Indian Space Programme Discussion

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Dec 2015 22:58

Rest assured theere will be no RLV flight in 2016.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 29 Dec 2015 23:05

^ How do you know so authoritatively ?

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 29 Dec 2015 23:07

sanjaykumar wrote:Rest assured theere will be no RLV flight in 2016.

Sorry? The HEX is scheduled for February or April as per ISRO. Sure things might delayed but the timeline waswhat ISRO gave. Yes it has seen a lot of delays but I am expecting to see it happen in the next year and then we would see ISRO start focusing on LEX which will need a lot of expertise that will need a HAL or ADA helping out + Plus the new runway that will be needed at SHAR.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 30 Dec 2015 00:43

2015:
The Reusable Launch Vehicle-Technology Demonstrator (RLV-TD) mission, India’s first step towards building a space shuttle, will be delayed at least till the year end.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/ ... 915712.ece

2015:
India To Fly RLV Tech Demo by June
** Deleted **
http://spacenews.com/india-to-fly-rlv-t ... o-by-june/

2015:
ISRO to Launch RLV-TD in October
** Deleted **

2015:
ISRO has scheduled the maiden flight of its 12-tonne RLV-TD (Technology Demonstrator) for the first week of August this year.
http://www.caravanmagazine.in/vantage/i ... nch-market

2013:
The Integrated Technical Review (ITR) of RLV-TD by the National Review Committee in October 2012 has concluded that launch of RLV-TD HEX-01 mission in September 2013 was feasible.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/wor ... rlv-td.htm

2012:
In June 2011, ISRO Chairman Dr. Radhakrishnan indicated that the program is behind schedule.
First flight of RLV, initially planned for 2010-2011 will now take place in 2012-2013.
** Deleted **

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 30 Dec 2015 05:52

`That talks of delays. Doesn't say it will not occur in 2016. It is an experimental flight and is taking a relative backbirner to GSLV Mk 3 issues that have come up after analyzing data from the LVMX CARE launch. Also IRNSS has become a major priority.Also as mentioned a fuel leak in HEX was detected. These things and especially experimental flights take time all the more with hundreds of Cortes being spent on each experiment so ISRO tries to play as safe as possible rather than sorry.

nits · Post by **nits** » 30 Dec 2015 18:04

Just a Hyper Speculation... At times i feel we get pressure from Khan \ other west countries to delay test of such modern tech \ stuff and we just delay it for time being... i read somewhere how khan pressurized us to go slow on building Thorium bases reactors...

Again its just a speculation IMHO and i can \ may be 100% wrong

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 30 Dec 2015 18:09

No they rather tried sabotage ! A complex interplay of different countries like in the Nambi Naryan episode

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 31 Dec 2015 04:42

I already mentioned the long delays in the RLV TD program. But, given the current status and the issue at hand it would be good to say that we shouldn't be expecting years worth of delays anymore. ISRO might have a history of not keeping schedules and very long delays, but I do see them working on this and getting better at it. Maybe not by the amount expected but they are incrementally getting there.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 31 Dec 2015 05:40

Wow, the RLV program is like Boeing/NASA/USAF X-37 plane program.
If ISRO can rig it to produce materials in zero gravity, among other defense and civil purposes, what a wonderful achievement it will be.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 31 Dec 2015 07:47

There is always a delay when a critical quantum jump is required. For eg cryogenic engines and in the case of Jabbering its hot section. We have surmounted the cryogenic hurdle. This has led to confidence and readjustment of time lines.In the case of GSLV No they have to resolve two things the C25 testing and whatever corrections that need to be done from the data obtained by LVM3 CARE experiment.These take time. Similarly for HEX you cant just go ad expect the time line to be precise when you have to create technology. Simple things likehogh altitude testing was not available for the C15 andwe don't have long enough a runway for HEX.
Regarding accelerating GSLV tolaunch 4 ton satellites -that's what the NO is al about

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 04 Jan 2016 18:49

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 575_1.html

Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) has plans to build its heaviest rocket that can carry satellites weighing 10 communication tonnes into space.
India's heaviest rocket would be powered by a semi-cryogenic engine

The design process for the semi-cryogenic engine is completed and is being built by Godrej Aerospace,
"Once we have this engine, we will have different levels of launch vehicles possible. Currently the GSLV MK 3 uses the CE20 engine and once we put the semi cryogenic engine in such a combination, we will have a much bigger rating, which will have a payload capability of 10 ton,"

"One of the launch vehicle...will look like the GSLV Mk 3 but it will be much taller, almost 65 metres, weighing almost 732.6 tons at liftoff and it is capable of putting a 10 ton space plant in communication orbit," said Somanath.
"..we thought that we will go in a modular way. It will be possible for nearly 6 ton payload capability and if required we will be able to change to our full 10 tonne launch vehicle with little bit of addition," he said.

