suffered a serious anomaly resulting in the loss of the vehicle.

“The WhiteKnight Two carrier aircraft landed safely. Our first concern is the status of the pilots, which is unknown at this time. We will work closely with relevant authorities to determine the cause of this accident and provide updates as soon as we are able to do so.”

PHOTOS: SpaceShipTwo Crashes In The Mojave Desert

Witnesses reported seeing the aircraft explode in flight.

The FAA released the following statement: “Just after 10 a.m. PDT today, ground controllers at the Mojave Spaceport lost contact with SpaceShipTwo, an experimental space flight vehicle. The incident occurred over the Mojave Desert shortly after the space flight vehicle separated from WhiteKnightTwo, the vehicle that carried it aloft.

“Two crew members were on board SpaceShipTwo at the time of the incident. WhiteKnightTwo remained airborne after the incident. Under a voluntary cooperative agreement with the FAA, the NTSB is leading the accident investigation with FAA support.”

[..]

bharats · Post by **bharats** » 01 Nov 2014 09:14

India to launch Canadian satellite that was delayed by political dispute with Russia
by PETER RAKOBOWCHUK

MONTREAL — The launch of a Canadian satellite, postponed amid tensions in the Ukraine, is finally scheduled for liftoff — one year behind schedule.The M3M communications satellite, which was originally to be launched aboard a Russian rocket, will instead blast into orbit from India next July.The announcement that a deal has been signed with India was made at the International Astronautical Congress in Toronto, a few days after Canada refused to allow Russian delegates to attend the prestigious symposium which opened on Monday.

Read complete story at http://www.vancouverdesi.com/news/canad ... -4/798078/

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 01 Nov 2014 09:24

According to them Mangalyaan was "part of the Indian elite’s delusional quest for superpower status.".
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... unch-space http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/235c487a ... ab49a.html

Branson's ambitious space-travel project plagued by problems and delays
theguardian.com | Oct 31st 2014

[..]

By 2004, Branson thought Virgin Galactic was three years away from launching people into space and opened a reservations website, which crashed because of the amount of interest. But three years later the programme was delayed after the detonation of a tank of nitrous oxide destroyed a test stand, killing three people and seriously injuring three others. In 2011, the newly designed test ship, SpaceShipTwo, malfunctioned during re-entry, though its pilots managed to correct the problem.

[..]

Please send few tweets to Briturds:

https://twitter.com/VJMallet
https://twitter.com/ARobertsjourno
https://twitter.com/EdwardGLuce
https://twitter.com/jamescrabtree
https://twitter.com/DelhiDean
https://twitter.com/simondenyer
https://twitter.com/burke_jason
https://twitter.com/AndrewBuncombe
https://twitter.com/fjdnl
https://twitter.com/AndyMacaskill
https://twitter.com/anniegowen
https://twitter.com/myraemacdonald
https://twitter.com/robr1
https://twitter.com/matthi_williams

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Nov 2014 15:03

^^^ Not a correct course of action.

Comment was not made by a UK National. Comment was made by Jean Drèze who is a naturalized Indian of Belgian origin.

Anyway, even if comment was attributable to a UK National, which is clearly not the case, there is no need to give a rat’s behind about comments about Indian rocketry that emanate from the UK. The UK has a grand total of one single successful satellite launch on an indigenous launcher. That was the BLACK ARROW launcher, a name officially capitalized, which launched the Prospero satellite in 1971. That is a miniscule fraction of what India has done.

Even in Ballistic Missile arena the UK has done nothing that will require India to give a rat’s behind. The UK’s Ballistic Missiles have been scrounged from the US. First the Polaris then the Trident.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 01 Nov 2014 23:07

PratikDas wrote:Both the Inmarsat and Thuraya satellite telephony services use geostationary satellites.

good to know, seems like all these handsets are proprietary designs and specific to their own networks, in GSAT-6 case wonder what handsets would be used, this is a news item regarding BEL and software defined radios,

India developing hi-tech software-defined radios

The software-defined radio, as this device is called,
can operate on Very High Frequency, Ultra High Frequency, High
Frequency and L-band, which otherwise need different radios.

The radio can also work with any legacy radio.

