Indian Space Programme Discussion

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 May 2016 09:12

I have frame grabbed the thermal shroud being ripped off as the PSLV launcher leaves the pad. It is supposed to be ripped off due to some ties attached to the umbilical tower. If you see the video the Styrofoam ? shroud is painted white with the PSLV logo just like the metal casing below it so when the shroud is ripped off it reveals the same logo painted on the metal casing like a magic trick !!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 May 2016 12:02

Exotic heat-resistant gel: a spinoff from ISRO - K.S. Sudhi, The Hindu

A near-invisible silica gel that would serve as a thermal barrier in cryogenic fuel tanks, boot soles and sun films may sound like a magical product straight from a sci-fi.

But it’s a tangible reality that researchers of the Indian Space Research Organization at its Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvananthapuram, have made possible.

The yet to be christened product, the hydrophobic silica aero gel as it is known now, is supposed to have low thermal conductivity and density and high specific surface area and can be applied on any surface.

With its “exotic properties,” silica aero gels are attractive candidates for many unique thermal, optical, acoustic, catalytic and chemical applications and are best known for their “super-insulating property.”

Silica aero gels can be made in chunks (granular), beads, powder and tape or sheet form, and may be used as the application demands, according to VSSC.

As air fills the gel up to 95 per cent of its size, it comes as super lightweight material. The air molecules trapped inside the gel would act as insulators, and its heat conductivity is close to zero. They could be used for coating the windows of houses and vehicles as they would let in 95 per cent of the light that falls on the surface and fully deflect the heat.

“The researchers stumbled upon the exotic properties of the gel during their search for a super thermal insulator for the cryogenic fuel tanks of rockets. The temperature on the surface of the rockets is likely to be between 300 and 400 degree Celsius during its flight, and the cryogenic fuel needs to be insulated. Thus, the gel was developed,” explained K. Sivan, director, VSSC.

As the gel acts as a thermal barrier, it could be used as a protective component of clothes and boots of solders stationed in extremely cold regions such as Siachen and Kargil. The weight of military clothes could be brought down to ordinary dresses after applying the gel over it thus giving the much required freedom of movement for the soldiers. To coat a jacket may require around 500 grams of gel. “Discussions are on with some textile developers for the design of cloths by applying gel over it,” said Dr. Sivan.

“Besides apparel for soldiers, the gel could also be used for heavy duty dresses used by researchers working in Arctic/Antarctic expeditions. For insulating cryogenic fuel tanks, 2.8 kg of gel is required. It needs to be produced in large quantities for commercial use and discussions are on with some entrepreneurs,” he explained.

“ISRO has offered the knowhow of the technology to suitable entrepreneurs in India and the benefits from the transfer of technology would go to the country,” he said.

The other applications of the material include acoustic insulations, building and pipeline insulation and window facades as translucent panels which allow natural light but not heat for hot areas where air conditioners are and trapping heat in cold places.

It would also be used for controlling oil spills and vibration. Other applications include acoustic damping materials and insulation in refrigerators, fillers or additives in paints, sealants, adhesives, cement, coatings, foams, and for increasing the heat resistance of the material, according to VSSC sources.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 May 2016 16:42

^ Sridhar it was posted before .

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 08 May 2016 18:00

There appears to something extraordinary about this particular silica gel, because someone mentioned that silica gels have been used before.

The one developed by ISRO is a rare one, that only a few countries possess. Going by the tone and content of the article!

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 May 2016 18:57

Yes it is called aerogel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerogel

member_29404 · Post by **member_29404** » 10 May 2016 13:54

Looks like a lot of work has been done by Indian researchers in Technical University in Czech Republic. Google and you'll find a lot of papers about Aerogel.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 10 May 2016 18:44

Nozzle Testing Laboratories established at VSSC

Performance improvement in propulsion systems is essential towards achieving cost effective launch vehicles. Apart from propellant energetics, the nozzle plays a vital role in improving propulsion system performance. Therefore by improving performance of existing nozzles and by developing new nozzle concepts, which can operate at both low and high altitude regimes, it is possible to obtain significant gains in the delivered specific impulse of rockets. With these objectives, ISRO has established Nozzle Testing Laboratories (NTL) at Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvananthapuram.
The NTL consists of a Nitrogen gas generation and storage system, a graphite cored induction heater (for heating nitrogen), a test chamber, a diffuser system and heat exchanger, coolant system and power supply systems. The facility utilizes the available 6600 m3 capacity vacuum vessel of the Hypersonic Wind Tunnel (HWT) for simulation of altitude pressure. For nozzle performance evaluation, heated nitrogen gas is allowed to expand in nozzles kept in the test chamber having simulated altitude pressure. Gaseous nitrogen admitted to the storage heater from the top exits the heater at the required temperature. The facility utilises fast response pressure transducers and instrumentation to study nozzle phenomena. Nozzles up to Area Ratio (AR) 300 and more can be tested in the facility.

