NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
International Space Flight (ESA, Russia, China and others) => Indian Launchers => Topic started by: johnxx9 on 12/05/2008 02:19 pm
-
William Graham's excellent launch overview:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/ (http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/)
Launch Updates begin around page 29 on this thread.
See I recently got to know of the GSLV-Mk 3 specifications of every stage. I'll just post them:
Boosters:
* Stage0: 2 x GSLV-3 S200.
* Gross Mass: 240,000 kg (554,301 lb).
* Empty Mass: 40,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction:0.83 (S125 and S139 have a mass fraction of 0.82)
* Thrust (vac): 7698 kN.
* Isp (Vac): 269 sec
* Burn time: 106-108 seconds (based on S125 and S139)
1st Stage/Core Stage:
* Stage1: 1 x GSLV Mk3.
* Gross Mass: 119,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 9,000 kg. [based on Ariane 4 first stage data]
* Mass Fraction: 0.92
* Motor: 2 x Vikas L-110
* Total Thrust (vac): 1,600 kN.
* Isp: 300 sec.
* Burn time: 220-230 seconds. One vikas engine in the GSLV and PSLV uses 40 tons of fuel for a 160 second burn. The Mk3 allots 55 tons per engine.
* Propellants: UDMH + N2O4.
2nd Stage/ Indigenous Cryogenic Stage:
* Gross Mass: 30,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 5,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction: 0.83
* Motor: 1 x ICE.
* Thrust (vac): 200 kN.
* Isp: 450 sec.
* Burn time: 720 sec.
* Propellants: Lox/LH2
The speculation is that it will be able to launch 10 tons to LEO and 4 tons to GSO. But I am really doubting if a rocket with this kind of thrust would have such minimal capabilities.
I compared every stage to the Ariane-5 ECA and really GSLV-MK3 outdid it in thrust. Ariane has a capability of 6-7 to GSO and about 15-18 tons to LEO.
So I really think that GSLV- Mk 3 would be a heavy lifter like the Ariane-5 and Angara.
My thinking is that its reduced capability is mainly due to the low burn time of the core stage!
-
The specifications for the GSLV-3 are similar to a Titan 3 launcher with a centaur upper stage.
It is therefore reasonable to expect that the GSLV could put at least 15 tons in LEO. I would not be surprised if they eventually put 20 tons in LEO.
The GSLV-4 (essentially a double GSLV-3) would be able to put between 40-45 tons in orbit. It would be possible to launch a lunar expedition with 2 GSLV-4 lauches (one for the TLI stage and one for the orbiter+ lander).
See I recently got to know of the GSLV-Mk 3 specifications of every stage. I'll just post them:
I compared every stage to the Ariane-5 ECA and really GSLV-MK3 outdid it in thrust. Ariane has a capability of 6-7 to GSO and about 15-18 tons to LEO.
So I really think that GSLV- Mk 3 would be a heavy lifter like the Ariane-5 and Angara. So please post the possible capability that you could think !!!!!! :'(
My thinking is that its reduced capability is mainly due to the low burn time of the core stage !!!!!!! I
-
See I recently got to know of the GSLV-Mk 3 specifications of every stage. I'll just post them:
Boosters:
* Stage0: 2 x GSLV-3 S200.
* Gross Mass: 2400,000 kg (554,301 lb).
* Empty Mass: 40,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction:0.83 (S125 and S139 have a mass fraction of 0.82)
* Thrust (vac): 7698 kN.
* Isp (Vac): 269 sec
* Burn time: 106-108 seconds (based on S125 and S139)
1st Stage/Core Stage:
* Stage1: 1 x GSLV Mk3.
* Gross Mass: 119,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 9,000 kg. [based on Ariane 4 first stage data]
* Mass Fraction: 0.92
* Motor: 2 x Vikas L-110
* Total Thrust (vac): 1,600 kN.
* Isp: 300 sec.
* Burn time: 220-230 seconds. One vikas engine in the GSLV and PSLV uses 40 tons of fuel for a 160 second burn. The Mk3 allots 55 tons per engine.
* Propellants: UDMH + N2O4.
2nd Stage/ Indigenous Cryogenic Stage:
* Gross Mass: 30,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 5,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction: 0.83
* Motor: 1 x ICE.
* Thrust (vac): 200 kN.
