Indian Space Program Discussion

[Austin]

Found it in an archive of Moscow Defence Brief of 2005 , good from historical perspective of Indo-Russian Space co-operation

Russian-Indian Cooperation in Space
Mikhail Barabanov

Cooperation between India and Russia in the field of space has long been an important aspect of the partnership between Moscow and New Delhi. However, the contribution of Soviet and then Russian assistance to India’s drive to become an independent space power is not entirely clear and bears further exploration.

India’s Path to Space

India’s national space program dates to the formation of the Indian National Committee for Space Research (INCOSPAR) in 1962. India carried out its first launch of a U.S.-built Nike-Apache sounding rocket from the Thumba Range in November, 1963.1 In 1969, a full-scale space agency – the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) – was established, reporting to the Space Commission and the Department of Space of the Indian government since 1972. Gaining independent access to space had been the primary goal of India’s space program since its inception. To this end, ISRO led extensive efforts focused on the development of a self-sufficient space infrastructure, including launch vehicles and satellites.

India’s first step into space was assisted by the Soviet Union. On April 19, 1975 the first Indian-built scientific satellite Aryabhata (launch mass 360kg) was launched on a Soviet Kosmos-3M rocket from the Kapustin Yar range. Unfortunately, the satellite failed in orbit after several days of operation because of equipment defects. The second satelliteBhaskara1 for Earth observation also was launched from Kapustin Yar in 1979. That satellite experienced operational problems too, and was followed by the Bhaskara 2 in 1981. The first Indian communication and television broadcasting satellite APPLE was put into geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) by a French Ariane 3 launch vehicle from the Kourou launch site in Guiana, also in 1981.2

Guided by considerations of political prestige more than practical benefit, India entered into an agreement in March 1981 with the Soviet Union to place an Indian cosmonaut onboard a Soviet spacecraft. Squadron Leader Rakesh Sharma, the first (and still the only) Indian citizen in space, was aboard the launch of the Soyuz T-10 on April 3, 1984 from Baikonur. Together with Yuri Malyshev (Captain) and Guennadi Strekalov (Flight Engineer), Sharma successfully completed an almost eight-day mission onboard the Salyut-7 orbital station. In the interests of maintaining “political balance,” India made a similar arrangement in December 1984 with the United States to put an Indian astronaut on board a Space Shuttle, but the project was not implemented due to the Challenger accident that occurred a year later.

Launcher development in India centered initially on solid propellant engines because they are easier to develop and operate than liquid engines. India carried out the first launch of its SLV-3 (Satellite Launch Vehicle) four-stage solid rocket with a payload capacity of only 40kg in a 400km circular orbit in August 1979 from a new launch site built on Sriharicota Island in the Bay of Bengal (SHAR), recently named the Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC). In its maiden flight, the rocket failed to deliver the small Rohini 1A satellite. It was not until July 18, 1980, when the SLV-3 successfully orbited another satellite, the Rohini 1B, that India joined the ranks of the space powers. After another two successful flights of the SLV 3, India focused on the development of ASLV (Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle), a five-stage version of the SLV capable of delivering a 150kg payload to the same orbit. The first two ASLV rockets with SROSS scientific satellites failed at launch. It was not until 1992 that an ASLV successfully orbited the SROSS Csatellite. Another successful launch was conducted in 1994.

Building on this experience, India embarked on the development of a fully capable space launch vehicle named PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle), possessing the capacity to put up to 3,500kg into a 400km low-Earth orbit, or over 1,000kg in a 900km sun-synchronous orbit. The four-stage PSLV had two solid stages (stages I & III) and two liquid propulsion stages (II & IV) using highly toxic storable propellants. Stage II was powered by the Vikas engine (thrust 74 tons), a modification of the Viking-4 engine (used onAriane 1-4 launch vehicles) developed by India under French license. A malfunction of the Vikas led to the failure of the first PSLV in September 1993. The next launch of a PSLV in October 1994 was successful. Since then, PSLVs have carried out six more flights (including 1 failure). In May 1999 and October 2001 each PSLV lofted three satellites, including some international ones, thus marking India’s presence on the international commercial launch market.3 Over the next few years, PSLV rockets are expected to launch Resourcesat and Risat satellites for Earth observation, Metsat weather satellites, an Astrosat observatory, and SRE (Spacecraft Recovery Experiment) small (500kg) recoverable capsules to validate reusable launcher technology. Furthermore, a PSLV is planned to launch the Chandrayaan 1 moon probe (525kg).4

Russian Propulsion for GSLV

In 1986, ISRO started its most ambitious Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) project aimed at developing a medium launcher with a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) capacity of more than 2 tons (twice as much as the PSLV). Stages I & II of the three-stageGSLV Mk 1 version are powered by Vikas engines. The Vikas engines are also used in four strap-on boosters of the launch vehicle. A cryogenic upper stage (Stage III) would be a key element of the new launcher. Initial development of the upper stage and cryogenic engine was done by Indian specialists without foreign assistance, but to expedite the fulfillment of the GSLV program, India decided to acquire foreign technologies. The Soviet Glavkosmos beat other US and French companies to win a $120 million contract for the delivery of two upper-stage cryogenic KVD-1 engines to India in January 2001. The KVD-1, with a thrust of 7.5 tons and one-time ignition, was developed in the1960s for the Soviet N-1 moon rocket by the Chemical Machine-Building Design Bureau (KB KhimMash located in Korolev, Moscow region). The contract also provided for the transfer of engine manufacturing technology. The Khrunichev Design and Production Center (GKNPTs Khrunichev) was contracted to design the upper stage. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US pressured Yeltsin’s government to formally terminate the agreement in August 1993, citing an alleged violation of Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). It is interesting to note that at the same time, US companies were building a rocket propellant liquefaction plant in Mahendragiri, which was completed in 1992. US arguments that cryogenic engines could be used for missile production are highly doubtful, while the European Vikas really is fit for such a purpose.