"It (software-defined radio) will change the way
communication is managed in a battlefield situation", said I V
Sarma, Director (R&D) of the defence electronics company under
the Ministry of Defence.

In these radios, hardware blocks would be replaced by
software ones. So, a software will do the job of a hardware
Circuit Board.

"A software today can generate a waveform which is
equivalent to a modulated signal," Sarma said

while the GSAT-6 is S band, the BELs SDR spec covers upto L band

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 02 Nov 2014 00:40

^^ Hope the new GoI is keeping a close watch on this rascal Dreze, ex member of NSA, honorary perfesser at the leftist D school and chela of Amartya Sen.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 02 Nov 2014 19:30

ISRO Satellite Center, Bangalore

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 02 Nov 2014 19:46

Does anyone know whether India is fully self sufficient in the grade of steel called 15CDV6, or does India/ISRO import the material, then shape, weld and forge it into rocket casings?

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 02 Nov 2014 20:33

Varoon Shekhar wrote:Does anyone know whether India is fully self sufficient in the grade of steel called 15CDV6, or does India/ISRO import the material, then shape, weld and forge it into rocket casings?

Many people seem to be manufacturing it.

for eg
http://www.navnidhistainlesssteel.com/s ... 5cdv6.html

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 02 Nov 2014 21:13

^

That's good to know! For the first generation SLV-3 launcher, I'm certain that the material was imported, though it was fabricated into rocket casings by ISRO and Indian industry.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 02 Nov 2014 22:43