* Isp: 450 sec.
* Burn time: 720 sec.
* Propellants: Lox/LH2
The speculation is that it will be able to launch 10 tons to LEO and 4 tons to GSO. But I am really doubting if a rocket with this kind of thrust would have such minimal capabilities.
I compared every stage to the Ariane-5 ECA and really GSLV-MK3 outdid it in thrust. Ariane has a capability of 6-7 to GSO and about 15-18 tons to LEO.
So I really think that GSLV- Mk 3 would be a heavy lifter like the Ariane-5 and Angara. So please post the possible capability that you could think !!!!!! :'(
My thinking is that its reduced capability is mainly due to the low burn time of the core stage !!!!!!! I
These numbers do not add up. The "2400,000 kg" Stage Zero GLOW is obviously in error. If it is supposed to be "240,000 kg", then that doesn't match the "554,301 lb" (251,384 kg) number.
The "7,698 kN" Stage Zero thrust may be correct for liftoff, but a much lower average thrust, something like 4,750 kN, is required for the burn time to match the propellant and specific impulse numbers.
The 1,600 kN Stage One thrust seems too high to me. Available propellant, burn time, and specific impulse suggests something closer to 1,400 kN, which is more in line with current Vikas capabilities.
I suspect that the dry mass of the Cryo stage would have to be less than the suggested 5 tonnes in order to achieve the reported 4 tonnes payload to GTO. I have to put it at 4 tonnes in my spreadsheet to get close to the required delta-v. With a 5 tonne dry mass, I can't even get a 3 tonne payload to GTO!
If I assume a 4 tonne dry Cryo stage mass, I can get 12.5-13 tonnes to LEO on my spreadsheet model, but this doesn't take into account the very low T/W ratio that the upper stage would provide. (Obviously the LEO payload would only be 11.5-12 tonnes for a 5 tonne dry mass Cryo stage.) A highly lofted trajectory would be needed for a heavy LEO payload. The real capability of this launch vehicle will depend heavily on its upper stage, which is providing more than 50% of the delta-v.
One possibility is that the reported 10 tonnes payload is for sun synchronous LEO.
As it stands, GSLV Mk3 looks to be roughly equivalent to a Titan 3C, LEO wise, but with better GTO performance due to the use of an LH2 upper stage.
- Ed Kyle
-
See I recently got to know of the GSLV-Mk 3 specifications of every stage. I'll just post them:
Boosters:
* Stage0: 2 x GSLV-3 S200.
* Gross Mass: 2400,000 kg (554,301 lb).
* Empty Mass: 40,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction:0.83 (S125 and S139 have a mass fraction of 0.82)
* Thrust (vac): 7698 kN.
* Isp (Vac): 269 sec
* Burn time: 106-108 seconds (based on S125 and S139)
1st Stage/Core Stage:
* Stage1: 1 x GSLV Mk3.
* Gross Mass: 119,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 9,000 kg. [based on Ariane 4 first stage data]
* Mass Fraction: 0.92
* Motor: 2 x Vikas L-110
* Total Thrust (vac): 1,600 kN.
* Isp: 300 sec.
* Burn time: 220-230 seconds. One vikas engine in the GSLV and PSLV uses 40 tons of fuel for a 160 second burn. The Mk3 allots 55 tons per engine.
* Propellants: UDMH + N2O4.
2nd Stage/ Indigenous Cryogenic Stage:
* Gross Mass: 30,000 kg.
* Empty Mass: 5,000 kg.
* Mass Fraction: 0.83
* Motor: 1 x ICE.
* Thrust (vac): 200 kN.
* Isp: 450 sec.
* Burn time: 720 sec.
* Propellants: Lox/LH2
The speculation is that it will be able to launch 10 tons to LEO and 4 tons to GSO. But I am really doubting if a rocket with this kind of thrust would have such minimal capabilities.
I compared every stage to the Ariane-5 ECA and really GSLV-MK3 outdid it in thrust. Ariane has a capability of 6-7 to GSO and about 15-18 tons to LEO.
So I really think that GSLV- Mk 3 would be a heavy lifter like the Ariane-5 and Angara. So please post the possible capability that you could think !!!!!! :'(
My thinking is that its reduced capability is mainly due to the low burn time of the core stage !!!!!!! I
These numbers do not add up. The "2400,000 kg" Stage Zero GLOW is obviously in error. If it is supposed to be "240,000 kg", then that doesn't match the "554,301 lb" (251,384 kg) number.