The agreement with India was renegotiated, and Russia committed to deliver seven fully assembled KVD-1 engines. Nevertheless, the unilateral termination of the agreement by Russia had a significant negative impact on Russian-Indian relations and, from the Indian point of view, delayed the GSLV program by at least two years. Mr. U.R. Rao, Head of India’s space program at that time, said that “it was a serious blow and now we have to rely on ourselves”. Then Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao was cited as having said in a private meeting: “In that case, India will develop cryogenic motors on its own. Within several years our scientists will achieve that goal”.5 That, however, was merely a political statement: it is all but impossible from a technological point of view to develop a cryogenic engine from scratch in less than 15-20 years, especially one based on hydrogen, given that the boiling point of liquid hydrogen is -253 degrees C. Though India strived to proceed independently with the development of cryogenic upper stage and motor, in fact it had to rely on Russian support delivered through a team of Russian specialists lead by Leo Kiselev.6 Therefore, India decided to integrate all seven GSLV Mk I launchers with upper stages powered by Russian KVD-1 rocket motors and use the indigenous Indian engine in future versions of the GSLV Mk II.

On April 18, 2001 the GSLV Mk I made its inaugural flight with a Khrunichev-built cryogenic (KVD-1) upper stage, placing an Indian GSAT-1 communication satellite (1,500kg) into geostationary transfer orbit. Having launched another two GSLV rockets during 2003-2004, India became fully independent in launching its payloads into the critical geostationary orbit. The development of a GSLV Mk II version featuring indigenous CUS (Cryogenic Upper Stage) continues. The CUS would be powered by cryogenic propulsion developed in India on the basis of the KVD-1. Nevertheless, planning of the first launch for 2005 does not seem realistic. Therefore, India is very likely to power the GSLV with imported KVD-1 engines at least for the next few years. Also, the cost of one GSLV launch, due to its cryogenic stage, is currently very high – the first launch of a GSLV cost India about $300 million, compared to $15 million for a PSLV. 7 Though reductions to launch-costs to levels ranging from $35-45 million are foreseen in the future, the GSLV is not expected to capture any significant share of the commercial market because of its unconfirmed reliability and low production rate: not more than 1-2 launch vehicles per year, most of which would be reserved for Indian payloads. This will not allow the GSLV to compete with the highly reliable, mass-produced, low-cost Russian launchers, such as the Proton, Zenith or Soyuz.

Since 2002, ISRO has been working on the development of a more powerful vehicle dubbed the GSLV Mk III. The new launch vehicle, designed to launch up to 4 tons (6 tons in future) into GTO or more than 10 tons into lower orbits, would be quite different from the GSLV Mk I and Mk II versions built in a “tandem” configuration. Similar to the Titan IV or Ariane 5 launchers in appearance, the Mk III includes a liquid-core stage with two large, solid, strap-on boosters. It would have two Vikas engines in the core stage and an indigenously-developed cryogenic engine with a thrust of 9.5 tons derived from the KVD-1 in the upper stage.8 Other sources report that the upgrading of the engine from 7.5 to 9.5 tons is being done by Russian specialists. The first flight of the launcher is planned for 2009.

The payload capacity of the GSLV Mk III would be 10 tons in low-Earth orbit, compared to the 7-8 tons capacity of Russian Soyuz or the similar Chinese Shenzhou launchers. Such a capacity would enable the Indians to launch a manned spacecraft. India’s interest in manned flights may have been piqued by the recent flight of the first Chinese astronaut, since India and China have long rivaled each other for influence in South-East Asia. In December, 2003, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes spoke of the need for India to carry out a human space flight in order to demonstrate its national achievements in science and technology. ISRO Chairman Dr. Madhawan Nair acknowledged that while India can presently pursue human space flight only in the abstract, it will be done should the nation require it.9 Manned flights remain a distant goal for India’s space program that will require the kind of scientific and technological assistance that Russia supplied to China.

Various sources have reported that Russian industrial enterprises have assisted India in the construction of GSLV launching facilities on Sriharikota Range. Also, in 1977, the Soviet Union helped ISRO build an experimental laser-based optical Satellite Tracking & Ranging Station (STARS) near Kavalur.10

Collaboration between Russia and India in satellite projects

After the Soviet Union launched the first Indian satellites, further cooperation with Moscow in this field was limited. India was able to build two major national satellite systems, including the geostationary Insat (Indian National Satellite) system for communication, television broadcasting, and meteorology and the IRS (Indian Remote Satellite) low-orbit system for remote sensing using mainly western technologies. The first four Insat 1 series satellites were built in the U.S. in the 1980s. Another five Insat 2 and three Insat 3 satellites were built in India with assistance from the West. All Insat satellites were launched on French launchers of the Ariane family.

Backed by strong governmental support, IRS has become one of the world,s most extensive and fastest-developing remote sensing systems. System operation is coordinated by a National Natural Resources Management System committee. A total of 13 IRS satellites have been launched to date. Satellites are equipped mostly with payloads manufactured in France and Germany. The first three IRS 1 satellites were launched from the Baikonur space center on Russian Vostok (2 satellites) and Molniya (1 satellite) rockets from 1988-1995, while other IRS were launched by Indian launch vehicles. IRS data are sold by India on the international market. In 2000, India’s sales of commercial satellite imagery amounted to about 20% of the world total.11 IRS data are received at three centers in Russia (Moscow, Irkutsk, and Kurgan) and are then distributed commercially.12

Other Indian satellite systems, such as GSAT (communication), SROSS (science), TES (reconnaissance), Risat (observation), METSAT and Megha Tropiques (weather), and Astrosat (astronomy) were built by India either indigenously, or in cooperation with foreign, chiefly West European, countries. Broad Indo-European cooperation in the field of space culminated in India’s formal accession to the Galileo program in November, 2003. India’s participation in this navigation satellite system has been estimated at ?300 million.13