The NTL has the capability to cater to a wide range of studies related to nozzles such as:

Contour optimization for large AR nozzles
Flow separation, techniques for flow separation control
Nozzle wall heat transfer
Regenerative cooling
Supersonic film cooling
Evaluation of new nozzle concepts
Experimental validation of flow separation control devices with minimal modifications in the existing contour nozzles enabling high AR operation can be carried out. Specific tests can be devised and carried out to validate Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) predictions. The facility can also be used to carry out open jet heat transfer studies.

The Nozzle Testing Laboratories was inaugurated recently by Chairman, ISRO which is a unique facility established for the first time in the country towards carrying out advanced R&D in the area of rocket nozzle.

Inside view of NTL

A typical 100 AR nozzle developed for tests in the facility

Nozzle Testing Laboratories (NTL) Building at VSSC

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 10 May 2016 18:47

Nozzle Testing Laboratories established at VSSC

Performance improvement in propulsion systems is essential towards achieving cost effective launch vehicles. Apart from propellant energetics, the nozzle plays a vital role in improving propulsion system performance. Therefore by improving performance of existing nozzles and by developing new nozzle concepts, which can operate at both low and high altitude regimes, it is possible to obtain significant gains in the delivered specific impulse of rockets. With these objectives, ISRO has established Nozzle Testing Laboratories (NTL) at Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvananthapuram.
The NTL consists of a Nitrogen gas generation and storage system, a graphite cored induction heater (for heating nitrogen), a test chamber, a diffuser system and heat exchanger, coolant system and power supply systems. The facility utilizes the available 6600 m3 capacity vacuum vessel of the Hypersonic Wind Tunnel (HWT) for simulation of altitude pressure. For nozzle performance evaluation, heated nitrogen gas is allowed to expand in nozzles kept in the test chamber having simulated altitude pressure. Gaseous nitrogen admitted to the storage heater from the top exits the heater at the required temperature. The facility utilises fast response pressure transducers and instrumentation to study nozzle phenomena. Nozzles up to Area Ratio (AR) 300 and more can be tested in the facility.

The NTL has the capability to cater to a wide range of studies related to nozzles such as:

Contour optimization for large AR nozzles
Flow separation, techniques for flow separation control
Nozzle wall heat transfer
Regenerative cooling
Supersonic film cooling
Evaluation of new nozzle concepts
Experimental validation of flow separation control devices with minimal modifications in the existing contour nozzles enabling high AR operation can be carried out. Specific tests can be devised and carried out to validate Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) predictions. The facility can also be used to carry out open jet heat transfer studies.

The Nozzle Testing Laboratories was inaugurated recently by Chairman, ISRO which is a unique facility established for the first time in the country towards carrying out advanced R&D in the area of rocket nozzle.

Inside view of NTL

A typical 100 AR nozzle developed for tests in the facility

Nozzle Testing Laboratories (NTL) Building at VSSC

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 13 May 2016 18:21

Prof U R Rao selected to receive 2016 IAF Hall of Fame Award

Prof U R Rao, former Chairman, ISRO and Secretary, Department of Space is being honoured by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF) with the 2016 ‘IAF Hall of Fame’ Award, for his outstanding contribution to the progress of astronautics within the framework of the IAF activities.

The IAF award is intended to reward personalities for their contributions to the progress of astronautics and the Federation. In the letter to Prof Rao by the President, IAF stated that, ‘It is a true honour for IAF to attribute this award to Prof Rao, who have been for many years an active participant to the success of space in general and of the Federation in particular’.