The "7,698 kN" Stage Zero thrust may be correct for liftoff, but a much lower average thrust, something like 4,750 kN, is required for the burn time to match the propellant and specific impulse numbers.
The 1,600 kN Stage One thrust seems too high to me. Available propellant, burn time, and specific impulse suggests something closer to 1,400 kN, which is more in line with current Vikas capabilities.
I suspect that the dry mass of the Cryo stage would have to be less than the suggested 5 tonnes in order to achieve the reported 4 tonnes payload to GTO. I have to put it at 4 tonnes in my spreadsheet to get close to the required delta-v. With a 5 tonne dry mass, I can't even get a 3 tonne payload to GTO!
If I assume a 4 tonne dry Cryo stage mass, I can get 12.5-13 tonnes to LEO on my spreadsheet model, but this doesn't take into account the very low T/W ratio that the upper stage would provide. (Obviously the LEO payload would only be 11.5-12 tonnes for a 5 tonne dry mass Cryo stage.) A highly lofted trajectory would be needed for a heavy LEO payload. The real capability of this launch vehicle will depend heavily on its upper stage, which is providing more than 50% of the delta-v.
One possibility is that the reported 10 tonnes payload is for sun synchronous LEO.
As it stands, GSLV Mk3 looks to be roughly equivalent to a Titan 3C, LEO wise, but with better GTO performance due to the use of an LH2 upper stage.
- Ed Kyle
But Ariane-5 ECA carries 238 metric tons of propellant in the booster stage and yet gets about 6500kN of average thrust.
-
But Ariane-5 ECA carries 238 metric tons of propellant in the booster stage and yet gets about 6500kN of average thrust.
That's not the average thrust, that's probably the peak or liftoff thrust. The thrust is going to be tailored to peak during the first seconds of flight, then to slowly tail off with time. It turns out that the Ariane 5 ECA booster has roughly the same average thrust as the GSLV Mk3 booster, but the Ariane 5 booster burns longer.
Total propellant mass is not necessarily linearly related to thrust. Thrust is determined by propellant surface area, among other things.
- Ed Kyle
-
Even if the capability of GSLV-Mk III is 5-GTO and 10-12 to LEO wouldn't a total mass of 630 tons be very high compared to other launch vehicles of the same payload capability ???
I was quite surprised to see some of the other launch vehicles in this payload category. The GSLV-Mk III weighs in about 630,000 kg.
*The American Delta-IV Medium has a payload capability of 4 tons to GTO and 9 tons to LEO. It weighs at around 250,000 kg
*The European Ariane-4 Heavy(retired) had a capability of 4.5 tons to GTO and 8 tons to LEO. It had a mass of 470,000 kg.
*The Japanese H-II (retired) had a payload capability of 4 tons to GTO and 10 tons to LEO. It's overall mass was surprisingly 260,000 kg
*The Chinese Long March-2E(A) has a capability of about 3.5 tons to GTO and 9 tons to LEO. It's overall mass is 462,000 kg.
What would be the cause of this very high overall mass ???????
Is GSLV- Mk III so in-efficient ????????
-
Even if the capability of GSLV-Mk III is 5-GTO and 10-12 to LEO wouldn't a total mass of 630 tons be very high compared to other launch vehicles of the same payload capability ???
I was quite surprised to see some of the other launch vehicles in this payload category. The GSLV-Mk III weighs in about 630,000 kg.
*The American Delta-IV Medium has a payload capability of 4 tons to GTO and 9 tons to LEO. It weighs at around 250,000 kg
*The European Ariane-4 Heavy(retired) had a capability of 4.5 tons to GTO and 8 tons to LEO. It had a mass of 470,000 kg.
*The Japanese H-II (retired) had a payload capability of 4 tons to GTO and 10 tons to LEO. It's overall mass was surprisingly 260,000 kg
*The Chinese Long March-2E(A) has a capability of about 3.5 tons to GTO and 9 tons to LEO. It's overall mass is 462,000 kg.
What would be the cause of this very high overall mass ???????
Is GSLV- Mk III so in-efficient ????????