http://freakonomics.com/2008/01/11/is-s ... cs-quorum/

Is Space Exploration Worth the Cost? A Freakonomics Quorum
STEPHEN J. DUBNER
01/11/2008 | 11:19 am
Warning: what follows is a long blog post, perhaps better suited for a newspaper or magazine, and it will at times require your close attention. But I believe it is easily one of the best quorums we’ve ever published here. I’d like to thank all the participants for their thoughtful, well-considered, and fascinating answers, and for taking the time to share their very considerable expertise and experience.
Pretend that instead of being responsible for your household budget, which means paying for rent or a mortgage, transportation, some schooling costs, groceries, healthcare, vacation, etc., you are instead responsible for a considerably larger budget that provides a variety of services for about 300 million people including the maintenance of an army, protecting the borders, etc. In other words, pretend you are responsible for the U.S. Federal budget. And now ask yourself how much of that money you want to spend on manned space travel, and why.
We gathered up a group of space authorities — G. Scott Hubbard, Joan Vernikos, Kathleen M. Connell, Keith Cowing, and David M. Livingston, and John M. Logsdon — and asked them the following:
Is manned space exploration worth the cost? Why or why not?
Their responses are below. As I suggested above, take your time. For the impatient among you, here are a few highlights:
Logsdon on a not-so-obvious incentive for manned space travel: “Space exploration can also serve as a stimulus for children to enter the fields of science and engineering.”
Vernikos on the R.O.I. of space travel: “Economic, scientific and technological returns of space exploration have far exceeded the investment. … Royalties on NASA patents and licenses currently go directly to the U.S. Treasury, not back to NASA.”
Cowing on space expenditures relative to other costs: “Right now, all of America’s human space flight programs cost around $7 billion a year. That’s pennies per person per day. In 2006, according to the USDA, Americans spent more than $154 billion on alcohol. We spend around $10 billion a month in Iraq. And so on.”
I hope you enjoy their answers, and learn from them, as much as I did.
G. Scott Hubbard, professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanford University and former director of the NASA Ames Research Center:
The debate about the relative merits of exploring space with humans and robots is as old as the space program itself. Werner Von Braun, a moving force behind the Apollo Program that sent humans to the moon and the architect of the mighty Saturn V rocket, believed passionately in the value of human exploration — especially when it meant beating the hated Soviet Empire. James Van Allen, discoverer of the magnetic fields that bear his name, was equally ardent and vocal about the value of robotic exploration.
There are five arguments that are advanced in any discussion about the utility of space exploration and the roles of humans and robots. Those arguments, in roughly ascending order of advocate support, are the following:
1. Space exploration will eventually allow us to establish a human civilization on another world (e.g., Mars) as a hedge against the type of catastrophe that wiped out the dinosaurs.
2. We explore space and create important new technologies to advance our economy. It is true that, for every dollar we spend on the space program, the U.S. economy receives about $8 of economic benefit. Space exploration can also serve as a stimulus for children to enter the fields of science and engineering.
3. Space exploration in an international context offers a peaceful cooperative venue that is a valuable alternative to nation state hostilities. One can look at the International Space Station and marvel that the former Soviet Union and the U.S. are now active partners. International cooperation is also a way to reduce costs.
4. National prestige requires that the U.S. continue to be a leader in space, and that includes human exploration. History tells us that great civilizations dare not abandon exploration.
5. Exploration of space will provide humanity with an answer to the most fundamental questions: Are we alone? Are there other forms of life beside those on Earth?
It is these last two arguments that are the most compelling to me. It is challenging to make the case that humans are necessary to the type of scientific exploration that may bring evidence of life on another world. There are strong arguments on both sides. Personally, I think humans will be better at unstructured environment exploration than any existing robot for a very long time.
There are those who say that exploration with humans is simply too expensive for the return we receive. However, I cannot imagine any U.S. President announcing that we are abandoning space exploration with humans and leaving it to the Chinese, Russians, Indians, Japanese or any other group. I can imagine the U.S. engaging in much more expansive international cooperation.
Humans will be exploring space. The challenge is to be sure that they accomplish meaningful exploration.
Joan Vernikos, a member of the Space Studies Board of the National Academy and former director of NASA’s Life Sciences Division:
Why explore? Asked why he kept trying to climb Everest, English mountaineer George Mallory reputedly replied, “Because it was there.” Exploration is intrinsic to our nature. It is the contest between man and nature mixed with the primal desire to conquer. It fuels curiosity, inspiration and creativity. The human spirit seeks to discover the unknown, and in the process explore the physical and psychological potential of human endurance.
There have always been the few risk-takers who ventured for the rest of us to follow. Because of earlier pioneers, air travel is now commonplace, and space travel for all is just around the corner. Economic and societal benefits are not immediately evident, but they always follow, as does our understanding of human potential to overcome challenges. Fifty years after Sputnik, space remains the next frontier.
Without risking human lives, robotic technology such as unmanned missions, probes, observatories, and landers enables space exploration. It lays the groundwork, and does the scouting. But as I heard former astronaut Thomas Jones often say, “only a human can experience what being in space feels like, and only a human can communicate this to others.” It is humans who repair the Hubble telescope. It is humans who service the International Space Station (ISS). Mercury astronauts were the first to photograph Earth from space with hand-held cameras. Earth scientists in orbit on the ISS may view aspects of global change that only a trained eye can see. In addition, studying astronauts in the microgravity of space has been the only means of understanding how gravity affects human development and health here on Earth. It is highly probable that, in this century, humans will settle on other planets. Our ability to explore and sustain human presence there will not only expand Earth’s access to mineral resources but, should the need arise, provide alternative habitats for humanity’s survival.