He did not set a time frame for the rocket development.

vina · Post by **vina** » 04 Jan 2016 20:00

Currently the GSLV MK 3 uses the CE20 engine and once we put the semi cryogenic engine in such a combination, we will have a much bigger rating, which will have a payload capability of 10 ton

I have already said it multiple times here. The Vikas Engines (ie,the earth storable hypergolic fuel Weakass engines) are atleast 20 years past their sell by date. Just getting rid of those engines and putting in LOX/Hydrocarbon engines with a higher isp will give a higher payload to orbit.

Better still, get rid of those two huge low isp solid booster and cluster two of those 2MN Lox/hydrocarbon engines , together with the CE 20 stage will give a launcher with a performance equivalent or better than the Saturn V, and will be very efficient. If they do it, they can do horizontal assembly and launch like the Russian rockets, the Space X Falcon rockets , and of course our very own SLV-3!

But no, ISRO will not develop a new stage with 2 clustered 2MN engines , but rather replace the 2 WeakAss engines the L110 stage of the MKIII with ONE 2MN LOX/Hydrocarbon engine and keep the two solid rocket boosters and have a rather inefficient vehicle which will require vertical assembly and the mobile service tower and all that.

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 04 Jan 2016 21:40

vina wrote:
Currently the GSLV MK 3 uses the CE20 engine and once we put the semi cryogenic engine in such a combination, we will have a much bigger rating, which will have a payload capability of 10 ton
Better still, get rid of those two huge low isp solid booster and cluster two of those 2MN Lox/hydrocarbon engines , together with the CE 20 stage will give a launcher with a performance equivalent or better than the Saturn V, and will be very efficient.

After 2MN semi cryo, ISRO will be concentrating on CE50 and CE100 engines. Also cluster is also not required (which then requires another round of development), they can add 2 more 2MN SC engines on the sides to boost the capacity

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 04 Jan 2016 22:09

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 442882.cms

All IRNSS satellites to be in orbit by March: ISRO official

IRNSS-1E is slated for launch on January 20 from the space port of Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh

"..by March 31st we want to have all the seven satellites constellation in place

Reiterating that the Mars Orbiter Mission may last 'many years', Shivakumar said, "we still have 37 kilo grams of fuel."

member_29268 · Post by **member_29268** » 04 Jan 2016 22:55

vina, ISRO might have been reading your posts.

(If we go by the following wiki page)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Launch_Vehicle

member_29268 · Post by **member_29268** » 04 Jan 2016 23:13

Better still, get rid of those two huge low isp solid booster and cluster two of those 2MN Lox/hydrocarbon engines , together with the CE 20 stage will give a launcher with a performance equivalent or better than the Saturn V, and will be very efficient.

Saturn V's 5 F-1 Engines produce >6MN each, totalling >30MN compared to SCE-2000 producing only 2 MN

. Going by this we will need to cluster 15 SCE-2000 engines to create the equivalent thrust of a saturn V. which might be a huge leap from the present ISRO launchers.

If they do it, they can do horizontal assembly and launch like the Russian rockets, the Space X Falcon rockets , and of course our very own SLV-3!

Horizontal integration has its own challenges as with vertical integration. I don't think that decision is that much dependent on the type of launch vehicle.

member_29268 · Post by **member_29268** » 04 Jan 2016 23:26

vina wrote:
Quote:
Currently the GSLV MK 3 uses the CE20 engine and once we put the semi cryogenic engine in such a combination, we will have a much bigger rating, which will have a payload capability of 10 ton

Better still, get rid of those two huge low isp solid booster and cluster two of those 2MN Lox/hydrocarbon engines , together with the CE 20 stage will give a launcher with a performance equivalent or better than the Saturn V, and will be very efficient.

After 2MN semi cryo, ISRO will be concentrating on CE50 and CE100 engines. Also cluster is also not required (which then requires another round of development), they can add 2 more 2MN SC engines on the sides to boost the capacity

L110 stage is a clustered stage and AFAIK there were not many major issues faced during its development.

Its highly improbable that ISRO might think about developing an upper stage engine with a capacity > 50t. in the near future. What ISRO may look to develop is a high capacity stage(read: higher propellant loading) with already available engines CE-20 engine perhaps . In vacuum performance is directly related to total dV imparted which is proportional to Thrust and duration of burn. Much less developmental effort increasing the burn time rather than increasing the thrust significantly.
More ever for higher thrust engines envelope requirements are also higher (diameter of stage).

vina · Post by **vina** » 05 Jan 2016 03:49

khedar wrote: Saturn V's 5 F-1 Engines produce >6MN each, totalling >30MN compared to SCE-2000 producing only 2 MN . Going by this we will need to cluster 15 SCE-2000 engines to create the equivalent thrust of a saturn V. which might be a huge leap from the present ISRO launchers.

