Indian Space Program Discussion

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jan 2011 09:18

However there is no seal between the connectors. No teflon O ring etc. So it can't trap air.

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 07 Jan 2011 17:46

Small Satellite Revolution Taking Root at Universities

A 'small' revolution has taken root at some universities across the country.

With a little push from the Indian space agency, more and more students are now building small satellites.

These satellites ride to the outer space as piggyback payloads on Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) rockets that put into orbit bigger earth observation satellites.

"For the past five years we have been encouraging university students to build satellites.It gives them an avenue to explore this field and also helps us develop human resource for our space programme," D V A Raghava Murthy, Project Director, Small Satellites, ISRO told PTI.

The SRM University, which is hosting the 98th Indian Science Congerss, will be the first institute to have a satellite launch this year.

Last year, ISRO had put into orbit Studsat -- a tiny earth observation satellite built by 35 students from engineering colleges in Bangalore and Hyderabad. Prior to that, the agency had launched Anusat, another satellite developed by students.

At present, five institutes -- IIT-Kanpur, IIT-Mumbai, Indian Institute of Space Technology, Sathyabhama Institute and Vellore Institute of Technology -- are building small satellites.

"We have been getting nano satellites developed by foreign countries for being launched. We thought why not our own universities develop satellites," Murthy said.

The space agency has been getting hundreds of applications for developing small satellites from universities across the country.

"We evaluate every application and the science proposal before going ahead with a project. ISRO scientists work closely with the universities that are selected for the project," he said.

A group of 35 students from the SRM University have been working on 'SRMSAT' since 2008. The satellite weighing just 10 kg and at a cost of Rs one crore will monitor trace gases from space.

"The satellite will monitor GHG - mainly carbon dioxide - in the atmosphere. A grating spectrometer is employed for monitoring earth-based sources and sinks of anthropogenic and natural sources of GHG," he said.

The students from 12 disciplines of engineering in the university have been working closely with the ISRO to develop the nano satellite.

The SRMSAT is expected to be put into orbit by the middle of the year as a piggyback payload during the launch of Indo-French satellite Meghatropiques.

Last year, students of IIT Kanpur handed over a nano satellite --Jugnu -- developed by them to the ISRO for launch.

Murthy said such smaller satellites can also be used to test new technologies or equipment which could be scaled up for bigger missions after their success is proven.

The life of a small satellite is much less -- a few months -- compared to the larger ones which last for more than a decade.

Smaller satellites have emerged as low cost options the world over for carrying out specific activities in outer space.

There are over 1,000 satellites weighing less than 100 kgs launched in the last 30 years, T K Alex, Director of the ISRO Satellite Centre, said.

Small satellites have good potential due to their innovative approach to technology and their low cost which enables scientists to take risks, he said, adding that these little birds are suited for a wide spectrum of space missions for proving new ideas in communication and sensor technologies, biology experiments and advanced propulsion technologies.

Alex said space scientists were now exploring possibilities for launching a swarm of satellites that could orbit the earth in various formations.

This idea comes from a flock of birds who fly together without colliding into each other.

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?707553

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 07 Jan 2011 20:46

India to have own satellite navigation system soon: ISRO http://www.zeenews.com/news678670.html

Chennai: India will shortly join a select group of nations having its own satellite navigation system called Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS) offering position, navigation and timing (PNT) services, an official of India's space agency said Wednesday.

"The IRNSS is a constellation of seven satellites - to be increased to 11 later - to offer PNT services that could be used by various organisations globally or regionally," said Suresh V. Kibe of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

Speaking at the 98th Indian Science Congress held at SRM University in Kattankulathur near here, Kibe said there are two operational space navigation systems in the world -- US-owned Global Positioning System (GPS) and Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) belonging to Russia.

He said that Europe's Galileo system and Chinese COMPASS system are also expected to be operational in the next five to ten years.

The PNT services find application in mobile phones, vehicles, aviation, maritime, emergency services, survey and others including military, Kibe said.

In the next 10 years, the number of navigation satellites is expected to be around 100, he said.

On ISRO's GAGAN (GPS Aided Geo Augmented Navigation) project, Kibe said it will be used for landing of aircrafts with an accuracy of six metres and the target date of activating the system is 2012.

With the interests of space faring nations in exploring space colonization, emeritus professor P. Dayanandan said it is time for India to have a comprehensive space biology programme for self reliance and the success of current and planned space explorations.