At what cost? Is there a price to inspiration and creativity? Economic, scientific and technological returns of space exploration have far exceeded the investment. Globally, 43 countries now have their own observing or communication satellites in Earth orbit. Observing Earth has provided G.P.S., meteorological forecasts, predictions and management of hurricanes and other natural disasters, and global monitoring of the environment, as well as surveillance and intelligence. Satellite communications have changed life and business practices with computer operations, cell phones, global banking, and TV. Studying humans living in the microgravity of space has expanded our understanding of osteoporosis and balance disorders, and has led to new treatments. Wealth-generating medical devices and instrumentation such as digital mammography and outpatient breast biopsy procedures and the application of telemedicine to emergency care are but a few of the social and economic benefits of manned exploration that we take for granted.
Space exploration is not a drain on the economy; it generates infinitely more than wealth than it spends. Royalties on NASA patents and licenses currently go directly to the U.S. Treasury, not back to NASA. I firmly believe that the Life Sciences Research Program would be self-supporting if permitted to receive the return on its investment. NASA has done so much with so little that it has generally been assumed to have had a huge budget. In fact, the 2007 NASA budget of $16.3 billion is a minute fraction of the $13 trillion total G.D.P.
“What’s the hurry?” is a legitimate question. As the late Senator William Proxmire said many years ago, “Mars isn’t going anywhere.” Why should we commit hard-pressed budgets for space exploration when there will always be competing interests? However, as Mercury, Gemini and Apollo did 50 years ago, our future scientific and technological leadership depends on exciting creativity in the younger generations. Nothing does this better than manned space exploration. There is now a national urgency to direct the creative interests of our youth towards careers in science and engineering. We need to keep the flame of manned space exploration alive as China, Russia, India, and other countries forge ahead with substantial investments that challenge U.S. leadership in space.
Kathleen M. Connell, a principal of The Connell Whittaker Group, a founding team member of NASA’s Astrobiology Program, and former policy director of the Aerospace States Association:
The value of public sector human space exploration is generally perceived as worth the cost when exploration outcomes address one or more national imperatives of the era. For example, in the twentieth century, the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik required a bold technological retort by the U.S. Apollo put boots on the moon, winning the first space race. The resulting foreign policy boost and psychic prestige for the U.S. more that justified the cost for the Cold War generation. Unquestionably, manned exploration of that era also created unintended economic consequences and benefits, such as the spinoff of miniaturization that led to computers and cell phones. Apollo also created new NASA centers in the South, acting as an unanticipated economic development anchor for those regions, both then and now.
In the twenty-first century, what would happen if U.S. manned space programs were managed based upon the contemporary demands of the planet and the American taxpayer? NASA could be rewarded to explore, but with terrestrial returns as a priority. Space exploration crews could conduct global warming research on the International Space Station National Laboratory, while other crews from the public or private sector could rapidly assemble solar energy satellites for clean energy provision to Earth. Lunar settlements could be established to develop new energy sources from rare compounds that are in abundance on the moon. Getting to Mars, to develop a terrestrial lifeboat and to better understand the fate of planets, suddenly takes on new meaning and relevance.
I have to come the conclusion, after over 20 years in the space industry, that addressing global challenges with space solutions that benefit humanity and American constituents is the key to justifying the cost of manned space exploration. I believe we are about to find out, all over again, if civil manned space capability and policy can adapt and rise to meet new imperatives.
Keith Cowing, founder and editor of NASAWatch.com and former NASA space biologist.
Right now, all of America’s human space flight programs cost around $7 billion a year. That’s pennies per person per day. In 2006, according to the USDA, Americans spent more than $154 billion on alcohol. We spend around $10 billion a month in Iraq. And so on. Are these things more important than human spaceflight because we spend more money on them? Is space exploration less important?
Money alone is not a way to gauge the worthiness of the cost of exploring space.
NASA is fond of promoting all of the spinoffs that are generated from its exploits, such as microelectronics. But are we exploring space to explore space, or are we doing all of this to make better consumer electronics? I once heard the late Carl Sagan respond to this question by saying, “you don’t need to go to Mars to cure cancer.” If you learn how to do that as a side benefit, well, that’s great, but there are probably more cost effective ways to get all of these spinoffs without leaving Earth.
To be certain, tax dollars spent on space projects result in jobs — a large proportion of which are high paying, high tech positions. But many other government programs do that as well — some more efficiently.
Still, for those who would moan that this money could be “better spent back on Earth,” I would simply say that all of this money is spent on Earth — it creates jobs and provides business to companies, just as any other government program does. You have to spend all of NASA’s money “on Earth.” There is no way to spend it in space — at least, not yet.