Sorry. Meant Atlas V and not Saturn V. The Atlas V (one of the most efficient launch vehicles), is basically a 4MN thrust RD-180 topped by a 100 KN cryogenic stage.

A GSLV with a 4MN thrust LOX/Hydrocarbon core topped with the 200 KN CE 20 will be pretty competitive.

Horizontal integration has its own challenges as with vertical integration. I don't think that decision is that much dependent on the type of launch vehicle.

You can do horizontal integration of large rockets only if they are liquid.Without fuel which can be pumped in, it is just a giant shell that doesn't weigh much. Can't do that with solids for large rockets.

For vertical integration, the key bottleneck is the Mobile Service Tower, which will be occupied. Horizontal integration can have multiple rockets assembled at the same time, rolled out to the launch pad and launched in quick succession. That is critical for large volume quick operations.

Think of it like the shelf in a retailer. All the retailer is worried about is the productivity of per unit of shelf space and wants quick turns of merchandise on the shelf.

Look at this Proton Launch vehicle launch prep. No fuss, high throughput, they can fire the next one off the same launch pad in probably a week.

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 05 Jan 2016 04:57

vina wrote: Sorry. Meant Atlas V and not Saturn V. The Atlas V (one of the most efficient launch vehicles), is basically a 4MN thrust RD-180 topped by a 100 KN cryogenic stage.

A GSLV with a 4MN thrust LOX/Hydrocarbon core topped with the 200 KN CE 20 will be pretty competitive.

Let us first see what ISRO wants from this NGLV. I'm using this term because ISRO has been using lots of names (SCLV, ULV, HLV) which might refer to the same family or might not.

The goal is to replace all existing launch vehicles with a single family with common components. + ISRO is looking for heavy lift capability ie 10 tons to GTO / 20-25 tons to LEO

So, we have
1) upper variants of the PSLV (normal and XL),
2) the GSLV (doesn't have any practical use with it's 2ton GTO payload, but still lets assume ISRO needs it),
3) the LVM3 (4-6 ton to GTO / 10-15 tons LEO)
4) the HLV (10 tons to GTO / 20-25 tons to LEO)

Now to have a single family catering to these diverse capacities is a challenging task.

The key will be the core stage or what ISRO calls the CLC (common liquid core). Ideally, it should have such a configuration that it can be used on all the variants enabling mass production and decrease of costs.

Will a CLC with 2 clustered SCE-200 do this job?
Ans: It will allow ISRO to cover 3) and 4) (it will get close say 9 tons to GTO) among the required configurations. Good enough, But then they would have to develop a new replacement for PSLV.

Proposed approach as per few details provided by ISRO
Have a CLC with a single SCE-200 and around 160 tons of prop loading. Use this with different solid boosters (S12, S60, S139, S200, S250) and different upper stages (CE20 and CE60)
This seems to reach all of ISRO's required payload capacity ranges. But, as you said we will have to vertical integration + develop CE60 a new.

Another approach that I am personally biased towards, but which doesn't seem to be favored from ISRO. (some inputs for these configs are mine, rest are based on opinions of few other knowledgeble folks)
4) All liquid HLV - 4 CLC boosters + CLC 1st stage + CE20 2nd stage + High performance space tug
Should give almost 30 tons to LEO and 12 tons to GTO
3) 2 CLC boosters + CLC 1st stage +CE20
2) and 1) can be relálized by using a single CLC + different number solid boosters (say S30) + low cost semi cryo upper stage

But, the catch is that this HLV will be costlier than the current proposed HLV. But the commonality can partially help decrease the costs by large scale manufacturing of the CLCs, S30s, CE20s.

vina · Post by **vina** » 05 Jan 2016 07:22

krishGAgain wrote:
Let us first see what ISRO wants from this NGLV. I'm using this term because ISRO has been using lots of names (SCLV, ULV, HLV) which might refer to the same family or might not.

The goal is to replace all existing launch vehicles with a single family with common components. + ISRO is looking for heavy lift capability ie 10 tons to GTO / 20-25 tons to LEO

So, we have
1) upper variants of the PSLV (normal and XL),
2) the GSLV (doesn't have any practical use with it's 2ton GTO payload, but still lets assume ISRO needs it),
3) the LVM3 (4-6 ton to GTO / 10-15 tons LEO)
4) the HLV (10 tons to GTO / 20-25 tons to LEO)

Now to have a single family catering to these diverse capacities is a challenging task.

The key will be the core stage or what ISRO calls the CLC (common liquid core). Ideally, it should have such a configuration that it can be used on all the variants enabling mass production and decrease of costs.