GSLV Mk III is projected to weigh about the same as Titan IIIC, which offered roughly similar payload capacity. Both weigh so much because both were/will be equipped with big throat solid rocket motors. Big solid motors are heavier than a comparable liquid stage, but they produce copious amounts of liftoff thrust (the Mk III solid pair produce half again as much thrust as Proton's first stage) and their simplicity is supposed to make them cost less than an equivalent liquid stage.
None of the examples you listed above used solid motors as big and heavy as GSLV Mk III and Titan IIIC. In addition, Delta IV and H-2A use hydrogen-fueled core stages, which provide more energy per kilogram than GSLV's UDMH/N2O4. Note that 480 of the GSLV Mk III 630 tonne liftoff mass is from the Mk III solids.
- Ed Kyle
-
MKIII's solid booster static test coming up next month ( Jan 2010):
http://beta.thehindu.com/sci-tech/article61220.ece
-
S200 ground-firing in Jan, 2010
http://indianspaceweb.blogspot.com/2009/12/ground-firing-of-s200.html
-
Test firing of GSLV Mk-III second stage
http://indianspaceweb.blogspot.com/2010/01/l110-test-to-follow-s200.html
-
Successful static testing of Solid Propellant Booster Rocket Stage S200 for GSLV Mk III Launch Vehicle :
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Jan24_2010
-
S200 successfully tested, L110 next (http://indianspaceweb.blogspot.com/2010/01/s200-successfully-tested-l110-next.html)
Towards self-reliance in launch vehicle technology (http://beta.thehindu.com/sci-tech/article93918.ece)
-
PICTURES: S200 static tests, L110 (http://indianspaceweb.blogspot.com/2010/01/pictures-s200-static-tests-l110.html)
-
First launch expected in April. Race with SpaceX? :)
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_first-flight-testing-of-gslv-mk-iii-in-april-isro-chief_1352051
-
First launch expected in April. Race with SpaceX? :)
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_first-flight-testing-of-gslv-mk-iii-in-april-isro-chief_1352051
They confused GSLV Mk.2 and Mk.3
-
They confused GSLV Mk.2 and Mk.3
It's Mk-2 apparently.
Mk-III is still having it's upper stage engine being built whuch will be followed by tests before launch in early 2011.
-
A set back :(. Where did it go wrong? Any ideas? Miscalculation of propellant mass?
http://isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Mar06_2010
-
A set back :(. Where did it go wrong? Any ideas? Miscalculation of propellant mass?
http://isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Mar06_2010
Leakage according to this link:
http://only2you.blogspot.com/2010/03/l110-liquid-engine-static-test-failed.html
"
.......
........
The test was aborted after some “minor leakage in the command system”
........
"
Not sure what is meant by command system....hydraulics??
-
Testing of L110 liquid core not fully successful.
http://isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Mar06_2010
-
ISRO was predicting a launch date for GSLV-Mk3 of early 2011 - so does this set back that date significantly?
They made it sound like it was a minor glitch, and not any kind of serious derailment.
What other tests remain to be done to certify the rocket for test flight readiness?
What kind of payload would the GSLV-Mk3 loft up on its first flight?
-
L110 (thanks to Salo):
-
L110 (thanks to Salo):
That is an unusual configuration. The engines are spaced far apart compared to the comparable Titan IIIC series. Wonder why?
- Ed Kyle
-
Nozzle extensions not yet installed? Visually, that is a very small expansion ratio... Just guessing...
-
Nozzle extensions not yet installed?
Sounds like a good guess to me.
-
This is a version for sealevel test firing.
http://isro.org/pressrelease/contents/2010/images/L110.jpeg
-
For comparison: Second stage of GSLV-D3 under preparation
http://www.isro.org/rep2010/citizens.htm
-
Will the Mk III be launched on solids only, or combined thrust with the core? If altitude lit, then one would expect nozzle extensions which would explain the wide spacing.
-
(http://s43.radikal.ru/i102/0912/58/7c6d70108191.jpg)
-
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/article621253.ece
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2010/09/09/stories/2010090951630400.htmGSLV-MkIII liquid stage clears test
Bangalore, Sept. 8
Indian Space Research Organisation on Wednesday said its heavy-lift launcher programme GSLV-MkIII moved further ahead after a successful static testing of the liquid core stage.
An earlier test in March had to be aborted 50 seconds earlier after a leak was noticed.