Where am I going with this? Asking if space exploration — with humans or robots or both — is worth the effort is like questioning the value of Columbus’s voyages to the New World in the late 1490s. The promise at the time was obvious to some, but not to others. Is manned space exploration worth the cost? If we Americans do not think so, then why is it that nations such as China and India — nations with far greater social welfare issues to address with their limited budgets — are speeding up their space exploration programs? What is it about human space exploration that they see? Could it be what we once saw, and have now forgotten?
As such, my response is another question: for the U.S. in the twenty-first century, is not sending humans into space worth the cost?
David M. Livingston, host of The Space Show, a talk radio show focusing on increasing space commerce and developing space tourism:
I hear this question a lot. So a few years ago, I decided to see what really happened to a public dollar spent on a good space program, compared to spending it on an entitlement program or a revenue generating infrastructure program. I used the school breakfast program for the test entitlement program. I chose Hoover Dam for the revenue generating infrastructure program. The space program I chose was the manned program to the moon consisting of the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs. Let me briefly summarize what I discovered.
All programs, if properly managed, can produce benefits in excess to the original invested dollar. There is no guarantee that a program will be properly managed, and this includes a space program. “Properly managed” implies many things, but I don’t think space is any more or less likely to be well managed than anything else the government does. A mismanaged space program wastes money, talent, and time, just like any other faulty program.
As for what happened to the dollar invested in the respective programs, the school breakfast program was successful, in that it increased the number of kids who received breakfast. However, when funding for this program or this type of program stops, as soon as the last of the funds goes through the pipeline, the program is over. It has no life past government funding. I was unable to find an inspirational or motivational quality for the program leading to downstream business, economic, or science advancements. One could make the case that kids who benefited from the program went on through school to accomplish great things, and I don’t doubt that — I simply could not document it in my research.
The Hoover Dam was very interesting. This project paid off its bond cost early, was a major contributor to the U.S. victory in World War II, and has been a huge economic factor for development in the Western part of the country. However, the Hoover Dam requires overhead and maintenance investment on a continual basis. It needs repairs, updates, modernization, and security, and it employs a labor force. Were we to stop investing in the Hoover Dam, over time it would lose its effectiveness and cease to be the value to our nation that it is now. Its value to us depends on our willingness to maintain, protect, and update it as necessary. The Hoover Dam and Lake Mead have given birth to thousands of private businesses, economic growth for the region, and much more. However, as with the entitlement program above, I could not find an inspirational or motivational aspect to the Hoover Dam.
What I discovered about our manned lunar program was different. When I did this study, it was 34 years after the last dime had been spent on Apollo, the last of the manned moon programs. Thirty-four years later, when I asked guests on The Space Show, students, and people in space-related fields what inspired or motivated them to start a space business or pursue their science education, over 80 percent said they were inspired and motivated because of our having gone to the moon. Businesses were started and are now meeting payrolls, paying taxes, and sustaining economic growth because the founder was inspired by the early days of the manned space program, often decades after the program ended! This type of inspiration and motivation seems unique to the manned space program and, of late, to some of our robotic space missions. I found the same to be true when I asked the same question to Space Show guests from outside the U.S.
John M. Logsdon, director of the Space Policy Institute and acting director of the Center for International Science and Technology Policy at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs:
The high costs of sending humans into orbit and beyond are measured in dollars, rubles, or yuan. The benefits of human spaceflight are not so easily calculated, since they include both tangible and intangible payoffs. So answering the question, “Do the benefits outweigh the costs?” is not straightforward.
If the payoffs are limited to scientific discovery, the position taken by many critics of human spaceflight is “no.” With both current and, especially, future robotic capabilities, the added value of human presence to missions aimed primarily at new understanding of the moon, Mars, near-Earth asteroids, and other celestial destinations most likely does not justify the added costs and risks involved. However, Steve Squyres, the principal investigator for the Mars Exploration Rovers, has frequently said that he wished that spirit and opportunity were working in partnership with humans on the surface of Mars; that combination, he argues, would greatly increase the scientific payoffs of the mission.
To me, the primary justifications for sending people into space require that they travel beyond low Earth orbit. For the next few decades, the major payoffs from humans traveling to the moon and Mars are intangible, and linked to both national pride and national power. Space exploration remains an effort that can be led by only a few countries, and I believe that it should be part of what the United States does in its desire to be seen by both its citizens and the global public as a leader, one to be admired for its continued willingness to invest in pushing the frontiers of human activity.
In the longer run, I believe that human exploration is needed to answer two questions. One is: “Are there activities in other places in the solar system of such economic value that they justify high costs in performing them?” The other is: “Can humans living away from Earth obtain at least a major portion of what they need to survive from local resources?” If the answer to both questions is “yes,” then I believe that eventually some number of people in the future will establish permanent settlements away from Earth, in the extreme case to ensure that the human species will survive a planetary catastrophe, but also because people migrate for both economic opportunities and new experiences. That is a big jump from today’s argument regarding the costs and benefits of human spaceflight, but I believe such a long range perspective is the best way to justify a new start in human space exploration.