Will a CLC with 2 clustered SCE-200 do this job?
Ans: It will allow ISRO to cover 3) and 4) (it will get close say 9 tons to GTO) among the required configurations. Good enough, But then they would have to develop a new replacement for PSLV.

Proposed approach as per few details provided by ISRO
Have a CLC with a single SCE-200 and around 160 tons of prop loading. Use this with different solid boosters (S12, S60, S139, S200, S250) and different upper stages (CE20 and CE60)
This seems to reach all of ISRO's required payload capacity ranges. But, as you said we will have to vertical integration + develop CE60 a new.

Another approach that I am personally biased towards, but which doesn't seem to be favored from ISRO. (some inputs for these configs are mine, rest are based on opinions of few other knowledgeble folks)
4) All liquid HLV - 4 CLC boosters + CLC 1st stage + CE20 2nd stage + High performance space tug
Should give almost 30 tons to LEO and 12 tons to GTO
3) 2 CLC boosters + CLC 1st stage +CE20
2) and 1) can be relálized by using a single CLC + different number solid boosters (say S30) + low cost semi cryo upper stage

But, the catch is that this HLV will be costlier than the current proposed HLV. But the commonality can partially help decrease the costs by large scale manufacturing of the CLCs, S30s, CE20s.

1. PSLV /GSLV core stage is a 4800 KN thrust solid (and hence a low isp). Replacing that core stage with a 4000 KN (ie 4MN) thrust high isp liquid will result in a far more efficient vehicle, and you can get rid of a lot of boosters and maybe even the 2nd stage

2. A PLSV --> with the 4MN liquid core topped with the current Cryogenic stage from the GSLV will see around a 2 to 2.5 T GTO kind of vehicle.

3. GSLV is equivalent to ariane 4, which is a 2.5 to 4 t GTO vehicle. GSLV is at present inefficient and doesnt match Ariane 4. With liquid hydro/lox core (with more fuel than in PSLV core), the GSLV will reach ariane 4 level performance. more efficiently.

A 4 MN thrust core does meet all the requirements.

member_29268 · Post by **member_29268** » 05 Jan 2016 09:33

Somehow Angara seems to be the solution to ISRO's all needs. It is based on a 2 MN engine core stage. I am sure our launch vehicle design team must have looked at this option

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)

Replacing a solid stage with liquid stage of an existing vehicle has two problems:
1. Liquid is much less denser than solid propellant and hence would require more volume for the same energy imparted to the payload.
2. Liquid stage is much more complicated and costly than a solid stage due to very high number of components involved.

Its highly unlikely that ISRO would want to experiment on this line with its PSLV and GSLV's. Also there are infinitely many number of permutation/combination possible to improve PSLV/GSLV which if applied will result in an entirely new vehicle altogether.

In the end efficiency is what ISRO wants it to be, but it surely has payload/cost as its one among many component.

But yes replacing the L110 stage of lvM3 with a SC160 stage is quite possible within the same envelop and has the potential to increase the lift-off thrust considerably. This option should be explored IMHO.

vina · Post by **vina** » 06 Jan 2016 04:54

WeakAss (N2O4/UDMH) Engines vs. LOX/Hydro carbon Engines - Soviet Experience.

Proton vs Soyuz..Proton

In November 1961 OKB-52 began to collaborate with V P Glushko's OKB-456 in developing a more appropriate engine. Glushko had completed a storable liquid engine design of 150 metric tons for use in Korolev's N1. However Korolev refused to accept this design, due to his refusal to use toxic propellants in his rockets and his belief that such propellants could never deliver the required specific impulse. Korolev insisted on development of an oxygen-kerosene engine; Glushko categorically refused to do so. As a result, the two leading Soviet rocket designers irrevocably split. Korolev had to turn for development of his N1 engines to the aviation engine OKB of N D Kuznetsov.

The payload capacity of the Proton was given in the press as 12.2 metric tons; however this included the empty mass of the last stage. The payload of the two-stage version was really only 8.4 metric tons, only 24% more than Korolev's Soyuz rocket based on the R-7, even though the UR-500 was 75% larger. These deficiencies would be rectified in the three-stage version, fully developed in accordance with the decree of 3 August 1964.

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 06 Jan 2016 06:28

vina wrote:
1. PSLV /GSLV core stage is a 4800 KN thrust solid (and hence a low isp). Replacing that core stage with a 4000 KN (ie 4MN) thrust high isp liquid will result in a far more efficient vehicle, and you can get rid of a lot of boosters and maybe even the 2nd stage

2. A PLSV --> with the 4MN liquid core topped with the current Cryogenic stage from the GSLV will see around a 2 to 2.5 T GTO kind of vehicle.

3. GSLV is equivalent to ariane 4, which is a 2.5 to 4 t GTO vehicle. GSLV is at present inefficient and doesnt match Ariane 4. With liquid hydro/lox core (with more fuel than in PSLV core), the GSLV will reach ariane 4 level performance. more efficiently.