He said 14 nations of the International Space Exploration Coordination Group hope that someday humans may live in other planets, most probably Mars and the most challenging issue is providing a permanent life support system.

prao · Post by **prao** » 07 Jan 2011 23:04

I was thinking about the connectors some more and I realized that a seal like O-rings wouldn't be possible because it would make it difficult to connect the two halves together (the air inside would be resist compression).

So a modified version of my theory is that after the halves were joined, the connectors were sealed from the outside with some substance to keep out moisture etc. That seal made the connectors airtight and caused the halves to separate at altitude.

Like I said I think it's unlikely but I'm just developing it to a plausible end.

SSSalvi · Post by **SSSalvi** » 08 Jan 2011 14:32

The connectors on launch vehicles are something which have been in use since ages in both GSLVs and the well operational PSLVs.

So assumption that a wrong connector was chosen ( even if a new type is used for the first time ) appears to be remote.

What can creep in even after several successful flights is carelessness at assembly and overconfidence at supervision and monitoring level.

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 08 Jan 2011 19:08

One more guess scenario: because of the lengthened stage, the play in the cables got reduced. As the vehicle passed through high aerodynamic stress the vibration of the vehicle caused the cables to flap and pulled out the connectors from the mating connector.
We are all guessing here desperately, in the dark, without knowing the actual innards of the vehicle. We will know only when ISRO completes its analysis, but in the time time it is so difficult not to keep guessing....

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 08 Jan 2011 19:28

SSSalvi wrote:The connectors on launch vehicles are something which have been in use since ages in both GSLVs and the well operational PSLVs.

So assumption that a wrong connector was chosen ( even if a new type is used for the first time ) appears to be remote.

What can creep in even after several successful flights is carelessness at assembly and overconfidence at supervision and monitoring level.

If this was a PSLV, it could be carelessness with several successful flights. This is GSLV with a failure from previous flight and not so successful streak.

I see this carelessness is repeated by others. Don't know how probable to attribute this as reason for the failure in GSLV whereas the failure from previous flight is expected to hang in everyone's mind.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 08 Jan 2011 22:21

juvva wrote:One more guess scenario: because of the lengthened stage, the play in the cables got reduced. As the vehicle passed through high aerodynamic stress the vibration of the vehicle caused the cables to flap and pulled out the connectors from the mating connector.

Or it could be Resonance build up of vibrations, remember this was a modified structure than the previous. And the vibrations of highest amplitude would have built up in top end of the rocket, the point most distant from the propelled end. Eventually as the vibrations got beyond a threshold, the cables snapped and things start to give away starting from the top.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jan 2011 09:46

Arya, The random vibe due to F/S wont travel to the payload section as it will get damped. Generally Random vibe is due to the rocket motor exhaust and is most severe in the functioning stage. Think of a long banana shook at the end. The vibes wont get to the other end. However shock for first stage will travel. However the vehicle traveled ~47 secs before the anomaly started. So something else happened.

The modified structure would be analysed for 1:500 expected flight loads and all resonant frequencies already identified.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 11 Jan 2011 12:21

ISRO not to be blamed for GSLV launch (failure): Nair
http://www.hindustantimes.com/ISRO-not- ... 48694.aspx

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 11 Jan 2011 12:28

Lost connection sinks India's GSLV launch attempt
By Gayle Putrich
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... tempt.html

Faulty connectors and cables were the cause of the 25 December failure of the Geostationary Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV), the second of 2010 for the Indian Space Research Organisation, a space agency panel has determined.

The "untimely and inadvertent snapping" of a group of 10 connectors at the bottom of the rocket's Russian-supplied upper stage caused the on-board computer near the top of the GSLV to lose communications with the control systems for the four L40 strap-on boosters that augment the rocket's first stage.

The connectors are built to snap apart on command, 292s after lift-off, but, for reasons still being investigated, they broke early. The GSLV flight was normal until 47.5s after lift-off, but from there the rocket lost orientation and began to break up under stress at 54s. A self destruct command was sent from the ground station 64s after lift-off.

An additional seven-member panel, led by former ISRO chairman K Kasturirangan, has been set up to examine the future of India's GSLV programme, including forecasting the vehicle's reliability for the Chandrayaan-2 mission to the Moon, scheduled for 2013.

Results from both the launch and programme reviews are expected at the end of February, says the ISRO.

During April's failed launch attempt, the performance of the GSLV-D3 vehicle was normal through the second stage. After a 293s burn of the first two stages, the cryogenic stage was supposed to ignite and burn for about 720s, sending the GSAT-4 satellite into the intended geosynchronous transfer orbit. The third stage never lit and the vehicle tumbled, lost altitude and eventually splashed down in the sea.