ISRO said it was satisfied with its performance. The launcher, under development for some years now, is slated to be ready for a first flight in 2012.
“Today's successful test of (the liquid second stage) L110 for its full flight duration of 200 seconds is a major milestone in the Earth storable liquid rocket programme and a significant step forward in the development of GSLV-MkIII launch vehicle,” a release said.
L110 was tested at the Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre test facility at Mahendragiri, Tamil Nadu, at 3.50 p.m.
The MkIII programme, taken up at a cost of nearly Rs 2,500 crore, is meant to double the GSLV's satellite lifting capacity to four tonnes. It uses two solid fuel based strap-on boosters (S200), which cleared the test in January this year; the L-110 liquid stage and the crucial cryogenic upper stage C-25.
ISRO said L110 is one of the heaviest Earth storable liquid stages ever developed by ISRO.
It has two high-pressure Vikas engines. Nearly 500 health parameters were monitored during the test and initial data indicate normal performance.
-
http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Sep08_2010
Successful Static Testing of L 110 Liquid Core Stage of GSLV - Mk III
Indian Space Research Organisation successfully conducted the second static testing of its liquid core stage (L110) of Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV Mk -III) for 200 seconds at its Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre (LPSC) test facility at Mahendragiri on September 8, 2010 at 15:50 hrs.
L110 is one of the heaviest earth storable liquid stages ever developed by ISRO. L110 stage had two high pressure Vikas engines in a clustered configuration. Nearly 500 health parameters were monitored during the test and the initial data acquired indicates its normal performance. Today`s successful test of L110 for its full flight duration of 200 seconds, is a major mile stone in the earth storable liquid rocket programme of ISRO and a significant step forward in the development of GSLV-Mk III launch vehicle.
It may be recalled that GSLV-Mk III, which is currently under advanced stage of development uses two solid strap on boosters (S200), L-110 liquid stage and a cryogenic upper stage C-25.
-
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1010/12gslv/
India is also designing a cryogenic stage for the third-generation GSLV slated to debut in 2012 or 2013. The GSLV Mk.3 will be powered by a third stage consuming double the propellant of the indigenous GSLV Mk.2 engine that is now the focus of ISRO's rocket engineers.
-
There has been an update on the progress of the GSLV Mk-III programme in the Indian Parliament - http://isro.gov.in/parliament/2011/Budget/LUSQ3347.pdf
1. They plan a second static test of the solid first stage S-200 in mid-2011.
2. The work of developing C-25, the cryogenic engine which powers the 3rd stage of the Mk-III is currently progressing. They have completed and tested the turbopumps and the gas generator and are working on the thrust chamber. If all goes well, they hope to test the C-25 by the end of 2011.
This is different from the GSLV Mk-II and so, I think the Mk-II is also expected to be seperately tested this year.
Pradeep
-
There has been an update on the progress of the GSLV Mk-III programme in the Indian Parliament - http://isro.gov.in/parliament/2011/Budget/LUSQ3347.pdf
1. They plan a second static test of the solid first stage S-200 in mid-2011.
2. The work of developing C-25, the cryogenic engine which powers the 3rd stage of the Mk-III is currently progressing. They have completed and tested the turbopumps and the gas generator and are working on the thrust chamber. If all goes well, they hope to test the C-25 by the end of 2011.
This is different from the GSLV Mk-II and so, I think the Mk-II is also expected to be seperately tested this year.
Pradeep
Dear pradeep,
Thank you for your valuable information on the test of solid booster & integrated test of cryogenic Engine to be held in the mid of the year & end of the year respectively.
I think there is technically difference on cryogenic engines used in both GSLV Mk-II & MK-III. So it might be the another new cryogenic test on MK-III.
Shams
-
2. The work of developing C-25, the cryogenic engine which powers the 3rd stage of the Mk-III is currently progressing. They have completed and tested the turbopumps and the gas generator and are working on the thrust chamber. If all goes well, they hope to test the C-25 by the end of 2011.
Unrealistic I would say given the progress made so far. IMHO the fabrication of the engine itself will go on through 2011 and even 2012.
-
ISRO thinks that the GSLV Mk-III vehicle could be test flown in 2012-13 time frame (April 2012 - March 2013). It would be interesting to see which satellite would serve as payload on the vehicle.
GSAT-10 or GSAT-11 look like prime candidates for the vehicle.