A 4 MN thrust core does meet all the requirements.

The question is whether it is a good thing to have so much of propellant and 2 engines for the low capacity. (CLC incase of 2 clustered SCE-200 will have propellant loading of around 250 tons). This as opposed to a 160 prop loaded CLC with one SC-200 and cheap solid boosters, and a cheap semi cryo upper stage.

khedar wrote:Somehow Angara seems to be the solution to ISRO's all needs. It is based on a 2 MN engine core stage. I am sure our launch vehicle design team must have looked at this option .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_(rocket_family)

Replacing a solid stage with liquid stage of an existing vehicle has two problems:
1. Liquid is much less denser than solid propellant and hence would require more volume for the same energy imparted to the payload.
2. Liquid stage is much more complicated and costly than a solid stage due to very high number of components involved.

Its highly unlikely that ISRO would want to experiment on this line with its PSLV and GSLV's. Also there are infinitely many number of permutation/combination possible to improve PSLV/GSLV which if applied will result in an entirely new vehicle altogether.

In the end efficiency is what ISRO wants it to be, but it surely has payload/cost as its one among many component.

But yes replacing the L110 stage of lvM3 with a SC160 stage is quite possible within the same envelop and has the potential to increase the lift-off thrust considerably. This option should be explored IMHO.

1. Yes liquids need more volume. But we are building the CLC anyways for the core. Liquids also offer you more specific impulse so you need lesser mass of propellant to achieve the same exhaust velocity as compared to solids.
2. Complicated and cost - I already mentioned these before as the catch. But, since you are reusing a component already developed (CLC will anyways be developed for the core) for the boosters, you are partly reducing complexity and also cost, through large scale production.

Also, the similarity with Angara is for the top variant. The lower variants themselves will be somewhat different using different numbers of solid boosters (The Russians are averse to it).

So to serve these varied needs you need these following components
2nd stage running on CE-20 - Done
CLC - Next to be ticked off
Upper stage space tug - We already have the PAM that can be used as it is with higher prop loading and ISRO can increase its performance further with comparatively ease
Low cost semicryo upperstage - Would require ISRO to develop a new semi cryo of around 500 kN

Since, this is a speculative configuration I wouldn't want to discuss much more on this.

member_29267 · Post by **member_29267** » 06 Jan 2016 06:38

Some new info on Chandrayaan-2 and future Chandrayaans.

ISRO Puts Off Nuclear Powered Space Mission

The nuclear power is expected expected to increase the lifespan of the mission as life of Chandrayaan 1, launched in 2008, was cut short by two months due to technical problems. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) has been also working to make the nuclear material for the mission.
..........
"We had plans to give nuclear power to Chandrayaan 2 but now we have decided to put it off for time being as we don't want further delay in launch which is scheduled for 2017-18," said ISRO satellite centre director M Annadurai.
...........
"Once we get the material we have to do necessary experiments which will further delay the mission. There has been some delay in getting material from Russia," he said.

ISRO is now looking forward to use the nuclear powered mission in future projects.

"We plan to take Chandrayaan 3 and 4 in near future and we may use nuclear power in those missions. By that time we will be completely ready with the materials and other things," he added.

Assuming this refers to RTG and Plutonium-238, it would be interesting to know if India does plan to produce Plutonium-238 on it's own. US just restarted production last year for use on its Deep Space probes. But, we might as well buy it from Russia (which is the largest and only producer of Plutonium-238) as it will be for space application (peaceful purpose).

From wiki

Reactor-grade plutonium from spent nuclear fuel contains various isotopes of plutonium. Pu-238 makes up only one or two percent, but it may be responsible for much of the short-term decay heat because of its short half-life relative to other plutonium isotopes. Reactor-grade plutonium is not useful for producing Pu-238 for RTGs because difficult isotopic separation would be needed.

Pure plutonium-238 is prepared by neutron irradiation of neptunium-237, one of the minor actinides that can be recovered from spent nuclear fuel during reprocessing, or by the neutron irradiation of americium in a reactor.[1] In both cases, the targets are subjected to a chemical treatment, including dissolution in nitric acid to extract the plutonium-238. A 100 kg sample of light water reactor fuel that has been irradiated for three years contains only about 700 grams of neptunium-237, and the neptunium must be extracted selectively. Significant amounts of pure Pu-238 could also be produced in a thorium fuel cycle.[

member_29268 · Post by **member_29268** » 06 Jan 2016 07:23

vina, weakass-ness of engines (if you compare N2O4/UDMH vs LOX/RP-1 based engines) has nothing to with the propellant used. both of these propellant combination have very little different in specific impulse (316s for RD-253(Proton 1st stage) and 335 for SCE-200(ISRO's SC Engine)) to make any significant difference in payload for a first stage application. On the other hand usage of N2O4/UDMH as propellants greatly simplifies the engine design, as these propellants being hypergolic they don't need any ignition systems for the engine start. Ignition systems are tricky to design and develop. On the other hand these propellants are very toxic in handling, (remember GSLV-D6 launch cancellation due to leakage in GS2 stage tank. Nobody could go near the launch vehicle for quite some time for visual inspection until safety teams cleared the pad safe for humans

). These are the reasons why almost all space agencies started with hypergolic propellants and than switched over to human friendly propellants.