The IAF Hall of Fame consists of a permanent gallery of these personalities, including a citation, biographical information, and a picture, in a special part of the IAF web presence. This year’s 67th International Astronautical Congress will be held in Guadalajara, Mexico during September 26 – 30, 2016. Prof Rao will receive the ‘IAF Hall of Fame’ Award and a certificate, during the closing ceremony on Friday, September 30, 2016.

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 15 May 2016 10:05

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 276174.cms

The RLV-TD is unlikely to be recovered from sea during this experiment as it is expected that the vehicle will disintegrate on impact with water since it is not designed to float. The purpose of the experiment is not to see it float but to glide and navigate from a velocity five times higher than the speed of sound onto a designated virtual runway in the Bay of Bengal some 500 km from the coast.
Very similar in its looks to the American space shuttle, the RLV-TD being experimented is a scale model which is almost 6 times smaller than the final version.
K Sivan, director of the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, says, "These are just the first baby steps towards the big Hanuman leap."

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 15 May 2016 17:01

A Nandy wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 276174.cms

The RLV-TD is unlikely to be recovered from sea during this experiment as it is expected that the vehicle will disintegrate on impact with water since it is not designed to float. The purpose of the experiment is not to see it float but to glide and navigate from a velocity five times higher than the speed of sound onto a designated virtual runway in the Bay of Bengal some 500 km from the coast.
Very similar in its looks to the American space shuttle, the RLV-TD being experimented is a scale model which is almost 6 times smaller than the final version.
K Sivan, director of the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, says, "These are just the first baby steps towards the big Hanuman leap."

Was always the plan. The recovery part will be the next phase called LEX (Landing EXperiment) where the test article will landon a runway after hypersonic suborbital flight. I believe there was talk of building a long enough runway for this purpose.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 15 May 2016 17:52

It is not clear whether they will use the space shuttle model or capsule model for manned missions as development seems to be going on in both directions.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 15 May 2016 18:32

Gagan wrote:More Vehicle Assembly buildings seem to be coming up on the new launch pad.
There are already 2 along the main railway transport line, one seems to be perpendicular and another at an angle...

Just some clarifications.

What you refer to as the new VAB on the existing line is actually the solid stage assembly building, This building, built with the LVM3 and other future bugger launchers in mind, is where the S200 solid stages are assembled before the entire vehicle is assembled in the VAB.

The second VAB and associated SSAB are under construction as shown.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 May 2016 14:47

ISRO's RLV-TD Reusable Launch Vehicle technology Demonstrator - ISRO making india proud

Ashokk · Post by **Ashokk** » 16 May 2016 16:08

Image of the RLV TD - HEX prototype

Ashokk · Post by **Ashokk** » 16 May 2016 16:17

NDTV - ISRO Embarks On Launching Indian Space Shuttle - RLV

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 16 May 2016 17:03

Austin wrote:ISRO's RLV-TD Reusable Launch Vehicle technology Demonstrator - ISRO making india proud

Nice video, though they could have been more clear about the actual demonstrator vehicle being tested next month- the film makes it look like the prototype is going to have a semi- cryogenic engine, and the main section a cryogenic engine. That I'm sure is not what is being flown in June! IIRC, the test vehicle will have a conventional solid booster, and some scramjet in the second stage(?). They do talk about the TD, but only after confusing/misleading stuff about the composition.

Question, not deathly important- would the nice instrumental music in this video have been produced in India itself, or taken from elsewhere?

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 16 May 2016 18:21

I couldn't find any concrete answers through Google chacha. However it looks like ISRO is doubling down on reusable shuttle option and not reusable rockets like Space X. Is there a plan in the medium future to develop reusable rockets?

It looks to me that a mature space program would need both. Can experts comment on the strategy of ISRO. There was one news article in ToI that talked about SpaceX beating ISRO in terms of cost advantage once their reusable rockets mature.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 288965.cms

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 16 May 2016 19:17

There was one news article in ToI that talked about SpaceX beating ISRO in terms of cost advantage once their reusable rockets mature.

They havent refurbished and launched any of the 3 returned boosters yet, so we don't really know cost-wise yet. If it does turn out that way, I wonder how long it would take for us to start returning the booster which will launch the RLV itself.

That should certainly undercut SpaceX

Provided we have the funding to go through all the steps. SpaceX seems to be building upon a long history of reusability related programmes like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X

The recovery part will be the next phase called LEX (Landing EXperiment) where the test article will landon a runway after hypersonic suborbital flight. I believe there was talk of building a long enough runway for this purpose.