At the same time, Russia experienced serious problems making the GLONASS global navigation system fully operational. Over the last few years Russia has actively solicited participation in the program from various countries, first of all the fast growing space powers China and India. After many years of unsuccessful negotiations, China finally decided in 2004 to join Galileo. Negotiations with India gave more promising results. In July 2004, ISRO Head Modhawan Nair and Russian space agency (Roskosmos) Head Anatoly Perminov signed a protocol on Indian participation in the GLONASS system. This was followed by the signing of a number of intergovernmental agreements during Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to India in December 2004. The agreements provided not only for the joint development of a new generation of navigation satellites and user sets, but also the launch of several GLONASS satellites by Indian launch vehicles.14 This represents the first such concession in Russia’s space-faring history: no Russian or Soviet satellite has ever been launched from a foreign rocket. Meanwhile, Russian launch vehicles of all classes are available in abundance. The reasons for India’s decision are not known. It may be India’s intention to prevent dependence on the West in matters related to the military application of navigation satellite systems, including their use for aiming modern precision weapon systems. Nor is it clear how India’s involvement will affect GLONASS and its military and commercial applications with respect to its US (GPS) and European (Galileo) competitors.

Other cooperation agreements negotiated in the field of satellites include the development of remote sensing payloads and satellite electric propulsion systems. Also, the cooperation program was amended with projects on moon observation and setup of a “sun observatory” to study solar X-band radiation.15 ISRO’s Physical Research Laboratory has extensive experience cooperating with Russian research organizations in the field of space research experiments.16

observatory, and SRE (Spacecraft Recovery Experiment) small (500kg) recoverable capsules to validate reusable launcher technology. Furthermore, a PSLV is planned to launch the Chandrayaan 1moon probe (525kg).4

Russian Propulsion for GSLV

In 1986, ISRO started its most ambitious Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) project aimed at developing a medium launcher with a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) capacity of more than 2 tons (twice as much as the PSLV). Stages I & II of the three-stage GSLV Mk 1 version are powered by Vikas engines. The Vikas engines are also used in four strap-on boosters of the launch vehicle. A cryogenic upper stage (Stage III) would be a key element of the new launcher. Initial development of the upper stage and cryogenic engine was done by Indian specialists without foreign assistance, but to expedite the fulfillment of the GSLV program, India decided to acquire foreign technologies. The Soviet Glavkosmos beat other US and French companies to win a $120 million contract for the delivery of two upper-stage cryogenic KVD-1 engines to India in January 2001. The KVD-1, with a thrust of 7.5 tons and one-time ignition, was developed in the1960s for the Soviet N-1 moon rocket by the Chemical Machine-Building Design Bureau (KB KhimMash located in Korolev, Moscow region). The contract also provided for the transfer of engine manufacturing technology. The Khrunichev Design and Production Center (GKNPTs Khrunichev) was contracted to design the upper stage. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US pressured Yeltsin’s government to formally terminate the agreement in August 1993, citing an alleged violation of Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). It is interesting to note that at the same time, US companies were building a rocket propellant liquefaction plant in Mahendragiri, which was completed in 1992. US arguments that cryogenic engines could be used for missile production are highly doubtful, while the European Vikas really is fit for such a purpose.

The agreement with India was renegotiated, and Russia committed to deliver seven fully assembled KVD-1engines. Nevertheless, the unilateral termination of the agreement by Russia had a significant negative impact on Russian-Indian relations and, from the Indian point of view, delayed the GSLV program by at least two years. Mr. U.R. Rao, Head of India’s space program at that time, said that “it was a serious blow and now we have to rely on ourselves”. Then Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao was cited as having said in a private meeting: “In that case, India will develop cryogenic motors on its own. Within several years our scientists will achieve that goal”.5 That, however, was merely a political statement: it is all but impossible from a technological point of view to develop a cryogenic engine from scratch in less than 15-20 years, especially one based on hydrogen, given that the boiling point of liquid hydrogen is -253 degrees C. Though India strived to proceed independently with the development of cryogenic upper stage and motor, in fact it had to rely on Russian support delivered through a team of Russian specialists lead by Leo Kiselev.6 Therefore, India decided to integrate all seven GSLV Mk I launchers with upper stages powered by Russian KVD-1 rocket motors and use the indigenous Indian engine in future versions of the GSLV Mk II.

On April 18, 2001 the GSLV Mk Imade its inaugural flight with a Khrunichev-built cryogenic (KVD-1) upper stage, placing an Indian GSAT-1 communication satellite (1,500kg) into geostationary transfer orbit. Having launched another two GSLV rockets during 2003-2004, India became fully independent in launching its payloads into the critical geostationary orbit. The development of a GSLV Mk II version featuring indigenous CUS (Cryogenic Upper Stage) continues. The CUS would be powered by cryogenic propulsion developed in India on the basis of the KVD-1. Nevertheless, planning of the first launch for 2005 does not seem realistic. Therefore, India is very likely to power the GSLV with imported KVD-1 engines at least for the next few years. Also, the cost of one GSLV launch, due to its cryogenic stage, is currently very high – the first launch of a GSLV cost India about $300 million, compared to $15 million for a PSLV. 7 Though reductions to launch-costs to levels ranging from $35-45 million are foreseen in the future, the GSLV is not expected to capture any significant share of the commercial market because of its unconfirmed reliability and low production rate: not more than 1-2 launch vehicles per year, most of which would be reserved for Indian payloads. This will not allow the GSLV to compete with the highly reliable, mass-produced, low-cost Russian launchers, such as the Proton, Zenith or Soyuz.

Since 2002, ISRO has been working on the development of a more powerful vehicle dubbed the GSLV Mk III. The new launch vehicle, designed to launch up to 4 tons (6 tons in future) into GTO or more than 10 tons into lower orbits, would be quite different from the GSLV Mk I and Mk II versions built in a “tandem” configuration. Similar to the Titan IV or Ariane 5 launchers in appearance, the Mk III includes a liquid-core stage with two large, solid, strap-on boosters. It would have two Vikas engines in the core stage and an indigenously-developed cryogenic engine with a thrust of 9.5 tons derived from the KVD-1 in the upper stage.8 Other sources report that the upgrading of the engine from 7.5 to 9.5 tons is being done by Russian specialists. The first flight of the launcher is planned for 2009.

