Indian Space Programme Discussion

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 28 Mar 2015 17:04

We will get around 18 hours of coverage with 4 satellites. Need 5 for full 24 hour coverage. (Source: ISRO announcer)

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 28 Mar 2015 17:09

Congrats ISRO..
Congrats PSLV team ...

Commentator said we will get 18 hrs of coverage with 4 satellites & get full when 5th will be launched

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 28 Mar 2015 17:37

Congratulations ISRO!

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 28 Mar 2015 17:41

Congrats ISRO

!!!

3 more PSLV +GSLV D6 and RLV-TD to go for the year. Way to go . Cheers !!!!!

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 28 Mar 2015 18:40

Yawn! Another PSLV launched successfully!

akashganga · Post by **akashganga** » 28 Mar 2015 19:07

Congratulations isro again. Hope they will soon launch gslv mk2 with desi cryo.

nash · Post by **nash** » 28 Mar 2015 19:39

congrats ISRO

SAARC satellite's configuration to be finalised soon: ISRO

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 28 Mar 2015 19:49

Also Dr Shivan said that CE20 test was spot on and met all parameters exactly as predicted. They will be doing a 200 second test shortly followed by a full burn test and the program is on schedule and with multiple testing cycle they expect to meet the deadline of 2017 for the full GSLV launch.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 28 Mar 2015 20:27

I am reading " an aggregate success rate of nearly 97%positions MHIs H-IIA and H-IIB rockets as the world's most reliable launch vehicles". This is from ad section of Economist on Mitshubishi Heavy Industries (MHI). Is it true? What is success rate for PSLVs?

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 28 Mar 2015 20:33

2 failures in 30 flights of which 3 flights were developmental ones and the first commecial flight C1 was a partial success and D1 was a failure.The rest were all successes.

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 Mar 2015 21:23

Hi Res (2048X1363 pixels, 313KB) picture of the PSLV-C27/IRNSS-1D Launch:

Clicky

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Mar 2015 21:57

What is the cep of these sats?
Are they 1:1 alternative to gps glonass for military use?

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 28 Mar 2015 22:20

rsingh wrote:I am reading " an aggregate success rate of nearly 97%positions MHIs H-IIA and H-IIB rockets as the world's most reliable launch vehicles". This is from ad section of Economist on Mitshubishi Heavy Industries (MHI). Is it true? What is success rate for PSLVs?

And also the worlds most expensive in it's class....

We should take into account the low flight rates of the these vehicles.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 28 Mar 2015 22:31

PSLV is doing good and so is H2, but check Soyuz U 724 out of 745 success. .
now this is some launch and success rate

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 29 Mar 2015 04:17

Congrats ISRO. Once more !!!!

SSSalvi · Post by **SSSalvi** » 29 Mar 2015 05:05

Orbit of IRNSS 1D immediately after Launch has been plotted.

Orbit Shape

Orbit period : 6Hrs 1.2 Min ( 3.98 Orbits /day )
Semimajor Axis : 16807.1 Kms
Semiminor Axis : 13392.8 Kms
Apogee: 20569.1 Kms

Perigee location and Height above Earth
Perigee Height : 278.1 Kms

Inclination=19.212

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 29 Mar 2015 05:51

dhiraj wrote:PSLV is doing good and so is H2, but check Soyuz U 724 out of 745 success. .
now this is some launch and success rate

97%. Competitive with the Ariane & Long March units. Statistically though the most successful might be the Space Shuttle program - 134 of 135 successful launches.

SSSalvi · Post by **SSSalvi** » 29 Mar 2015 09:10

Arun Venkataswamy, a hobbyist from Chennai, used his home brewed equipment of Camera and a Astronomical mount to obtained some breathtaking images of PSLV C27 flight from Chennai.

A real rare opportunity utilized to full extent.

1st image is 1st stage with full ignition.
2nd image shows the falling 4 strap on motors and the remaining 2 are seen separated in 3rd picture.
4th and 5th image are the peak of opportunity ... that fraction of second apart .. 1st stage spent ( not burning ) and 2nd stage ignited.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Mar 2015 09:34

Fabulous.

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 29 Mar 2015 09:50

^^ Arun Venkataswamy , captured the first stage sep. (last panel photo.), which the DD camera man missed.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 29 Mar 2015 11:17

This time around, there were clear skies and HD telecast, and so DD was able to capture the strapon booster seperation.
I guess, DD has tasted blood.

Hopefully they will employ a stabilized camera with remote tracking, use a high power telescope to show as much of the launch as possible from SHAR, hopefully even get an image from an aerial platform, even get a telescope assisted image from car nicobar of all geo launches.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 29 Mar 2015 11:31

DD has tasted blood.

actually the english commentator and the cameraman are not in good terms

. The moment the commentator said that we will now be able to see the first stage separation, the cameraman had other plans and showed the trailing smoke

Damn we missed a great opportunity this time too

Why ISRO does not release the launch captured by its own camera

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 29 Mar 2015 13:04

I also noticed that - the camera man was tracking it properly adn at the exact opportune moment he moved the camera away !!

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 29 Mar 2015 13:27

dhiraj wrote: Why ISRO does not release the launch captured by its own camera

And the control room audio without the DD commentary masking the controller call outs....
I have been saying this after all most all the launches........well I suppose we propose and ISRO disposes.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 29 Mar 2015 13:51

juvva wrote:
dhiraj wrote: Why ISRO does not release the launch captured by its own camera
And the control room audio without the DD commentary masking the controller call outs....
I have been saying this after all most all the launches........well I suppose we propose and ISRO disposes.

ISRO gives DD the rights to broadcast and they do not give their tracking feed. DD has to improve their coverage. I don't think that ISRO wants to get involved at that time with coverage and outsource it to others.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 29 Mar 2015 16:11

"Congrats ISRO

!!!

3 more PSLV +GSLV D6 and RLV-TD to go for the year. Way to go . Cheers !!!!!"

Yes, congrats again. But this schedule really should( it must!) include the long awaited launch of "Astrosat". ISRO even said that the satellite would be ready for launch in August. Also, there is supposed to be one commercial mission, with British and Canadian, and possibly a Google, satellites. So that would mean 6 more launches before the end of the year. More realistically, 5, one IRNSS sat may go up early in 2016.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 29 Mar 2015 16:50

I do hope all the payloads on "Astrosat" kept in cold storage for so long will all function normally and give plenty of opportunity for space astronomers in India to do some outstanding work. It is at least 5 years late already, maybe more. Work on the payloads started almost 15 years ago, even before the first moon mission was declared by ABV. The other space astronomy payload 'tauvex" was never launched by ISRO.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 29 Mar 2015 17:17

Varoon Shekhar wrote:So that would mean 6 more launches before the end of the year. More realistically, 5, one IRNSS sat may go up early in 2016.

2 more IRNSS and 1 UK launch for PSLV for sure and Astrosat can be squeezed by the end of the of year.
In fact ISRO should go for more launches for PSLV since Vega is now winning a few contracts and ISRO should watch out for .

http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/03/27/ve ... satellite/

Vega wins contract to launch Peruvian military satellite

The PeruSat 1 satellite, built by Airbus Defense and Space, will take off on a Vega rocket from the Guiana Space Center in South America. Four satellites owned by California-based Skybox Imaging, a subsidiary of Google, will launch on the same rocket under a separate agreement.

The contract win gives the Vega rocket another payload as Arianespace tries to attract customers to support a launch rate of at least three Vega flights per year, a milestone expected to be achieved for the first time this year.

So Vega is ensuring PSLV looses out on European satellites and at the same time pursuing other outside opportunities.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 30 Mar 2015 03:55

So Vega is ensuring PSLV looses out on European satellites and at the same time pursuing other outside opportunities

Can we not sweeten the deals by launching another half the size or weight less than specific number of another satellite free? Or even building one at cost price provided they use our launch rockets?

Common how hard it is to beat them on cost?

member_28417 · Post by **member_28417** » 30 Mar 2015 12:17

LVM3-SC rocket powered by the SCE-200 Semi-Cryo Engine

The SCE-200 is a liquid-fuel rocket engine being developed by the Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre, a subsidiary of ISRO. It is being developed to power the future heavy-lift Unified Launch Vehicle (ULV) and Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) being planned by ISRO but before that it will be tested with GSLV Mk III by replacing L110(powered by old Vikas engine) stage to SC160.

Here is how this version of GSLV-3 would look like. All specifications are based on available valid data.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 30 Mar 2015 12:30

ashish raval wrote:Common how hard it is to beat them on cost?

problem is not the cost for sure. It is all about aggressive marketing and launch availability rate. To pursue more commercial launch capacity has to be increased.
Wiki suggest the following

By increasing flight rate up to 4 per year price of an each individual launch vehicle will drop to €22 million.[65]
Our belief is that we can charge up to 20 percent more per launch than our biggest competitors and still win business because of the value we provide at the space center here and with Arianespace.
—Francesco De Pasquale, managing director of ELV SpA, [65]

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 30 Mar 2015 12:41

jithinnam wrote:LVM3-SC rocket powered by the SCE-200 Semi-Cryo Engine

Don't see its first launch before 2019 (best case). If any other update on the timeline then plz do share

SSSalvi · Post by **SSSalvi** » 30 Mar 2015 21:03

^^^
By increasing the no. of launches cost can be brought down. ( I am sure some spacecraft owners must have turned back knowing that their turn of launch will be after a year or two.

We are dogged by:
1. There seems to be only one team producing vehicle one after another ( we can see same faces in every PSLV launch video manning same consoles .. except payload specialists )
2. Even with 2 Launch assembly facilities we should be able to deliver 7,8 launches in a year if the hardware supply is possible as every rocket assembly takes about 3 months ( [url =http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 636884.cms]TOI News[/url] dated Aug 3rd says assembly started for Oct launch )

Allowing 2,3 domestic requirements we should be able to cater for at least 5 foreign payloads.

The bottleneck seems to be Hardware production.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 30 Mar 2015 21:23

Viv S wrote:
dhiraj wrote:PSLV is doing good and so is H2, but check Soyuz U 724 out of 745 success. .
now this is some launch and success rate
97%. Competitive with the Ariane & Long March units. Statistically though the most successful might be the Space Shuttle program - 134 of 135 successful launches.

IIRC two of the shuttle went kaput..........so not the best.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 31 Mar 2015 02:18

Viv S wrote:
dhiraj wrote:PSLV is doing good and so is H2, but check Soyuz U 724 out of 745 success. .
now this is some launch and success rate
97%. Competitive with the Ariane & Long March units. Statistically though the most successful might be the Space Shuttle program - 134 of 135 successful launches.

US lost more lives than anybody else. US lost 15 men & women during spaceflight while USSR lost 4 men during spaceflight. US also lost 9 lives during spaceflight testing or training compared to USSR/Russia which lost 4 lives. However, USSR/Russia lost more lives while preparing or overhauling rockets on the ground than anyone else. See list of fatalities here at wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sp ... paceflight

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 31 Mar 2015 02:36

Hitesh wrote:
US lost more lives than anybody else. US lost 15 men & women during spaceflight while USSR lost 4 men during spaceflight. US also lost 9 lives during spaceflight testing or training compared to USSR/Russia which lost 4 lives. However, USSR/Russia lost more lives while preparing or overhauling rockets on the ground than anyone else. See list of fatalities here at wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sp ... paceflight

Yea 4 official deaths according to the USSR...I'll take that with a GIANT spoonful of salt.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 31 Mar 2015 03:52

Same is true of US.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 31 Mar 2015 08:41

India’s indigenous satellite navigation system - Ajay Lele, The Space Review

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 31 Mar 2015 19:19

rsingh wrote:IIRC two of the shuttle went kaput..........so not the best.

The Columbia was lost during re-entry. The 1986 disaster might have been a high profile one but it is still only 1 failure of 135 launches, which makes the launch system statistically the most successful in the world (albeit the priciest).

Hitesh wrote:US lost more lives than anybody else. US lost 15 men & women during spaceflight while USSR lost 4 men during spaceflight. US also lost 9 lives during spaceflight testing or training compared to USSR/Russia which lost 4 lives. However, USSR/Russia lost more lives while preparing or overhauling rockets on the ground than anyone else. See list of fatalities here at wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sp ... paceflight

That's a lot like saying that the Su-27 family is the most unsafe in the world seeing as it killed 77 people in the Sknyliv accident.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 31 Mar 2015 19:28

Viv S,

No it is not. It is like saying that the MiG-21 is the most unsafe for killing the most pilots versus to killing on the ground. That is why I said USSR/Russia lost more lives on the ground while preparing rockets. Remember that spectacular explosion of the Vostom-2M rocket. That would be more analogous to your analogy. Therefore, US killed more astronauts than Russia killed its. As for the claims that USSR hid more losses, wiki says the claims are rubbish. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cosmonauts