In the past decade, the GSLV has failed in four out of seven launch attempts.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 12 Jan 2011 12:15

Edusat stops operations, leaves students in lurch

nits · Post by **nits** » 13 Jan 2011 16:28

ISRO mum on how 684 of its staff died in last 15 years

ISRO does not want to reveal the details about its employees' deaths. When Mumbai-based Right To Information activist Chetan Kothari tried to find out how many of ISRO's employees had died in the last 15 years at the agency and its associate units, he was provided with a bureaucratic jargon.

Although the agency replied that 684 persons had died in the last 15 years at ISRO and its associate units, it had withheld the cause of their deaths.

Last year, Kothari had obtained similar information from nuclear establishments and related organizations in which all of the government bodies had provided the cause of death. The revelation then had been startling, as it showed that 197 employees had committed suicide across all the nuclear establishments and related institutes in the last 15 years, while 1733 had died of various illness.

1) ISRO - 684 death in 15 Years, i.e, average 45 Employees Per Year ( roufghly 4 death per month)

2) Nuclear Installations - 1733 + 197 = 1930.average 128 Employees Per Year ( roufghly 64 death per month)

I know this is pure stats and we just can't go with figures but its highly alarming...

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 13 Jan 2011 17:36

^^ one should not look at absolute number of deaths but take into account total no. of employees, age profile & compare that with similar data for general population and only then draw conclusions. Looking at absolute number of deaths in isolation, leads only to needless alarm and erroneous conclusions.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 13 Jan 2011 17:38

These numbers are meaningless. I don't like the tone of this entire article. This is clearly an attempt at maligning a vaunted institution without actually alleging any work related circumstances.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 13 Jan 2011 20:56

http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Ind ... t_999.html

Apart from the rather poor track record of GSLV launches, another problem is at play. The GLSV has gradually evolved over the course of its launches. The most recent GSLV is substantially different from the first.

These changes have been good in principle, and have focused on improving the rocket and phasing in indigenous technology. In practice, the numerous changes make it hard to generate a reliable statistical base for the overall launch campaign. Can earlier launches truly be used to evaluate the reliability of a new model of the rocket?

In some ways, this "apples and oranges" problem makes things look good. Some of the earlier failures can be written off as teething troubles with a new and unevolved prototype. In other ways, it looks even worse.

The failure rate of more advanced versions of the rocket remains high, and the overall statistical base is even smaller. Furthermore, failures seem to happen for different reasons on different launches. This could suggest problems with multiple sub-systems, which further complicates the debugging process.

Man rating the GSLV will require ISRO to settle on a design and test it extensively, demonstrating a good performance record. This will require a lot of work to make the rocket more reliable, and a high flight rate in the years ahead.

SSSalvi · Post by **SSSalvi** » 13 Jan 2011 21:12

^^^

he figure of deaths at ISRO, excluding its headquarters, in the last 15 years is 387, while at its associate units of ISRO Telemetry, Tracking And Command Centre, Space Applications Centre and Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre and ISRO HQ the figure of dead employees was 297.

Headquarters is one of the smallest unit .. no technical facilities ... 297 deaths there means mental strain caused the death or what?

This number is more than any other technical units.

Generally rights activists want to prove that the technical work is hazardous.. so should it be stopped? If it is stopped will not the same activist demand : " why we are not into forefront in these areas?"

By the way for the strength of almost 20K .. is it alarming over 15 years?

First batch of veterans must be nearing 70 yrs age .. so what is alarming.

( yours truly may not be 1st batch but surely 1.1 or 1.2 th batch .. joined fresh after studies ... now 62+ yrs )

RTI is a very effective tool .. so needs to be used carefully and conclusions should be unbiased.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 13 Jan 2011 21:45

Indonauts Must Wait For A Better Rocket

by Morris Jones
Sydney, Australia (SPX) Jan 13, 2011
The 2010 Christmas Day failure of India's Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle was a sad blow to India's space program. ISRO, India's space agency, lost a rocket and a major satellite.
Out of a total of seven launches, only two are judged to be complete successes. Four were unquestionable failures (including both of the launch attempts in 2010). One 2007 flight is judged to be a partial failure, placing a satellite in the wrong orbit.

In a major setback, GSLV-F06 powered by Russian Cryogenic stage, with GSAT-5P communication satellite on board, failed in its mission yesterday following a technical problem soon after the liftoff from the Sriharikota spaceport in Andhra Pradesh.

The GSAT-5P, meant to give a boost to communication services, including TV, telephone and telemedicine, was originally scheduled for launch on December 20 but was postponed a day earlier after a leak was noticed in the cryogenic stage during pre-countdown checks.