bharats · Post by **bharats** » 04 Nov 2014 13:39

Isro working on landing tech
by Prashanth G N
Link http://www.deccanherald.com/content/439 ... -tech.html

Senior scientist of the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) and Director of Isro Satellite Centre (ISAC), S K Shivakumar said the space agency will focus on developing the lander and rover technology, which are crucial to next major space programmes of landing a spacecraft on moon and Mars. Senior scientist of the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) and Director of Isro Satellite Centre (ISAC), S K Shivakumar said the space agency will focus on developing the lander and rover technology, which are crucial to next major space programmes of landing a spacecraft on moon and Mars. He said the development of technologies and materials for the second moon and Mars missions will be completely indigenous, fulfilling Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s dream call to the nation. Sharing his perceptions on India’s second moon and Mars missions, he said the orbit of the current Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM) could have been much better. “There is scope to improvement. The Mars mission is actually a technology demonstrator. We have shown that our design works well. So, proving the technology is over. Now, we could look at what more can be done,” Shivakumar opined. Asked what he meant specifically, ..Shivakumar said: “There could have been more science experiments and experiments with greater impact than what we have now. We could have had more maturity in the Mars satellite in terms of payloads and experiments. We will request the Advisory Committee for Space Sciences (ADCOS) to review this. The recommendations and improvements can be taken up over the next three years. It would be ideal for us to launch Mars II in 2018. The 2016 window would be too close to usher in and stabilise changes.”

He said the instruments are functioning as per expectations and plans and if more complex data needs to be unearthed, the capabilities of the instruments need to be more intense. The selection of instruments can be changed in the second mission. Prior to the second Mars mission or at about the same time, the second moon mission would have to be taken up. Chandrayaan II, he explained, would be more complex because Isro has not yet developed the lander and rover technologies. “We need to look at landing technologies, which is relatively new to us and will take time to master. The 2018 time frame, therefore, would be ideal for both missions. Once we master the landing technologies with the second moon mission, we can learn from that to handle landing on Mars in the second mission.”

Isro has two time frames for the second Mars mission– 2016 and 2018. Mars comes closest to earth every two years which is why Isro grabbed the 2014 window opportunity and demonstrated its capability. As it would take time to learn and develop new technologies, Isro will have to skip the 2016 window. When the 2018 window opens up, Isro would be ready to test whether its rover and lander will actually land on moon and Mars and operate through robotic commands.

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 08 Nov 2014 13:50

The LOX turbo pump for Semi Cryo engine to be tested, end of November:

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/ ... 513064.ece

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 11 Nov 2014 16:25

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 110347.cms

NEW DELHI: India will conduct an experimental test of its Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) Mark 3 in mid-December, ISRO Chief K Radhakrishnan said Tuesday.

"China has launch vehicles with 5.5 tonnes capacity, Europe has 11 tonnes capacity launch vehicle, US has 13 tonnes capacity launch vehicles and Russia has nearly 10 tonnes capacity vehicles," he said.

The ISRO chief said the long term target is to make a launch vehicle with 12 tonnes capacity.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 11 Nov 2014 17:11

http://aviationweek.com/space/spacex-pr ... h-launcher

Interesting how Chinese are close to having their own LOX engines.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 11 Nov 2014 17:12

prasannasimha wrote:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 110347.cms

NEW DELHI: India will conduct an experimental test of its Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) Mark 3 in mid-December, ISRO Chief K Radhakrishnan said Tuesday.

"China has launch vehicles with 5.5 tonnes capacity, Europe has 11 tonnes capacity launch vehicle, US has 13 tonnes capacity launch vehicles and Russia has nearly 10 tonnes capacity vehicles," he said.

The ISRO chief said the long term target is to make a launch vehicle with 12 tonnes capacity.

He means 12 tonnes to GTO!

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 11 Nov 2014 20:37

Yes - GSLV Mk III is planned for a 4 ton payload to GTO. Ariane 5ECA can take 10 tons to GTO