P.S. RD-253 is SC cycle engine of 2MN class based on N2O4/UDMH and SCE-200 is also SC cycle engine of 2 MN. Both are equally powerful. RD-253 still serves the proton even after 60 years of its first flight.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Jan 2016 08:40

Sriharikota space port scores 50 - Madhumitha D.S., The Hindu

The nation’s space launch complex at Sriharikota in coastal Andhra Pradesh, which reached its milestone 50th launch last month, is being readied to take up at least four more launches a year than now.

Work on the second vehicle assembly building (SVAB) began three months ago and is scheduled to be ready by mid-2017. It will enable the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to do a dozen launches a year compared to about eight at present; this includes both the PSLV and the GSLV vehicles, according to P. Kunhikrishnan, Director of the launch port, Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC).

“Work on the second VAB began in October last year by a team of Indian industries. [VAB2] is a complex project, about three times bigger than the existing one. We expect to get it completed by the first half of 2017 and start using it from the second half onwards,” he said.

It will handle different types of future launch vehicles that are also in the works at other centres.

SDSC has two launch pads, LP1 and LP2, which are both designed differently. A vehicle assembly bay is attached to LP2 by rail. The second bay will also be connected to LP2 by rail and will increase SDSC’s total launch frequency, Mr. Kunhikrishnan told The Hindu .

ISRO is midway through work on the heavy-lift GSLV Mark III vehicle and is working on another 10-tonne-capacity semi-cryogenic launch vehicle. The new VAB is being tailored to these.

Leaving the preparation time between two launches, normally ranging from a month to two, LP1 can now do up to five launches and LP2 up to eight, while focussing on GSLV and MkIII, Mr. Kunhikrishnan said.

Last month, SDSC completed 50 launches since the first flight of 1979. The maiden one, SLV-3 E1, of August 1979 was a failure but marked the country’s first shot at putting satellites in orbit. So far it has put into orbit 42 Indian satellites including communication, navigation and remote sensing (Earth observation) kinds; and 57 small satellites for foreign customers.

The historic 50{+t}{+h}launch was the December 16 flight of PSLV-C29 carrying six Singapore satellites, ISRO said, noting that SHAR was developed from a barren island into a world class launch pad that meets international demand for launching small and mid-sized satellites ranging from a few kilos up to 1.5 tonnes.

The SDSC tally stands at 32 PSLVs from 1993; nine GSLVs from 2001; and a partial GSLV-Mk III in 2013.

As many as 42 Indian satellites have been put into space from here - including communication, navigation and remote sensing (Earth observation) kind; and also 57 small satellites of foreign customers.

vina · Post by **vina** » 07 Jan 2016 09:39

vina, weakass-ness of engines (if you compare N2O4/UDMH vs LOX/RP-1 based engines) has nothing to with the propellant used. both of these propellant combination have very little different in specific impulse (316s for RD-253(Proton 1st stage) and 335 for SCE-200(ISRO's SC Engine)) to make any significant difference in payload for a first stage application

Trouble is that WeakAsses are used not just in the first few seconds burn of the 1st stage (like boosters) but rather are used in the 2nd stage as well. In higher stages, even a small difference in Isp shows up in huge differences in weight carried to orbit.

What we really need is to get all he WeakAsses out go for a two stage to orbit vehicle with LOX/Hydrocarbon stage (okay with small sized solid boosters if needed that burn for a few seconds during initial lift off) topped with a LOX/LH2 stage.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 Jan 2016 16:29