This is madness in the guise of patriotism,.Why they keep on sending costly/strategic satellites using a unreliable vehicle?

To put it simple if you have got 3 cars ,and you have to cover a very long distance to fulfill an important task , you wont select a car which has a breakdown average of 70% of the total trips made ,. One might select a more reliable yet costly method to do an important mission , until and unless the third car is made fully reliable .
GSLV must be tested many times with smaller/dummy payloads before it is made fully operational

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 13 Jan 2011 21:59

The only other option was to send the satellite through european space agency and pay of course double the cost of this total launch.

GSLV was selected not because of "patriotism" but because PSLV cannot send that satellite.

India cannot send a satellite of such size without GSLV. You aint got 3 cars, you got only one car which however rickety it is, is the only car. Or you pay through the nose to the rental car.

So deal with your anguish and face the truth.

by the way 150 crores is a mere 33 million, loss due to launch, when converted to dollars.

Now compare this 150 crores with the figures in scams going around and then come back with the "patriotism" rant.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 13 Jan 2011 22:50

Its a lame excuse to rely on an unreliable gslv because pslv cant be used for an important mission

And other vehicles(rusian,european,,ie 2 other cars) cant be used,but their engines can be, because we had previously thought it to work correctly,because we are masters in assembling computers,so we can do the same with a rocket.

AFAIK , the issue I raised is simple , and the point is simple that we dont correct correct ourselves and resist change.

Its not good that we always ignore the mistakes of highly decorated government organizations and keep on blaming germans,russians,etc. It is a dangerous practice, much more dangerous than feeble rants

BTW ,What is the cost of credibility, 150 crore?

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 13 Jan 2011 22:55

JTull wrote:These numbers are meaningless. I don't like the tone of this entire article. This is clearly an attempt at maligning a vaunted institution without actually alleging any work related circumstances.

True. India's death rate is ~7.5 per thousand per year. Going by SSalvi-ji's figure of 20k employees assuming the employees were from all ages that would imply ~140 deaths per year. Granted that they are of a particular age group (kids/and really old people excluded) and from a narrower economic strata (when compared to whole of India), the figures need to be adjusted accordingly -- but if someone were to tell me that 140 people out of randomly selected 20,000 died per year, I wouldnt be surprised at all.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Jan 2011 23:38

JTull wrote:These numbers are meaningless. I don't like the tone of this entire article. This is clearly an attempt at maligning a vaunted institution without actually alleging any work related circumstances.

This is a foreign agency news lifafa with false image.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 14 Jan 2011 00:03

Samay wrote:Its a lame excuse to rely on an unreliable gslv because pslv cant be used for an important mission

and whose engine/upper stage was it, the russian.

tells me a lot about your knowledge of ISRO.

Who blamed anyone except you blaming ISRO, that they dont take decisions professionally, but in "madness in guise of patriotism".

AFAIK , the issue I raised is simple , and the point is simple that we dont correct correct ourselves and resist change.

No where in your earlier post, have you raised your "simple point", unless you go and change it now.

Read about how many launches took place before PSLV was reliable. read how many launches took place before european/russian/american rockets became reliable.

You think that these failures were not part of Isro before today? Read through its launches in 80s. The 90s and early 00s was the only phase when the launches were reliable, PSLV. All through that phase whenever a big communication satellite was launched, our only option was to go to the europeans.

Its not good that we always ignore the mistakes of highly decorated government organizations and keep on blaming germans,russians,etc. It is a dangerous practice, much more dangerous than feeble rants

Even today, the "unchanged" PSLV is reliable. It's the "changing" GSLV which is not yet reliable

BTW ,What is the cost of credibility, 150 crore?

credibility?? Using your logic Pakistan's Suarco has more credibilty than Isro because they didnt have a failure.

And other vehicles(rusian,european,,ie 2 other cars) cant be used,but their engines can be, because we had previously thought it to work correctly,because we are masters in assembling computers,so we can do the same with a rocket.

I will not directly respond to your stupid flame

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 14 Jan 2011 00:14

And your knowledge of ISRO suggests that russians use the upper stage designed by ISRO ,in their rocket.?

And by your logic ,while we use their engine , but we are good at designing/launching gslv because pslv is successful?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 14 Jan 2011 00:38

Bade wrote:http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Ind ... t_999.html
Apart from the rather poor track record of GSLV launches, another problem is at play. The GLSV has gradually evolved over the course of its launches. The most recent GSLV is substantially different from the first.

