Indian Space Program Discussion

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Dec 2010 16:44

From the video grab above, at T+30, it looks like the explosion occurred in the CUS motor.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 25 Dec 2010 16:48

Better version of the launch video. The vehicle veers off trajectory at around T+1min and then the explosion (could probably be the auto self-destruct).

The rocket veering off trajectory before the explosion tells us that something was indeed wrong with either the 1st stage or the LSBs.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 25 Dec 2010 16:51

Does anyone suspect sabotage? With failures in even established missiles like prithvi not to forget newer agnis and the rockets gslvs especially after all testing on ground.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Dec 2010 16:59

this was the last russian cryo engine - next time it will be indian cryo stage introducing one more risk element.

this is a program that must ofcourse be pushed to completion, regardless of time or cost. maybe a 2 yr hiatus for a total design review and redesign is needed.

vina · Post by **vina** » 25 Dec 2010 17:00

Interesting. There was an explosion of sorts on the top.Lots of things could have gone wrong. Some possibilities.

1) The heat shield separated prematurely, leading to loss of vehicle from the air pressure

2) Some tank/propellant explosion in the CUS or satellite

3) I think this is quite probable. The vehicle lost attitude control (you can sort of see that moments before the bang), the AoA increased beyond limits and the top of the vehicle simply collapsed.

The rest of the vehicle was structurally fine and in one piece,the engines were still working ,even after the top blew up and later there was a fireball and everything broke apart.

Oh well. They will be back up in the air pretty soon.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Dec 2010 17:03

Failure even in 1st stage has happened in a liquid strap-on motor before, IIRC. However, from the second video clip by KrishG above, I do not see any deviation from the flight path up to the point of destruction. And, the debri trace (there are two traces at 1:16 in the clip) also show they were from a normal flight path. I do not think the vehicle was destroyed by Range Safety after it veered off.

I hope our ISRO scientists/engineers do not feel disheartened at this time.

Sathish_A · Post by **Sathish_A** » 25 Dec 2010 17:04

the explosion occured after T50+ secs and in the video above at 1.07 the explosion seems to be at the bottom of the rocket. If doubt if it was CUS.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 17:06

It is a wake up call for ISRO now.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Dec 2010 17:07

Singha wrote:this was the last russian cryo engine - next time it will be indian cryo stage introducing one more risk element.

I think we still have one engine left.

But, we *must* have our own CUS, there is no alternative.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 25 Dec 2010 17:10

Rediff is reporting failure in 1st stage as per ISRO

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/isros ... 101225.htm

vic · Post by **vic** » 25 Dec 2010 17:13

IIRC when USA started developing solid fuel stages, then it had around 50-100 failures. We should should double the funding, and triple the efforts. Looking forward to next launch! Nobody died, so why cry!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 17:15

Wasn't there a report about a leak?

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 25 Dec 2010 17:16

vina wrote: 3) I think this is quite probable. The vehicle lost attitude control (you can sort of see that moments before the bang), the AoA increased beyond limits and the top of the vehicle simply collapsed.

Most probable. The cause as to why it veered off trajectory is unknown as of yet. The S139 is a very reliable stage and flies on both PSLVs and GSLVs. I would be bit surprised if it caused the failure.

Sathish_A · Post by **Sathish_A** » 25 Dec 2010 17:35

Interesting. There was an explosion of sorts on the top.Lots of things could have gone wrong. Some possibilities.

Vina ji, that was shock wave or cloud breaking and not the heat shield If you observe from 1.00 onwards...

manoba · Post by **manoba** » 25 Dec 2010 17:40

It's a wake up call for ISRO...
They must double, triple, quadruple check...
Radhakrishnan seems to be hell of a bad luck for ISRO...

I mean give those hard working guys at ISRO a break and some space to breath.

After two failures they became what? Asin, Veer, MNIS, Kites?

Stop that Bollywood ishtyle panchangam.

It's rocket science folks. Failure is also part of it. And from that the ISRO guys already learnt lot and still learning, which we can't buy off-the-shelf from any country. Do you think they didn't check and recheck for hundred, if not thousand, times before the countdown. That too after the failure of the first Indian CUS or having a launch on the eve of Christmas?

Now, the DDM doggies got their bones to chew.

Meantime, I wish the ISRO folks a good year ahead and many of successful launches.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 25 Dec 2010 17:40

SSridhar wrote:Failure even in 1st stage has happened in a liquid strap-on motor before, IIRC. However, from the second video clip by KrishG above, I do not see any deviation from the flight path up to the point of destruction. And, the debri trace (there are two traces at 1:16 in the clip) also show they were from a normal flight path. I do not think the vehicle was destroyed by Range Safety after it veered off.

The vehicle does pitch-up seconds before the disintegration.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 25 Dec 2010 17:45

SaiK wrote:Wasn't there a report about a leak?

Yes!

The launch of country's latest communication satellite GSAT-5P on Monday from the spaceport of Sriharikota, was deferred today after a minor leak in the Russian cryogenic engine on board the GSLV-F06 launch vehicle.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Dec 2010 17:52

Guys, in its nascent stage, there were two successive failures of ASLV. Major lessons in design aspects were learned by ISRO from those failures. I am sure, ISRO will also learn from this today.

If the failure was due to explosion in CUS, it goes to prove that even after Russian engineers had attended to the leakage problem, things went wrong proving once again how unforgiving spacecraft are.

If it was a failure in the first stage, it is probably a quality control issue as the solid booster and liquid strap-ons are proven ones.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 25 Dec 2010 17:53

"Does anyone suspect sabotage? With failures in even established missiles like prithvi not to forget newer agnis and the rockets gslvs especially after all testing on ground."