So for the next stage of the experiment, the LEX - where could they build this long runway? SHAR?

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 16 May 2016 19:30

schinnas wrote:I couldn't find any concrete answers through Google chacha. However it looks like ISRO is doubling down on reusable shuttle option and not reusable rockets like Space X. Is there a plan in the medium future to develop reusable rockets?

It looks to me that a mature space program would need both. Can experts comment on the strategy of ISRO. There was one news article in ToI that talked about SpaceX beating ISRO in terms of cost advantage once their reusable rockets mature.

ISROs approach to reusability, as of now, is the RLV TSTO. A 2 staged rocket with lower stage being a semicryogenic flyback booster and the upper stage being retrieved through parachutes. This was (is) their approach. They are also working on air breathing scramjet engines.

The TD missions will allow ISRO to develop the technology needed for the TSTO.

Just to make things clear. It is NOT a space shuttle.

Is this approach the best? Very difficult to say. Only time will tell. As of now there 3 approaches to lower stage reusability.
1. Flyback booster (RLV TSTO, Energia Uragan (never fully realized)) - The boosters have wings and a lifting body design. After stagecutoff they fly back and land on a runway.
2. Hopper approach (SpacceX, BleuOrgin etc) - Using the boosters engines (actually just some of them) for controlled descent and land with the 'legs '
3. Flyback engine (proposed for Ariane 6) - Newest approach. Instead of the whole booster flying back, only the most important part, the engines are flown back and recovered.

The consensus is, approach 1 is more capital, effort intensive. Takes lots of development and costs. Approach 2 is somehat less complex in development compared to 1 but has other shortcomings (like having to carry much more fuel for the recovery phase). Approach 3 has been proposed a middle ground.

But, the fact of the matter is, the comparative savings from each of the above and how it would compare against an expendable system in the long term is still debatable.

EDIT: Where does the scramjet feature in all this? Basically, each stage carries its propellants (fuel and oxidizer). For most cases the oxidizer is oxygen. What a scarmjet does is, it takes the oxidizer from the air (hence air breathing). This saves the weight of having to also carry the oxidizer, now the stage can just carry the fuel.

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 16 May 2016 19:35

A Nandy wrote:
There was one news article in ToI that talked about SpaceX beating ISRO in terms of cost advantage once their reusable rockets mature.
They havent refurbished and launched any of the 3 returned boosters yet, so we don't really know cost-wise yet. If it does turn out that way, I wonder how long it would take for us to start returning the booster which will launch the RLV itself.

That should certainly undercut SpaceX
Provided we have the funding to go through all the steps. SpaceX seems to be building upon a long history of reusability related programmes like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X

The recovery part will be the next phase called LEX (Landing EXperiment) where the test article will landon a runway after hypersonic suborbital flight. I believe there was talk of building a long enough runway for this purpose.
So for the next stage of the experiment, the LEX - where could they build this long runway? SHAR?

1. HEX-01 isn't the design profile of RLV-TSTO. In TSTO, reusable part will be the booster which will fly back and land on the runway.
2. HEX-01 is a TD mission. The solid booster is there take the lifting body to a certain altitude from here it will glide hypersonically. Its a cheap way to develop the tech compared to using an actual semicryo booster.
3. The runway was planned to be built at SHAR. I am not aware where things stand now.

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 16 May 2016 19:36

...with lower stage being a semicryogenic flyback booster

Cool! so they are planning to retrieve the first stage.

HEX-01 isn't the design profile of RLV-TSTO. In TSTO, reusable part will be the booster which will fly back and land on the runway.

There really needs to be a like button for individual posts!

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 16 May 2016 19:47

Just for the record...

This is how the RLV TSTO is supposed to be.