The payload capacity of the GSLV Mk III would be 10 tons in low-Earth orbit, compared to the 7-8 tons capacity

Conclusions

At first glance, the role of the USSR and then Russia in the development of India’s space program is not large and doesn’t correspond to the high levels of cooperation attained by the two countries in other fields such as arms sales. Obviously, the Soviet Union helped India with some important political demonstrations, including the first launch of an Indian satellite and the flight of the first Indian cosmonaut. However, the direct impact of Soviet space technologies on India’s principal space programs does not appear to have been terribly important, unless one factors in the training of Indian technical specialists at Soviet universities and colleges. The only exception seems to be Russia’s assistance in developing the most powerful Indian GSLV launch vehicle, where the supply of Russian cryogenic engines can be reckoned as the key and critical element for the whole program. This has helped India to find a substantially simpler, easier, and cheaper solution to ensure guaranteed access to geostationary orbit with heavy satellites, thus accomplishing a priority political, economical, and military task.

Aside from the recent agreement on the joint operation of GLONASS, there is no current Russian or legacy Soviet involvement in Indian satellite projects. In this field, India actively collaborates with western companies, which is explained in part by Russia’s lag in satellite technology. Moreover, Indian achievements in this field are impressive. India’s Laboratory for Electro-Optic Systems (LEOS) is developing satellite electronics and gyros and offers its products to the Russian and CIS space industries.17 Nevertheless, Russia cannot access modern satellite technologies through India, first of all because most of the electronic components of Indian-built satellites are produced in the USA or Europe.18 Therefore, science and technology cooperation between Russia and India can only be realized in the form of “Russian technologies for Indian money”.

That said, the future of cooperation between Russia and India depends entirely on the latter. Obviously, India is not merely working on a range of space programs, but is committed rather to creating a fully capable space industry backed with indigenous science and schools of technology. Therefore, foreign assistance will only be used when it helps to advance the implementation of a project. Examples include acquisition of technologies relating to rocket elements, the development of which would require much time and resources, such as the European Viking-4 or the Russian KVD-1 liquid rocket engines for Indian PSLV and GSLV launchers. Independent development of those elements would have taken India dozens of years with uncertain results. (In this respect it enough to consider the history of launch vehicle development in Japan). Therefore, if India decides to build a more powerful launcher or, for political reasons, leans towards human space flight, Russian cooperation will definitely be required. Otherwise, there is very little chance for the further development of Indo-Russian cooperation.

We should note that Russia could learn from Indian experience in the field of managing and targeting space activities. With a space budget of about $450 million and only 13 spacecraft (compared to Russia’s space budget of around $600 million and approximately 100 satellites), India has captured about 20% of the space imagery market, and earnings from commercial imagery and satellite communication services amount to $100 million a year. India’s space program is oriented to applications such as meteorology, telemedicine, and distant education (which is important for a country with an illiterate population of 350 million), and serves national interests. Can the same be said of Russia? What practical tasks is its much larger space fleet accomplishing? It is shameful to admit, but Russia, stretched in eleven time zones, has no weather satellites – the nation that was a founder of remote sensing technology now buys satellite images received from Indian IRS satellites. By the way, Russia has developed a cryogenic upper stage for rockets currently produced in India, while their Russian analog exists only in the form of blueprints.

Finally, it is noteworthy that Abdul Kalam, the engineer who was Project Director for the SLV-3 in 1973, is the President of India today.

1 Rohini Sounding Rockets (RSR) // Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

2 Indian Science Satellite Program Series // Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

3 Prilukova L. India’s Space Activity // http://www.space.com.ua; Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

4 Cherny I. Powerful rockets for the near future // Space News, #1, 2004.

5 India has consolidated on space // Vremya novostey, 19.06.2003.

6 Ibid

7 Afanasiev I., Kucheyko A. METSAT-1 in GEO // Space News, #11, 2002.

8 Cherny I. Powerful rockets for the near future // Space News, #1, 2004.

9 RIA “Novosti”, 17.12.2003.

10 ISTRAC-IRSO Telemetry Tracking and Command network // Jane’s Space Directory, 2003. Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

12 Also marketed by ITTs ‘ScanEx’// http://www.scanex.ru.

13 India joins Galileo // RBK, 01.12.2003.

14 Roskosmos Head A. Perminov. Internet briefing // http://www.federalspace.ru, 16.12.2005

15 Russian GLONASS satellites to be launched on Indian rockets // Izvestiya, 19.07.2004.

16 Physical Research Laboratory (PRL) // Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

17 Laboratory for Electro-Optic Systems (LEOS) // Jane’s Space Directory, 2003.

18 Cherny I. Indian Space Program: Ambitions and Reality // Space News, #3, 2004.

[arun]

ISRO inaugurates what appears to be a high Mach wind tunnel facility that can test up-to speeds of Mach 14:

………….Sources said that a Horton Spheres System (along with wind tunnels), which creates vacuum enabling calibration of the launchers, has been installed at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC).

The System, manufactured by a Bangalore-based firm, comprises three Horton Spheres each with a diameter of 16.3 metre and 2,200 cubic metre capacity.

It has two parallel pumping trains, each with two mechanical booster pumps with a pumping speed of 30,000 cubic metre per hour, backed successively by booster pumps of 14,000 cubic metre per hour and 7,000 cubic metre per hour and finally by three rotary piston pumps, each with a pumping speed of 1,325 cubic metre per hour.

Added to this, a complete range of measurement and control instrumentation as well as vacuum valves are part of the system, which boasts of six large capacity heat exchangers to ensure cooling of the high temperature exhaust air from the booster pump.