This latest launch failure does look very puzzling. An established vehicle with an established upper stage cryo-engine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Dec 2010 17:54

ISRO confirms Altitude Error in Press Conference , Large Altitude error developed.

Control Command Signal from onboard computer failed to reach first stage after 47 second

Self Destruct command issued.

ISRO chairman noted what caused this control command failure needs further analysis.

Good Luck to ISRO GSLV team , they will bounce back soon.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Dec 2010 17:55

KrishG wrote:The vehicle does pitch-up seconds before the disintegration.

KrishG, I thought the pitch up occurs after a large chunk seems to have fallen off from the upper stage, at time 1:08 in your second video.

Added: Didn't see Austin's post above about self-destruct.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 18:16

this is a tremendous loss in terms of the satellite and its service. ISRO must to do dummy launches with new cryo before loading up with real sats. Perhaps moon mission experiments.

vina · Post by **vina** » 25 Dec 2010 18:34

ISRO confirms Altitude Error in Press Conference , Large Altitude error developed.

Hmm. I guessed right. That seemed most probable. Now obviously Isro will dig deep to find out why there was a control/guidance failure. Pretty sad.

I just hope it is not some trivial IT/Vity programming error like in the first PSLV stage and thereafter the command programs just crashed /shutdown/ went off the rails

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Dec 2010 18:49

TV says "explosion" was the self destruct command.

vina · Post by **vina** » 25 Dec 2010 19:03

shiv wrote:TV says "explosion" was the self destruct command.

Yes. That part is the orange fireball. If you see the footage posted (the best ones are the DD /NDTV ones), it clearly sees the top breaking up and flying out, the vehicle still flying with the top blown up (the rest in still one piece) and the entire vehicle erupts in an orange fireball later , which I think is the self destruct.

The ISRO chief said right now on TV,that the command guidance stopped going to the engine gymbal controls after 47 secs (I thought they had a secondary injection thrust system of steering engines continued from SLV-3 all the way to PSLV for the zero and 1st stages.. it looks like for GSLV, they went for engines mounted on gymbals... Raakit gurus who know the latest pls to fill.. ).

This surely looks like some electronics / IT/Vity error and not something mechanical like the hydraulics/drive of the gymbals failing because something was roasted up /leaking/failing or something. Bummer really if it came down to something as trivial as a connector coming loose or a IT/Vity program crashing.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 25 Dec 2010 19:05

It's Ok guys. We will keep at it I'm sure. this is par for the course.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 Dec 2010 19:16

GSLV has seen more failures than PSLV which is the real workhorse. I suspect another 10 years work is needed given the rate at which we launch these things.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 25 Dec 2010 19:23

Arihant = Russian technical consultancy.

What is the degree of above consultancy wrt to GSLV, if any?

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 25 Dec 2010 19:28

Lets hope ISRO do the best for GSLV next time

for the question of different control systems in GSLV, there is something called RCS (Roll control system) apart from the SITVC (Side inertial thrust vector control). If I correctly remember, helium (which leaked) was for that. Before the top sweared away, there was a serious distrubance in the way rocket moved

Similar leakage and failure was there for SLV-3 first launch

Version Date of Launch Launch Location Launch Pad Payload Mission Status
3 E1 10 August 1979 SDHC, Sriharikota 1 Rohini-1A Experimental Technology mission, 30 kg Failure; Faulty valve and wrong assessment causes vehicle to crash into the Bay of Bengal (317 s after take off), Developmental Flight.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 25 Dec 2010 19:31

French radio in Brusselabad said it exploded on launch pad

.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 19:41

signal failure could also mean hardware failure from circuitry logic to physical disconnect/cable burn due to heat (leak).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Dec 2010 19:42

as usual you managerial classes are blaming the lowly ITvity trooper for any failure.

ramdas · Post by **ramdas** » 25 Dec 2010 19:44

All in all, looks like either lack of quality control or sabotage. The sabotage angle must be seriously looked into.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Dec 2010 19:45

and what was the reason to report on the leak, and the reasoning that a leak of certain degree/order is acceptable for this mission?

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 25 Dec 2010 19:53

there is something called RCS (Roll control system)

2nd stage: Engine Gimalling – two place for pitch and yaw control, hot gas Reaction Control System (RCS) for roll control

3rd stage: 2 Vernier engines for thrust phase control and cold gas RCS for cost phase control.

That was for F04.

http://www.isro.org/gslv-f04/gslv-f04.aspx

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 25 Dec 2010 19:55

From the TV footage and the news that control command to 1st stage was brokenn, it appears that the attitude (not altitude as mentioned earlier) of vehicle changed, bringing in large aerodynamic force...which resulted in the break up of upper stage. The smoke seen at the time of break up of upper stage could be the ice formed around the tank.

Sad thing that has happened...How long will they take to perfect this vehicl? it is already a decade and counting. Poor show by ISRO, unless there is an element of sabotage (why should the software malfunctin now?)

I for one would say their supply chain is the weakest link....something I feld after the very firsy failure on launch pad where some shoddy plumbing work was the reason.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 25 Dec 2010 20:06

It is the time they need our support.

bahdada · Post by **bahdada** » 25 Dec 2010 20:11

ramdas wrote:All in all, looks like either lack of quality control or sabotage. The sabotage angle must be seriously looked into.

Yes Ramdas, I'm think it was Amerikhan Unkil trying to make Lalmullah happy and our best friend Russia look stupid.

Unlike other Govt employees in other Govt "Enterprises", these guys are rocket scientists and their genius must never be questioned as it might make them feel bad or worse fear they might actually face a performance evaluation in another 30yrs. Btw, do Rocket Scientists and Engineers have a public union?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 25 Dec 2010 20:23

GSLV failure tragic, say scientists

ISRO’s GSLV mission goes up in smoke