The spate of articles coming shows that there was some knowledge of sabotage

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 14 Jan 2011 00:53

That is a possibility ,rather we should look at the picture from a different angle, that is sabotage to push isro out of the equation in international space explorations and market . The things we lag (like cryogenic engine) arent too big but crucial.
from the same article as above

Man rating the GSLV will require ISRO to settle on a design and test it extensively, demonstrating a good performance record. This will require a lot of work to make the rocket more reliable, and a high flight rate in the years ahead.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 14 Jan 2011 03:47

Samay wrote:That is a possibility ,rather we should look at the picture from a different angle, that is sabotage to push isro out of the equation in international space explorations and market . The things we lag (like cryogenic engine) arent too big but crucial.

Sabotage!! Really??

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 14 Jan 2011 05:48

talk about imaginations running wild...

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 14 Jan 2011 08:48

A systematic investigation should also consider the possibility of sabotage. Would not be good to have people with preconceived notions blocking a full inquiry.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 14 Jan 2011 14:11

The fishermen of North Chennai, around Pulicat, have been recovering several GSLV parts lately. The picture below shows the latest recovery.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 17 Jan 2011 20:30

ISRO to launch three satellites in 1st quarter of 2011

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jan 2011 22:27

x-posted:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1011942

I was speculating a while back that the computer worm, Stuxnet, that hit Iran could be a US and/or Israeli opertation. It now appears to be the case according to this NYT report

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world ... uxnet.html

I also speculated that the recent GSLV failures in India could be due to US sabotage. From the above report:

The worm hit primarily inside Iran, Symantec reported, but also in time appeared in India, Indonesia and other countries.

I have a question for the cyber-security gurus here:

1) From the above report, it appears to me that human in the loop is key, i.e, for those computers not reachable via the public Internet, somebody has to go and inject that worm into an Intranet system through a USB drive or something else. Yes/No?

2) Anyone knows if ISRO or BARC or any of India's sensitive installations use the Siemens PCS-7 control system software. This Stuxnet seems to be designed to specifically target PCS-7, and that too of a particular configuration according to the above report.

Or could be similar analogue program targetted to do the damage? Doesn't have to be Seimens controller.
It could be targetted for even LCA!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Jan 2011 23:34

sure, but why would ISRO/ADA be thread bare with the internet on such high national importance project. are we equating our networking skills and systems operational/ setup to the state of how Iran may have this setup loophole?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 17 Jan 2011 23:45

SaiK wrote:sure, but why would ISRO/ADA be thread bare with the internet on such high national importance project. are we equating our networking skills and systems operational/ setup to the state of how Iran may have this setup loophole?

Saik,

See the last phase in the diagram in the nyt link when it reaches the secure facility. All it needs is a naive/compromised person to use a pen drive both at his office and his home.

No need for ISRO/ADA to come out in the open. But just hope that they do take care in their protocols for these kinds of "mischieves".

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Jan 2011 23:56

well.. the assumptions here again is that our programs have the same operating systems to allow such things to happen., with an extended assumption that we would use portable programs or some one intentionally did this with a flash drive. the shiver aspect is that you say some "naive/compromised" person being let to handle these systems, is something that needs to clearly verified.

what i am saying the chances of that is so remote., and should that happen, the b@lls would be already rolling behind the scenes.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 18 Jan 2011 00:42

India Builds Its Own GPS

Under the IRNSS program, India will have a constellation of seven satellites, to be raised to eleven later, which will give unprecedented operational war-time leverage to the Indian military, apart from serving as an excellent infrastructure for a host of civilian applications like in the fields of civil aviation, agriculture and fisheries.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 18 Jan 2011 02:20

ravi_ku wrote:
SaiK wrote:sure, but why would ISRO/ADA be thread bare with the internet on such high national importance project. are we equating our networking skills and systems operational/ setup to the state of how Iran may have this setup loophole?
Saik,

See the last phase in the diagram in the nyt link when it reaches the secure facility. All it needs is a naive/compromised person to use a pen drive both at his office and his home.

No need for ISRO/ADA to come out in the open. But just hope that they do take care in their protocols for these kinds of "mischieves".

Let me assure you not even dumb cell phones are allowed inside ISRO facilities for the aam abdul. Forget penn drives and androids.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 18 Jan 2011 13:47

Opinion piece about the race between indian and chinese in space

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 19 Jan 2011 17:01

ISRO allocates Rs 9 cr for research on manned space mission

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 20 Jan 2011 13:17

This post comes in very late in the day for this.
This is a frame by frame analysis of the GSLV launch failure by what all I could make out.

Enlarged images: