So Dishaji, from a layman pov, it's basically moving up the "specific impulse" chain while having a eye on the costs as well.disha wrote:<snip>
...
This not just brings the cost down but also increases launch efficiency.
I think ISRO is hedging its bets., it has the cryo-tech and will scale that up. However scaling up the cryo-tech (to reach US Space Shuttle SSME levels) is not easy and in the meantime the semi-cryo stage provides a stop gap measure and takes care of one risk variable., that is any delay in scaling up the cryo stage does not effect the overall launch programmes.
Also ISRO has demonstrated that it can scale up its solid booster tech. Getting a 5 MN 200 tonne booster is no mean achievement.
Newer variants of solid boosters are in the offing., for example boosters based on CL-20 with carbon fibre and graphene can push the ISP of a solid booster way past a semi-cryogenic one. The current issue here is the cost of such nitramine based compounds like CL-20.
...
<snip>
So we are trying to implement a full spectrum of "specific impulse" value chain, with,
Cryo (e.g. CE20, LH-LoX based) - 360-380s > Semi-cryo (e.g. SCE-200, Kerosene/LOX based) - 310-335s > Liquid (e.g. L110) - 293s > Solid (e.g. S200, HTPB based) - 275s.
Which basically means, whilst replacing L110 stages with Semi-cryo offers not too much wrt launch efficiency etc, it does so, if replacing the solid stages. But for that we need 5K kN-class engines while current SCE-200 is at 2K kN-class.
Other alternate option is to continue to pursue the high-energy-but-expensive-and-unproven solid stages (like CL-20 based ones with 320s specific impulse) which provides semi-cryo comparable launch efficiency levels.
So yes, semi-cryo SCE-200 is all about hedging bets - a backup option actually for all stages (maybe except the Cryo Upper stage).