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... for-irnss/

The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) that is developing the Indian Regional Navigational Satellite System — the country’s own version of the GPS system having a constellation of seven satellites — will also be building four more satellites that will act as a backup to this constellation. These backup satellites are being built at Space Applications Centre (SAC) at Ahmedabad.
“We are building four more satellites that will act as a back up to the seven satellites of the IRNSS. Each individual satellite of this system can easily last for 7-15 years, but we are not taking any chances and building a back-up,” said Tapan Misra, director of SAC, while talking to The Indian Express.
IRNSS is India’s own regional navigation satellite system that will provide accurate real-time positioning and timing services over India and a region extending 1,500-kilometres around India. This system is expected to replace GPS of the US.
The IRNSS system that is expected to be fully deployed by July 2016 will consist of three satellites in the GEO (Geostationary) orbit and four satellites in the GSO (Geosynchronous) orbit, approximately 36,000-kilometres altitude above the earth’s surface.
The first four satellites developed by SAC – IRNSS-1A, 1B, 1C and ID – have already been launched and are in orbit while IRNSS- 1E, 1F have been dispatched for being integrated with spacecraft. “The IRNSS-1E is expected to be launched later this month, while we are currently working towards integrating the seventh satellite of this system at SAC,” Misra added.
IRNSS will provide services like terrestrial, aerial and marine navigation, help in vehicle tracking and fleet management, disaster management and navigational aid for hikers and travellers among others.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... Pm4GL.dpuf

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jan 2016 09:19

2015 in spaceflight

member_29247 · Post by **member_29247** » 10 Jan 2016 11:05

Please watch Operation cross bow staring George peppered and Sophia Loren in a very brief role ( of course not wearing brief just role)

It shows underground assembly of V2 rockets in hill caves as designed by Von Braun the father of Atlas V

also originally ISRO during Vikram Sarabhai time had prepared big plans for LoX Kerosene engines and then for some reason went to LOX and LH cryogenic technology.

It had plans to put Geo stat satellites by end of 1970s or early 1980s...

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 10 Jan 2016 16:17

Isro to use electric propulsion on satellites to carry more transponders

The Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) plans to use electric propulsion to power satellites, thereby increase the ability to carry heavier communication satellites by its home-grown rockets. The first of the few satellites would be hurled into space in 2017.

Today, nearly a third of the weight of a satellite is liquid fuel, which is used to power the spacecraft to its orbital slot once it is in space. Whereas electric or ion propulsion uses electricity generated from solar energy and releases positive atoms to create force akin to repulsive force between the same poles of two magnets, thereby pushing the satellite to its slot. It weighs significantly lighter and is ten times more efficient than liquid-fuelled satellites.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 11 Jan 2016 08:32

..It would be interesting to know if India does plan to produce Plutonium-238 on it's own. US just restarted production last year for use on its Deep Space probes. But, we might as well buy it from Russia

It may be difficult to get from Russia..

.. I think even Russia has stopped producing it and it's supply is running low -- at least they have not sold any to anyone since 2009)

From what I remember process to produce Pu238 goes/went something like -- some may find it interesting :

In a nuclear reactor U238 absorbs a neutron and one gets U-239 which beta-decays into Np-239 and then to Pu-239. (That is our source of Pu-239 in reactor used in bombs). Some Pu-239 absorbs neutron and become Pu-240. (That some may know, pollutes the bomb material, and one needs to remove it if one is making a bomb

). As time goes on some Pu-240 absorbs another neutron and becomes Pu-241 which is highly radioactive (half-life 14 years) and beta-decays to Am-241 and Am-241 alpha decays to Np-237.

Now Np-237 is separated into a special box and put back into the reactor, it absorbs another neutron and we have Np-238. Np-238 is highly radioactive (half life in days), emits beta decay and you get
Pu-238 !! All you have to do now is to remove that box, and chemically remove all remaining Np-238 to get Pu-238..

If that sounds complicated, it is very complicated and high tech. (Those RTG batteries used to costs roughly around $8 million/Kg or so.. I think even Russia has stopped producing it and it's supply is running low. so Oak Ridge National Laboratory recently (just a few weeks ago) announced the production of 50 grams of plutonium-238 considered very important in re-establishing a U.S. stockpile of Pu-238 for use as a power source on deep-space missions. ORNL has been developing the capability over the past couple of years using it High Flux Isotope Reactor. From what I know US at present has stockpile of only about 35 Kg (about half is not new and sort of 'expired' -- left over from the Savannah River production decades ago - Pu-238 purchased from Russia is about 17Kg only)

Pu-238 is an alpha emitter with half-life of 87 years so ideal for RTG.

Just an aside - Louis Alvarez (when he was at Los Alamos) used to keep a piece of Pu on his desk as paper weight. It is fairly safe to touch it as alpha rays will not pass through thin layer of paper or your skin. (outer layer of skin is dead anyway so it does not matter

).. just don't eat it.

jayasimha · Post by **jayasimha** » 11 Jan 2016 19:22

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=134162

ISRO is Planning to Launch Eight (8) Satellites on One PSLV: Dr. M. Annadurai

ISRO is planning to launch eight micro satellites on a single PSLV in future, said Dr.M. Annadurai, Director, ISRO. He was addressing a session on the topic “Future Satellite Programme” in the plenary of the 103rd Indian Science Congress at the University of Mysore, today.