Pradeep
-
ISRO thinks that the GSLV Mk-III vehicle could be test flown in 2012-13 time frame (April 2012 - March 2013). It would be interesting to see which satellite would serve as payload on the vehicle.
GSAT-10 or GSAT-11 look like prime candidates for the vehicle.
Pradeep
Difficult date to keep up. Second half of 2013 seems more plausible.
IIRC GSAT-10 will be launched on Ariane. It's the GSAT-11 which is being built to be launched on Mk-III. It's ISRO's first satellite based on I-4K bus ( >4 tonnes)
-
Here's the most recent news story I came across on it:
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article1820727.ece
“PSLV C-17 will be launched in July and it will carry GSAT-12, a communication satellite. PSLV-C18 will be launched in September and it will carry a weather forecast satellite. PSLV-C19 with a payload of Radar Imaging Satellite (RISAT) will be launched by this year end,” Mr. Chandradathan {Director, Sathish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota} said.
“Recently launched PSLV-C16 precisely injected its payloads into intended orbits without wasting even a bit of propellant,” he said.
Later speaking to reporters, Mr. Chandradathan said that building of GSLV-Mk III will be over by 2012 end and launch would be in the next year.
“GSLV-Mk III has three stages. The first stage, Solid propellant booster S-200 has been tested and qualified; Second and liquid propellant stage called L-110 has also been tested. Work is yet to be completed in third and important stage, the cryogenic stage,” he said.
-
Thanks sanman.
I have already referred to this article in the Indian launch schedule thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1173.msg731765#msg731765); but it does also belong here!
-
GSLV Mk III static testing is currently on and would continue till 2012.
(source (http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_isro-missions-delayed-courtesy-gslv-project_1543691))
-
The GSLV-MarkIII will be flight tested in 2 years:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/isro-to-begin-flight-testing-of-gslv-mkiii-in-next-two-years/articleshow/8761258.cms
This will impact the Chandrayaan-2 lunar mission, which will now have to be launched on the GSLV F-Series:
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/sci-tech/space/isro-likely-scale-down-chandrayaan-2-886
F-Series? I've never even heard of it before. Does anybody have any info on it?
-
The GSLV-MarkIII will be flight tested in 2 years:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/isro-to-begin-flight-testing-of-gslv-mkiii-in-next-two-years/articleshow/8761258.cms
This will impact the Chandrayaan-2 lunar mission, which will now have to be launched on the GSLV F-Series:
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/sci-tech/space/isro-likely-scale-down-chandrayaan-2-886
F-Series? I've never even heard of it before. Does anybody have any info on it?
The serial numbers… D1, D2 demonstration then followed by F01, F02…
PSLV also started with D for demonstration then C for continuation
-
Here is video of the latest test of the S200 solid rocket booster, which took place on Sep 4, 2011 at SHAR:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nym7AOJvIiE
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2011/09/s200-booster-tested-at-sdsc.html
-
http://www.asianscientist.com/topnews/india-isro-completes-second-test-of-s-200-solid-rocket-booster/
-
Another little blurb about GSLV Mk-III (video clip)
http://www.timesnow.tv/India-in-a-new-space-league/videoshow/4385667.cms
I'm just mentioning it, because @1:18 ISRO Chief Radhakrishnan says that they might attempt a developmental flight without the Cryogenic Upper Stage engine. He says they'd like to be in a position to do that by end of 2012. They don't want the CUS failures to delay the development of GSLV-Mk3 by too much.
-
Q&A: K Radhakrishnan, Chairman, ISRO: 'We need more launch pads and transponders' (http://business-standard.com/india/news/qa-k-radhakrishnan-chairman-isro/449096/)
-
S200 static test video:
http://www.isro.org/video.aspx
-
Acoustic/vibrational tests have been completed on the payload faring for the GSLV Mark-III:
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2012/03/gslv-mk-iii-payload-fairing-completes.html
-
From ISRO's 2011 report (http://www.isro.org/pdf/AnnuaReport2012.pdf), it reports that the first flight of GSLV-III will use a "passive upper stage"(pp.61), which presumably is a structural mock-up of the hydrogen upper stage.
Does it mean that it will be a sub-orbital flight?
-
From ISRO's 2011 report (http://www.isro.org/pdf/AnnuaReport2012.pdf), it reports that the first flight of GSLV-III will use a "passive upper stage"(pp.61), which presumably is a structural mock-up of the hydrogen upper stage.