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 16 May 2016 19:54

Usage of a parachute for the first stage recovery could certainly cut down on excess fuel requirements.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 16 May 2016 21:25

We have been seeing the PPTs/models of the RLV since probably before spaceX managed to successfully launch anything to orbit. How many years before we see an actual reusable launch vehicle from ISRO? 10 years? 20 years?
Meanwhile spacex intends to reuse one of its returned boosters this year itself. IMHO ISRO (and several other players) might become uncompetitive within 5 years.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 May 2016 22:09

^^
That 2nd stage ISRO TSTO recovery looks like a pipe dream aka science project. Musk has basically given up trying to recover the Falcon 9 2nd stage because it involves a ~60% payload penalty. Even without burning any additional fuel to slow it down, the weight penalty because of the heat shield required to slow down the TSTO 2nd stage from orbital velocity will make it a financial non starter. Not to mention that without lifting surfaces as well as engines to slow and maneuver it , the actual landing location will not be precise. A non precision landing area for India means a sea landing which will destroy the 2nd stage. India does not have the vast open spaces of Russia where such landings are possible.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 16 May 2016 22:13

Let us not forget that Elon Musk and others get preexisting technology handed over to them in a platter from NASA

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 May 2016 22:16

prasannasimha wrote:Let us not forget that Elon Musk and others get preexisting technology handed over to them in a platter from NASA

It's not what was handed on a platter. The approach should be to do what is practical i.e. even if only a 1st stage recovery is possible, work on that today and make it happen, rather than build castles in the air about a completely recoverable system. At least that way ISRO can maintain it's price edge and continue to compete with Musk etc.

disha · Post by **disha** » 16 May 2016 22:57

There is no reason to compare spacex to ISRO., and particularly what spacex is currently doing is half-way science experiments. Further spacex gets a sweetheart deal from US Gov/NASA including all the NASA engineers just because a). NASA could not figure its head from its a$$ and b). US wants to undercut other agencies - may actually come back and say other nations need to privatize their space programs and not subsidize it. They have enough Jean Druzes in India itself to entangle GOI/ISRO in that argument. Here US is playing a long game and using that to do rona-dhona against ISRO is being naive*.

ISRO has been on the RLV-TD/TSTO plan since almost a decade. ISROs RLV/TSTO plan is the *only* viable alternative to reduce cost of space travel. One of the competing space shuttle design was DC-3 and was a TSTO**. Of course US Airforce requirements doomed it. And no - it was no castle in the air., it was a very practical and competitively priced plan.

RLV/TSTO is scalable., the orbiter on top of the reusable flyback booster can be customized to requirements. It can carry a crew or additional cargo (or can be stacked, based on the size and dynamics of the reusable flyback booster).

*Coming to think of it., they should have tried the first artificial heart using ISRO technology on Jean Druze himself! For free.
** TSTO - Two stage to orbit

I do not mind it being called a desi space shuttle as long as it provides a very low cost safe way to go to space.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 16 May 2016 23:13

prasannasimha wrote:Let us not forget that Elon Musk and others get preexisting technology handed over to them in a platter from NASA

not exactly......

what he got was the design of the Apollo lunar landing module engine from NASA which is probably in the public domain anyway.

he then blew that engine up into the present day Merlin engine.

he did hire some ex-astronauts and NASA personnel but that is standard industry practice. (mainly for the development of the Dragon space capsule)

he also got the use of a US missile test site in the Kwajalein islands and the use of an old Navy facility at Mcgregor Tx near Fort Hood army base.

Musk manufactures his rockets under a secret process developed by his staff. He will not patent any of his technology for fear that the Chinese will read the patents and reverse engineer it.

not exactly handed to him on a platter.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 May 2016 23:29

disha wrote:
ISRO has been on the RLV-TD/TSTO plan since almost a decade. ISROs RLV/TSTO plan is the *only* viable alternative to reduce cost of space travel.

RLV/TSTO is scalable., the orbiter on top of the reusable flyback booster can be customized to requirements. It can carry a crew or additional cargo (or can be stacked, based on the size and dynamics of the reusable flyback booster).

I do not mind it being called a desi space shuttle as long as it provides a very low cost safe way to go to space.

What payload can it launch into LEO and GEO and at what cost/kg? The reason the US space shuttle was doomed was because of cost considerations. Fuel fraction to LEO and GEO vs revenue loss because of reduced payload vs cost of building new 2nd/1st stage.....

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 16 May 2016 23:37

ldev wrote:
disha wrote:
ISRO has been on the RLV-TD/TSTO plan since almost a decade. ISROs RLV/TSTO plan is the *only* viable alternative to reduce cost of space travel.

RLV/TSTO is scalable., the orbiter on top of the reusable flyback booster can be customized to requirements. It can carry a crew or additional cargo (or can be stacked, based on the size and dynamics of the reusable flyback booster).