“High pressures are created from one side of the tunnel and low pressures operate from the other side in vacuum, creating Mach numbers between 4 to14,” sources said, adding that these are the kind of machs encountered by launch vehicles while leaving or entering the earth’s atmosphere. ……………….

Deccan Herald

[Kailash]

Indian Scientists Propose 10 Experiments For 2013 Mission To Mars

IIT-B students set up society to study Mars

[Kailash]

Rs 750-cr outlay likely for spatial data infrastructure

[Varoon Shekhar]

Still waiting for news of the PSLV C-19 launch.

[SSSalvi]

^^^

Ground systems are getting tested right now. Sooooo Jald aa rahaa hai.. march/april?

[Varoon Shekhar]

Thanks- that means the SARAL launch will be pushed back to at earliest May-June, right? And the GSLV Mark 2 even further?

[SSSalvi]

Expected:

March - PSLV C19 ---- RISAT-1
April - Ariane-5 ---- GSAT-10 + Gagan
May/June - PSLV C20 ---- SARAL etc

[Hiten]

lists out all foreign satellites launched by ISRO, so far

Foreign Satellite Launch & Construction by Indian Space Research Organisation [ISRO]

Click on the 1st image to view its larger size

[member_21708]

lists out all foreign satellites launched by ISRO, so far

nice chart

[Varoon Shekhar]

^^^ Impressive and uplifting. But India needs some new launches- RISAT-1, Astrosat, SRE-2, GSATS, Insat 3D et al.

[Kailash]

ISRO has great plans for 2012

Satellite tech can help in education

RISAT-1 to be launched anytime from March 15

[Kailash]

Soon, safety in the sky as GPS-aided Gagan set to take off

[Virupaksha]

Am I worse than a terrorist- ex ISRO chief, Nair

http://www.firstpost.com/india/ex-isro- ... 93105.html

New Delhi: Taking action in the controversial Antrix-Devas deal, the government has barred former ISRO chief G Madhavan Nair and three other eminent space scientists from holding any government jobs.

[chiragAS]

Sad state of affairs. M. Nair's Outburst

[csaurabh]

I am quite sure politicos/congies are making him the scapegoat.
G. Mahadevan Nair is a top scientist, previous director of ISRO, Padma Vibhushan awardee and in my mind an inspirational person.
Great man, had the honor of meeting him once.

How does the govt blacklist someone like this?
If they have committed a crime, put them on trial. If guilty put them behind bars. I have no objection to that.
What is this cloak and dagger business.

[arunsrinivasan]

Edited, as requested. Ramana - that info widely available, I'm just a messenger.

[ramana]

Arun that is uncalled for.Suggest editing or deleting your post.

GMN is appealing to GOI who in all probability scape goated him for the S band scam. Instead of targeting those who "qui bono" the modus operandi is who can be bakrafied.

[sukhish]

looks like DFI members are nothing but anti congress squad, I APPEAL TO THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CHANGE NAME OF THIS
FORUM FROM DFI TO ANTI CONGRESS FORUM. if you take strict action against individual, people think GOI are sheilding the real culprit, if you don't take action people say GOI is incapable. bottom line people don't like congress in this forum and for good or bad reason they want to beat down the current GOI no matter what. keep the good job. I see the exact same thing in pakistani defense forum, not much of a difference between DFI and PFI. I would actually urge the ADMINISTRATOR to merge these two forums.

[Rupesh]

^^^
If you want to rant against DFI post that in DFI and not BRF. And if you don't like BRF you can stop posting. We are better off without you.

[Sanku]

Mr Nair, will most probably move court. He should. It appears that court is the only thing that holds the country back from going to a full fledged violent uprising against the kleptocrats in power.

[member_21708]

Members of PM science panel slam Govt’s ISRO blacklist

The government’s unprecedented action against former ISRO chief G Madhavan Nair and three of his colleagues for their alleged — and as yet unknown — role in the allocation of S-band frequencies for radio waves to a private company has been criticised by some of the biggest names in the Indian science establishment.

Too harsh, said Anil Kakodkar, former chairman of Department of Atomic Energy. Shocking news, said C N R Rao, head of the Scientific Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (SAC-PM). Extremely painful, said R A Mashelkar, the celebrated former head of CSIR and another member of SAC-PM. Way too harsh, and probably arising out of ill-will, said noted scientist and academician Prof Yashpal.

Nair and three colleagues — A Bhaskarnarayana, former Scientific Secretary in ISRO; K R Sridharmurthi, former managing director of Antrix which is the marketing arm of ISRO; and K N Shankara, former director in ISRO Satellite Centre — were banned from taking any government position, either now or in future, apparently because of their role in a 2005 agreement between Antrix Corporation and Bangalore-based Devas Multimedia. This ban order was first reported by The Indian Express.

“We are talking about highly reputed people. I am trying to gather more information and let us see whether it needs to be taken up at the SAC-PM level,” said C N R Rao.

Said Mashelkar: “I have zero knowledge of this case, apart from what I have read in The Indian Express but this order is puzzling. Such an action has been taken for the first time ever, especially with distinguished scientists like them.”

Yashpal said the matter needed to be handled better. “Maybe a decision has been taken which is later not thought to be very wise. But still the action seems way too harsh, probably arising out of ill will,” he said.

Kakodkar also wondered about the fallout. “I think for the country to mark a major progress in the field of technology... out of the box ideas must be welcomed and then we must be ready to implement them. The entire working has to be such...For development of completely new technology, there is need to create new partnerships in technology as well. After this (government decision to debar four scientists), we only hope that the efforts to pursue new ideas and new technology are allowed to persist”, he said.

IIM Ahmedabad professor Anil Kumar Gupta, who works extensively on promoting indigenous technologies, said he was amazed. “This is the same Madhavan Nair who you gave Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan. Are we to believe that these people who have done the nation proud were actually corrupt? I am willing to believe that some mistakes could have been made. Hang them if they have but at least give them an opportunity to defend themselves,” he said.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/membe ... st/904445/

scientists are being made scapegoats to protect powerful interests which were part of the plan to transfer tax payer funded public interest project into the hands of a private party.