In this new global era where everything is becoming smaller in size and smarter in application we are also trying to reduce the size of satellites to the extent possible. The vehicle configuration for PSLV of 400km Space Shuttle Orbiter (SSO) is 1200kg. The number of micro satellites that can be carried in single mission is eight, each weighing about 120kg with total payload capacity 960kg, he added.

He pointed to the fact that, present domestic satellite communication is dominated by Fixed Satellite Services and Direct to Home Services and the future service growth areas will be communication satellites for internet, multi-media and personal communication services, direct to home high definition TV services. Apart from that, Thematic missions such as Tele-medicine and Tele-education, bandwidth on demand services, E-Governance, secured communications and satellite aided navigation are expected to grow, he added.

He stressed the need for production of Space Systems to meet the huge demand for satellites and also to strengthen basic Research and Development. This will boost the increased participation of Indian industries in Space Programme in the areas of electronic systems, mechanical systems, assembly, integration and testing of satellites. Focusing on “Make in India” concept for end-to-end production of satellite from industries within the country would help us to achieve further self reliance.

The other resource persons of the plenary talk were Dr. Vinay K Dadhwal who briefed the gathering on the dimensions of Indian Space Programme and outline of Earth Observatory, Dr. S. K. Shivakumar on the topic “Mars Orbiter Mission- overview”, Dr. V. Koteswara Rao on the topic “ASTROSAT- A multi wavelength Space Observatory”and Dr. S Somanath on the topic “ISROs Launch Vehicles- Growth of Capability”. Prof. D N Rao, Chennai, chaired the programme. Delegates, students and participants from various states and countries enthusiastically participated in the session.

******

KSP:Kv

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 11 Jan 2016 22:21

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/i ... 089731.ece

Two space industry enclaves or “parks” that have been conceived — one for launchers at Sriharikota and a smaller one at an existing Bengaluru spacecraft campus — signal increased privatisation of the nation’s space programme over the next five years.

First, ISRO wants to groom and engage domestic industry in the launch vehicles area from integrating sub-systems up to assembling, and even launching the PSLV.
ISRO Chairman and Secretary, Department of Space, A.S. Kiran Kumar, told The Hindu: “Internal discussions have just started on the mechanism of forming a (launch vehicle) consortium. A few key industry players working in the space programme have been sounded.”
Eventually the future consortium will be fully responsible for building and launching the light-lift PSLV rocket.

Currently industries such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, Godrej & Boyce, Larsen & Toubro, MTAR and Walchandnagar Industries produce 80 per cent of the launch vehicle parts and sub-units.

In the last two years we did up to five launches [of both PSLV and GSLV rockets] in a year. The plan is to double this in two years and take it to about 16 over the next four years.

SHAR is also putting up a second Vehicle Asssembly Bay to improve the pace of building launchers.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 12 Jan 2016 18:50

http://www.isro.gov.in/launcher/pslv-c31-irnss-1e

PSLV-C31/IRNSS-1E launch scheduled on January 20,2016 at 09:31 Hrs (IST)

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 14 Jan 2016 20:14

http://www.isro.gov.in/sites/default/fi ... -final.pdf

Astrosat PDF by ISRO

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 14 Jan 2016 20:32

jayasimha wrote:http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=134162

In this new global era where everything is becoming smaller in size and smarter in application we are also trying to reduce the size of satellites to the extent possible. The vehicle configuration for PSLV of 400km Space Shuttle Orbiter (SSO) is 1200kg. The number of micro satellites that can be carried in single mission is eight, each weighing about 120kg with total payload capacity 960kg, he added.

Was that supposed to be Sun Synchronous Orbit?

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 14 Jan 2016 21:27

abhik wrote:
jayasimha wrote:http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=134162

In this new global era where everything is becoming smaller in size and smarter in application we are also trying to reduce the size of satellites to the extent possible. The vehicle configuration for PSLV of 400km Space Shuttle Orbiter (SSO) is 1200kg. The number of micro satellites that can be carried in single mission is eight, each weighing about 120kg with total payload capacity 960kg, he added.
Was that supposed to be Sun Synchronous Orbit?

You may already know this but altitude of typical Space Shuttle Orbit is about 400 Km (give or take a 100 Km).

Altitude of Sun Synchronous Orbit can be anywhere between, say 200 Km and 5000 Km, one just has to adjust the inclination in such a way that its it precesses exactly once a year. This precession happen because earth is not a perfect sphere and has an equatorial budge. That way when a satellite passes over any given point on earth, the local time (or sun's position, and shadows etc) is the same when it takes pictures over several days.

Hope that helps.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 14 Jan 2016 22:49

It was a pleasure to read the Astrosat pdf, thanks.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 17 Jan 2016 21:31

ISRO ‏@isro 20m20 minutes ago
PSLV-C31/IRNSS-1E Update: The 48hr countdown to start at 09:31 Hrs IST on Monday, January 18, 2016