I do not mind it being called a desi space shuttle as long as it provides a very low cost safe way to go to space.
What payload can it launch into LEO and GEO and at what cost/kg? The reason the US space shuttle was doomed was because of cost considerations. Fuel fraction to LEO and GEO vs revenue loss because of reduced payload vs cost of building new 2nd/1st stage.....

the present day x-37b is 29 feet long with a wing span of 14 feet and has a cargo bay about 5 x 6 feet big. the US Air Force seems to be very happy with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 May 2016 04:11

Yaa
What does the x37 B do exactly?
All those secret missions? Zero gravity manufacturing? Spying?

disha · Post by **disha** » 17 May 2016 05:13

TSJones wrote:
what he got was the design of the Apollo lunar landing module engine from NASA which is probably in the public domain anyway.

he then blew that engine up into the present day Merlin engine.

he did hire some ex-astronauts and NASA personnel but that is standard industry practice. (mainly for the development of the Dragon space capsule)

he also got the use of a US missile test site in the Kwajalein islands and the use of an old Navy facility at Mcgregor Tx near Fort Hood army base.

Musk manufactures his rockets under a secret process developed by his staff. He will not patent any of his technology for fear that the Chinese will read the patents and reverse engineer it.

not exactly handed to him on a platter.

It is just laughable to see an assertion of "not exactly handed to him on a platter".,

Apart from handing over designs of apollo lunar module., access to ex-astronauts and NASA personnel, access to missile test site ant the old navy facility.

Add to that access to the entire NASA launch sites from cape canaveral.

Point is, SpaceX did not have to build any infrastructure. Not just the infrastructure (incl. launch sites and monitoring platform developed and maintained by NASA)., SpaceX got the Falcon design's including the engine designs., the manufacturing jigs and trained personnel on top of it.

And after all of the above to say that "not exactly handed to him on a platter" is a joke of the year*

*Note: This does not take away any of Mian Musk's achievements. In fact it was his credentials that pushed NASA to think of COTS and move the production of the merlin engines into private hands. That way NASA can concentrate on science and next generation engineering.

This is Mian Musk's specific quote:

Musk has repeatedly said that, without the NASA money, development would have taken longer. SpaceX's statement about the NASA contract was:

SpaceX has only come this far by building upon the incredible achievements of NASA, having NASA as an anchor tenant for launch, and receiving expert advice and mentorship throughout the development process. SpaceX would like to extend a special thanks to the NASA COTS office for their continued support and guidance throughout this process. The COTS program has demonstrated the power of a true private/public partnership and we look forward to the exciting endeavors our team will accomplish in the future.[21]

A request., any further discussion of spacex should be taken off from this thread.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 17 May 2016 06:01

Space X has taken advantage of new composite materials for its manufacturing processes NOT dependent on the government;

Once that decision was made, SpaceX conducted an evaluation of available composites engineering solutions and decided that Siemens PLM (http://www.siemens.com/plm) Software’s Fibersim software was the best fit for its design and manufacturing environment.

SpaceX has used Fibersim to design and manufacture a variety of composite parts on both the Falcon rocket and the Dragon capsule. Fibersim is being used to develop production fiber placement diagrams and laser projection files. It is also used to assist with actual fiber placement for the spacecraft’s thermal protection system, including the heat shield, exterior panels, insulating layers on the rocket and spacecraft, and several panels around the nose cone and engines.

“Fibersim enables us to work in parallel between design and manufacturing, which is very important to us since we’re such a fast-paced organization,” notes Derek Lies, structural designer for composite panels used on the Dragon capsule. “It definitely helped improve the collaboration between design and manufacturing. And we also found that Fibersim very nicely captured the vocabulary of composites and provided an intuitive workflow, which enables our people who aren’t trained in composites to get up and running very quickly.”

that's just one example. and that's why it wasn't handed to them on a platter.....their willingness to adopt new techniques that no one else does.

and no one else is landing on a barge at sea.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 17 May 2016 06:24

disha wrote:US wants to undercut other agencies - may actually come back and say other nations need to privatize their space programs and not subsidize it.

They already are:

The FAA assured COMSTAC that the agency’s opinion would be part of the current review of whether India’s refusal to sign a Commercial Space Launch Agreement (CSLA) on rocket pricing still justifies the ban. The review, led by the U.S. Trade Representative, is the reason COMSTAC had raised the issue.