[Sanku]

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... -deal.html

ISRO’s Spectrum deal

The agreement .... could not have been finalised without the knowledge of the Prime Minister’s Office, because the then Minister of State for Science and Technology Prithviraj Chavan was also a Minister in the PMO.

It, therefore, stands to reason that a number of senior officials from the PMO would have been in the know of the deal, since they will have vetted it and finally given it clearance. That Mr Madhavan, being the chairman of ISRO at that point of time, may have played a lead role in seeing the agreement through is not being contested. What remains contestable is the clean chit that the Government seems to have given to the officials of the PMO.

[Kailash]

This is clumsiest set of people I have seen. Every little chance there was to boost their image (or atleast save face), they fumbled and floundered. Be it a telcom minister, social activist, IA chief or ex-ISRO chief, the charade goes on and on. Had there been a timely intervension, none of these would make it to the headlines as they are doing now.

Dis-proportionate reaction (hyper-action or complete silence), and denial have been their hallmark, in handling matters which need utmost deft and finesse !

[member_21708]

Ex-ISRO chairman slams V Narayanasamy's 'medieval views'
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ex ... ws_1642762

[Bade]

Though I was always for privatization of routine space operations or parts of building rockets and satellites for commercial purposes, felt quite uncomfortable with the existence of Antrix within the ISRO fold. In many ways the two are the same. But ISRO's mandate is Space Research as the name itself indicates. At some point in the future this conflict of interest as pure research entity and commercial service provider would have led to issues. Hope this does not affect the space science work being done within ISRO. Better to farm out Antrix completely out of ISRO.

[member_21708]

Former Isro chief G Madhavan Nair gives up IIT post; hopeful of getting justice through RTI

28 Jan, 2012, 11.14AM IST, Surojit Gupta,TNN
NEW DELHI: Former Isro chief G Madhavan Nair, who has been barred from any government work for his alleged lapse in the Antrix-Devas deal, on Friday voluntarily stepped down from the post of chairman of the board of governors of the upcoming Indian Institute of Technology, Patna.

The government decided to bar Nair and three other ex-Isro scientists from any government work for their alleged lapses in the Antrix-Devas deal.

"I came here to say goodbye. I am voluntarily stepping down. This college is very close to my heart and it's my moral responsibility to give them the message. I have nothing to do with the government. It has hurt me very badly. I have not been told anything by the government so far," the top space scientist told TOI on phone from Patna.

Sources said Nair refused to chair the meeting of the board but was persuaded to stay on as he was associated with the planning for the college for a long time. Nair said he had filed an application under the RTI Act and had sought the two inquiry committee reports.

"I am sure the government will not refuse it. After studying the reports , we will take appropriate action. It's a question of my prestige and it has to be restored ," he said. "We do not know what were the terms of the committees, what are their recommendations .

We do not know what processes they followed to secure such an unilateral decision from the government," he added. In February 2011, the UPA government scrapped the controversial contract between Antrix Corporation and Bangalore-based Devas Multimedia for the lease of space segment in S-band. The government had said it could not grant S-band spectrum to anyone including Antrix due to strategic reasons.

The controversy over the deal surfaced at a time when the government was battling corruption charges over the allocation of 2G spectrum. The government promptly appointed two committees - one headed by former cabinet secretary B K Chaturvedi and another by former central vigilance commissioner Pratyush Sinha - to probe lapses in the deal.

Nair said the Chaturvedi panel allowed them to present their case but the Sinha panel only sent a questionnaire, suggesting that they were denied the right to be heard. "We answered all the questions and sent it to them but we have not received any reply," the ex-Isro chief said, adding that government's decision to bar him from official work was against the process of natural justice.

Devas Multimedia has moved the International Court of Arbitration to settle the issue but Antrix has not responded favourably to the arbitration . The SC is expected to hear Antrix's petition on the issue early in February.

The ICA has appointed a three-member panel to go ahead with the arbitration proceedings. Former CJI A S Anand has been appointed as one of the members of the arbitration panel.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 660942.cms

[vishvak]

My view as an outsider:
The idea here seems perhaps to take credit away from Nation and ISRO when something big is about to be done. As an example, when the nation celebrated polio free day, the Bill Gates foundation was around. When MMRCA deal is to be signed, the Army chief should be declaring the same. Now for ISRO, in case of Agni testing, there is this trouble. Perhaps baabulog work like this. When there is something to celebrate, some Gandhi alone should be there to take credit away while ignoring any increase in the credibility of nation & people who earned it with aid of some inconvenient issues.

My 2 khota sikka only. Also suggesting, therefore & otherwise also, to celebrate with full clarity about giving the credit to whom it belongs, including babudom wherever applicable, and pointing out who is reducing credibility of the nation even if by a tiny amount.

[Sanku]

http://www.timesnow.tv/videoshow/4394677.cms

Top scientists back Madhavan Nair

"Today I saw a news item...somebody (Narayanasamy) saying that we want to teach the scientists a lesson," Nair said. "It's a big blow to the scientific community." "At least scientists are doing something. You also want them to shut-off? It's very strange," he said.

Eminent scientist Dr PM Bhargava added, “It is a very sad day for Indian Science. We must know the complete details of the deal and the way the investigation has been done before coming to conclusions.”

Slamming Union Minister V Narayanasamy for his remarks on scientists over the controversial Antrix-Devas deal issue, former ISRO Chairman G Madhavan Nair yesterday said it reminded him of medieval times when Galileo was imprisoned for his scientific bservations.

Former ISRO chief G Madhavan Nair and three fellow space scientists against whom Government has taken damning action in the controversial Antrix-Devas deal were "thrown out like garbage", said Prof C N R Rao, Head of the Scientific Advisory Council to the Prime Minister.

Mincing no words, an angry Rao while putting his weight behind Nair also slammed V Narayanasamy, Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, for his stand on the ISRO row.

"People who have served the country, served the organisation for long, you cannot throw them like garbage. That's what they have done. They have literally thrown them out of the window like garbage", Rao told PTI today, voicing outrage at the action.

"They have not treated corrupt persons in politics, in public life like that. Why only scientists have been picked
up?", asked Rao, also Honorary President of Bangalore-based Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research.

"Is this the way to treat anybody? Nobody will work for these (government) organisations if this is the way they are treated", Rao, a renowned scientist, said.

[Surya]

sanku

dont worry

unnithan or some other tool is probably right now writing an article on this.

This govt is totally pukeworthy

[abhishek_sharma]

Space War

[arunsrinivasan]

Spoke to my cousin, who is in a senior non technical role at Antrix for many years now & personally knows all the people involved. His take is that there is no corruption involved, & all the people are quite honest, but did not follow procedure correctly. He says the current ISRO chairman is responsible for the actions that have been taken who is in his words very "sensitive" i.e. mostly ego issues that lead to the current actons. He also mentioned that there are significant politicking & regional lobbies in ISRO & Antrix that is undermining work. FWIW

[ramana]

But what really happened?
Was there loss of revenues or not?

GOI by debarring these four implicates them. Why is none thinking about that?

[PratikDas]

The Economic Times - Antrix-Devas deal: Government yet to take action against those responsible
Bharti Jain, ET Bureau Jan 27, 2012, 02.17AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Centre may have annulled the Antrix-Devas deal a year ago and, more recently, blacklisted ex-ISRO chief Madhavan Nair and three others, but it appears to be holding back from taking penal action for the procedural lapses in signing the agreement.

The Department of Space (DoS) had in July 2011 conveyed to the inquiry committee set up to probe the Antrix-Devas deal a long list of "lapses in the decision-making process" that led to signing of the Antrix-Devas deal.


Pointing to "non-transparency" right from the signing of the deal, the DoS note, a copy of which is with the ET, pointed out how only four of the eight members on Antrix Board had approved the deal with Devas, with no agenda regarding the agreement being circulated in advance. "A full discussion and examination of the agenda notes was pre-empted on the issuea¦.the matter was dealt in an unseemly hurry, since Devas had been incorporated only a week prior to the board meeting," it was pointed out.

The DoS note also raised questions on how "complete trust was put in the capabilities of Forge Advisors USA," which set up Devas Multimedia, when it "did not possess intellectual property rights (IPRs) and had no material to show that it could develop technologies for hybrid digital communication."

Also, DoS claimed that ICC was bypassed while earmarking satellite capacity on Insat systems for use of Devas. Though policy guidelines for use of INSAT capacity by private sector providers postulated its use on a non-exclusive basis, 90% of the transponder capacity on satellites GSAT 6 and GSAT 6A were reserved for use by Devas alone. The proposal to allocate the valuable S-band spectrum to a private player was described by DoS as "an unjustified risk from the security point of view." It said as much as 60% of the total usable spectrum of 80 MHz was allocated for use by a private player like Devas, when countries like Japan and the US were using only 20-25 MHz for providing satellite services.

DoS maintained that Antrix-Devas deal made a rigid commitment of timeline of three years by Antrix, failing which penalty was to be levied for every month of delay with a cap of $5 million beyond 12 months and liability for breach of contract.

"This was agreed even when the product in question was not even fabricated on the day of signing of the agreement, and such fabrication involved the approval of the Space Commission and the Cabinet," said DoS note, "approved by the chairman of the high level team".

DoS further pointed out how, when Space Commission met to clear construction of Gsat 6, it was not apprised of the fact that 90% of the satellite transponder capacity had already been committed for Devas. Also, when Devas exercised its option for the second satellite in June 2007 and Space Commission met to clear fabrication of Gsat-6A, no details regarding its commercial utilisation were provided to the commission.

Conveying the lack of transparency in procedures, DoS found that there was "misrepresentation of facts" in the note to the Cabinet that said ISRO had received several firm expressions of interest by service providers for utilization of the satellite capacity on commercial terms. "Even the financial outlay for GSAT 6A was kept below the 150 crore threshold to do away with the need for Cabinet approval," DoS said.

Interestingly, DoS' earlier note to the Cabinet Committee on Security that annulled the deal did not raise these procedural lapses. The note for the CCS - a copy of which is in the possession of ET - had only cited the increased demand for S-band spectrum for "strategic and societal needs" for cancelling the contract with Devas. "Taking note of the fact that government policies with regard to the allocation of spectrum have undergone a change in the last few years and there has been an increased demand for allocation of spectrum for national needs, including needs of defence, para-military forces, railways and other public utility services as well as societal needs...the government will not be able to provide orbit slot on S-band to Antrix for commercial activities," the note to the CCS had said.

What sticks out like a sore thumb to me is this part:

"Even the financial outlay for GSAT 6A was kept below the 150 crore threshold to do away with the need for Cabinet approval," DoS said.

Launch opportunities in India are rare. It would make sense to me that we'd make the heaviest satellite we can launch ourselves to take full advantage of the launch opportunity. I expect the heavier satellites to be more expensive. Also, if 90% of a satellite's capacity is for private use, I also also expect that satellite to have a profit margin. In comparison, GSAT-12 costs 90 crore for the launch and 80 crore for the satellite [1,410 kg] with a total cost of 170 crores, i.e. well over the 150 crore threshold. So how did we commit to a cheap GSAT 6a at less than 150 crores, i.e. 147 crores to be precise, when 90% of it is for private use?

I don't mean to rake up dirt, but I don't think this is just an ego clash we're talking about here. This isn't just political vendetta.

[arunsrinivasan]

Ramana, in my cousin's opinion he says there is no corruption - Devas offered a lumpsum upfront & a revenue share afterwards to Antrix. If the decision was wrong, it was not malafide, but a genuine mistake on their part nothing more. I did not want to grill him too much .

On the debarring these four people, he say it is the current chairman's work & who is reacting to historical issues between him & some of these people involved. Funnily enough the current chairman was groomed into his role by the previous chairman. His take is there is too much of politicking of late, people split by region, camps etc.

[disha]

The Economic Times - Antrix-Devas deal: Government yet to take action against those responsible
What sticks out like a sore thumb to me is this part:

"Even the financial outlay for GSAT 6A was kept below the 150 crore threshold to do away with the need for Cabinet approval," DoS said.

Launch opportunities in India are rare. It would make sense to me that we'd make the heaviest satellite we can launch ourselves to take full advantage of the launch opportunity. I expect the heavier satellites to be more expensive. Also, if 90% of a satellite's capacity is for private use, I also also expect that satellite to have a profit margin. In comparison, GSAT-12 costs 90 crore for the launch and 80 crore for the satellite [1,410 kg] with a total cost of 170 crores, i.e. well over the 150 crore threshold. So how did we commit to a cheap GSAT 6a at less than 150 crores, i.e. 147 crores to be precise, when 90% of it is for private use?

I don't mean to rake up dirt, but I don't think this is just an ego clash we're talking about here. This isn't just political vendetta.

I would not be the first to cast stone when this things are indeed complex and the trust factor on this DDM journos is negative. In the article there were several inflammatory statements like "even in USA or Japan"., which might be true for their commercial space activities but not necessarily applicable for Indian space commercialization.

Further the article clearly confuses leasing of transponders with leasing of spectrum and goes only on the report from DoS which is a babudom tangle.

Now to your point, ISRO might have commited to a cheap GSAT to make sure that it gets internally funded, you and I do not for sure know what is their threshold to get it internally funded vis obtaining funding from DoS/GOI. It could be that if it crosses a certain threshold then it should be insured but the cost of insurance itself may outpace the actual cost of building the satellite! So this factors do come into play and one liner without a complete background on the process internally does not do much justice.

Another thing I have noticed is that lot of journos go around their jobs by putting masala into what they consider might be salacious tips or newsbits that can make their article published. I have seen Indian DDM journos and very few (almost negligible) have indepth understanding of the processes. Their ignorance is only matched by their arrogance.

So yes, will not put store on one insane article from con'mic times and tar and feather an entire organizations.

BTW, this "scandals" are not common to only ISRO. ISRO is evolving and such issues will hopefully lay down proper processes. That is what I am watching for, hopefully everybody learns their lessons and make sure this kind of situations are avoided in first place.

[ramana]

So what and who is Devas that got such a sweetheart deal? They keep saying its a NRI firm. Do they have name for the principals in that firm?

I think there is black lentils.

[svinayak]

Get me the name of the NRI firm. Some groups which can track it down

[Pranav]

There were reports saying Madeline Halfbright and many other big guns were lobbying for the deal. IIRC, there was a clause that the spectrum allotted could even be used for terrestrial applications, which would have made the 2G scam look like peanuts.

[mikehurst]

So what and who is Devas that got such a sweetheart deal? They keep saying its a NRI firm. Do they have name for the principals in that firm?

I think there is black lentils.

Might be able to help on this front, from available public sources. Will try to find and upload info on shareholder details for Devas.

If it is of any help, below is given the names and details of the present directors of the company:

Ramachandran Viswanathan 7700 MARBURY ROAD, BETHESDA, MD, 20817, , UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Director 25/06/2005

RAJENDRA SINGH 23 INDIAN CREEK ISLAND ROAD, INDIAN CREEK VILLAGE, NA, 33154, , UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Director 19/05/2006

ARUN KUMAR GUPTA 7432, OLD MAPLE SQUARE, MCLEAN, VA, 022102, , UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Director 19/05/2006

CHANDRASEKHAR GANGARUDRAIAH MUTHUGADAHALLI 284/C, 40TH CROSS, 9-A MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE, 560041, Karnataka, INDIA Director 25/06/2005

VENUGOPAL DESARAJU G-02, NO.26 9TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, PALASHA APARTMENTS, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE, 560003, Karnataka, INDIA Director 01/04/2008

LAWRENCE THOMAS BABBIO JUNIOR 720 PARK AVE 16A, NEW YORK, 10021, , UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Director 26/09/2007

GARY MICHAEL PARSONS 11009 STANMORE DR, POTOMAC M, MD, 20854, , UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Director 26/09/2007

SHYAM NARAIN TANDON C-2, NIRALANAGAR, LUCKNOW, 226020, Uttar Pradesh, INDIA Director 01/04/2008

VADIRAJ RAGHAVENDRA KATTI No.603, 9th A Main, 14th Cross, ISRO Layout, Bangalore, 560078, Karnataka, INDIA Nominee director 01/04/2008

NATARAJ DAKSHINAMURTHY Jade 202, Esteem Heritage Apts., Rose Garden Road, Behind Dollars Colony, J P Nagar 5th Phase, Bangalore, 560078, Karnataka, INDIA Director 09/02/2011

ANIL ANANT BOKIL 496, 9TH MAIN, ISRO LAYOUT, 12TH CROSS, BANGALORE, 560078, Karnataka, INDIA Nominee director 28/02/2011

Kevin Donald Copp Koernerstr. 5e, Bonn, 53173, , GERMANY Nominee director 18/08/2008

Neeraj Sharma M-11, Greater kailash, Part-I, New Delhi, 110048, Delhi, INDIA Director 09/02/2011

Sajal Kumar Roy Choudhuri 8, FL 24, Anil Moitra Road, Gariahat, Kolkata, 700019, West Bengal, INDIA Nominee director 01/05/2011

VINOD SUNDER R 488, 9TH MAIN, 6TH CROSS, II BLOCK, I STAGE, HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE, 560043, Karnataka, INDIA Secretary 01/04/2008

Any idea how to insert an index on this forum.

- Mike.