The CSLA, dating from 2005, is the U.S. government’s way of protecting the seemingly forever-nascent U.S. small-satellite launch industry from competing with government-controlled foreign launchers for U.S. business. It seeks to oblige non-U.S. rocket providers to sign a CSLA that, for all intents and purposes, sets U.S. commercial launch prices as the world minimum for government-owned non-U.S. launch providers.

Source: U.S. launch companies lobby to maintain ban on use of Indian rockets - Space News

disha · Post by **disha** » 17 May 2016 06:24

ldev wrote: What payload can it launch into LEO and GEO and at what cost/kg? The reason the US space shuttle was doomed was because of cost considerations. Fuel fraction to LEO and GEO vs revenue loss because of reduced payload vs cost of building new 2nd/1st stage.....

If the cost per kg comes down then the payload capacity is immaterial. RLV-TSTO's aim is to reduce the cost to 1/5th to 1/10th the current cost. You may come and say - how come I can launch a 10-ton sat to GTO? Well., you can launch 10 1-ton modules which will assemble itself in GTO and boost itself into GSO. The cost itself will still be 1/10th.

Reams of papers have been written on the shortcomings of Space Shuttle. In a nutshell, what doomed the shuttle was first the conflicting requirements (it had to be both heavy lift as well as crew capable) and the tradeoffs to launch the heavy shuttle itself. For example, instead of on top of booster, the safest place to be while you are on a booster., it was hitching a ride on the tank/booster (sort of hugging it). Challenger was a disaster when hot gases leaked off the SRB and detaching the SRB and breaking everything apart into a fireball. The crew compartment survived all of this (and more) and the crew actually survived the initial breakup - but not the impact on the ocean. Columbia was another breach in the tiles from falling debris., again if you are on top of it., the chances of falling debris hitting you is nil.

So it was a flawed design and NASA's chalta-hai culture with safety that doomed space shuttle and not the cost considerations and fuel faction to LEO/GEO vs revenue loss etc. Space shuttles were grounded totally for @6 years in its 30 years of service! Further, space shuttle was supposed to fly often and not like 4 launches a year.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 17 May 2016 08:05

disha wrote:
ldev wrote: If the cost per kg comes down then the payload capacity is immaterial. RLV-TSTO's aim is to reduce the cost to 1/5th to 1/10th the current cost. You may come and say - how come I can launch a 10-ton sat to GTO? Well., you can launch 10 1-ton modules which will assemble itself in GTO and boost itself into GSO. The cost itself will still be 1/10th.

I think the starting point is what is the actual current cost in dollars/rupees per kg to LEO and GEO? Does not matter whether it is one launch of 10 tons or 10 launches of 1 ton. What is ISRO's cost for a PSLV launch per kg currently to LEO? What does Antrix charge its customers? For comparison, SpaceX cost for the Falcon 9 is $62.1 million to lift 22,400 kgs to LEO, that is $2767/kg and that is without any reusability of any stage. Their near term goal is to reduce LEO cost to $1650/kg when their next rocket Falcon Heavy comes online. A reusable first stage only, will reduce prices for each rocket by a further 30% i.e. ~$2000/kg for the Falcon 9 and below $1200/kg for the Heavy.

The wiki article is a good read about the price pressures in the commercial launch market.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_lau ... ompetition

Way back in 2007 Antrix charged as much as $20,000/kg for some overseas customers. I think those days are long gone. So rather than waiting for 10-20 years for the fully reusable TSTO by which time Antrix could lose all it's overseas business with the kind of price competition given above, it may make sense to go for a reusable first stage project which can be implemented quicker.

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 17 May 2016 08:17

What happened to Space shuttle was that NASA mixed the cargo delivery to Human space flight. There was no need for that. They could have done a remote controlled one for cargo delivery and seperate one for Human flights (Human flights are the costlier ones). This would have reduced the cost for cargo delviery with NASA capturing markets

Instead Ariane space became preferred one in the launch market

What ISRO is attempting to reach the resuability from bottom to top. Once they gain confidence of flying the boosters back, they will enventually do it for upper segements too

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 17 May 2016 08:22

^^
The shuttle was designed for humans, cargo, science experiments, grab satellites with the robotic arm, repair them and the Hubble Space telescope i.e. jack of all trades, master of none.