Does it mean that it will be a sub-orbital flight?
Yes, it will be suborbital
-
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/245056/much-awaited-gslv-sept-oct.html
An atmospheric test for the GSLV-Mark-III upgraded version, sans the cryogenic stage, will also take place this year, said Radhakrishnan. “In fact during Jan-Feb 2012 we fully assembled a GSLV-Mark-III in Sriharikota and integrated it on our second launch pad and a series of tests were done followed by a detailed review by experts,” he disclosed.
The Isro had also changed its plans for the human spaceflight, he said. Instead of the human spaceflight happening on a GSLV flight, “we now want to do it on a GSLV-Mark-III,” he added.
-
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1205/01gslv/
(http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1205/01gslv/gslvmk3.jpg)
A test flight of India's third-generation GSLV, called the GSLV Mk.3, has been set for early 2013, Radhakrishnan said.
"GSLV Mk.3 has crossed several major milestones," Radhakrishnan said. "The lower stages have been qualified, and we will be undertaking an experimental flight of GSLV Mk.3 in a year from Sriharikota essentially to understand the behavior of the vehicle in the atmospheric stage of flight."
Propelled by two solid rocket boosters and a liquid-fueled two-engine core stage, the suborbital test flight will lift off from the Satish Dhawan Space Center on India's east coast.
Each booster will generate 1.1 million pounds of thrust, making it the third most powerful solid rocket motor in the world after the boosters used on the space shuttle and Ariane 5 launcher.
-
LVM3 monster on the launch pad.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/isros-new-monster-rocket/231686?pfrom=home-topstories (http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/isros-new-monster-rocket/231686?pfrom=home-topstories)
-
I like the description that it weighs more than 125 elephants.
-
<sigh> Sure would love a hi-res of that baby on the launchpad...pity it's ISRO. Even the Chinese are releasing good photos lately :/
-
(http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg585/scaled.php?server=585&filename=lvm3mockup.jpg&res=landing)
-
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Indigenous-space-engine-test-Saturday/articleshow/13100716.cms (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Indigenous-space-engine-test-Saturday/articleshow/13100716.cms)
The advanced rocket will have a multi-mission launch capability for geo-synchronous transfer orbit (GTO), low earth orbit (lEO), polar and intermediate circular orbits.
-
(http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/1624/gslvmk3.jpg)
-
-
Artist concept of manned LVM3
-
What sort of planetary mission capabilities does it have?
-
What sort of planetary mission capabilities does it have?
GSLV Mk 2 and GSLV Mk3/LVM3 have capability to deliver nearly 2300 kg and 4000 kg respectively in EPO.
-
If the Mark-III works out fine, there is the possibility of a Mark-IV:
(http://jayabarathan.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/indian-rockets.jpg?w=540)
(http://www.india365.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/gslv.jpg)
(http://www.destination-orbite.net/lanceurs/images/famille_gslv_mk3_4.jpg)
Other possible variants:
(http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg201/scaled.php?server=201&filename=lvm3variants.jpg&res=landing)
-
Acoustics suppression system for LVM3
-
Does anybody know if the X1 mission of the GSLV Mk-3 is still set for 2013?
According to ISRO's launch schedule the PSLV C-25 is to lift off from the second launch pad in october, the second launch pad normally has a 3 month turn round time for launches so i suspect GSLV-3 has slipped into 2014.
-
Does anybody know if the X1 mission of the GSLV Mk-3 is still set for 2013?
According to ISRO's launch schedule the PSLV C-25 is to lift off from the second launch pad in october, the second launch pad normally has a 3 month turn round time for launches so i suspect GSLV-3 has slipped into 2014.
Not possible this year, as ISRO will be be busy till the end of November with the MangalYaan mission.
-
LVM3 payload fairing acoustic test images (Thanks Tarmak007)
-
Hmm, those pictures look quite old. I remember seeing them some months after the most recent failure of GSLV-Mk2.
-
Hmm, those pictures look quite old. I remember seeing them some months after the most recent failure of GSLV-Mk2.
Learnt that there are lots of politics going on with in ISRO that might effect the progress of country. Humble request all the scientists to please keep their egos and politics away from the schedules as ISRO is the only one organization that is believed to be clean. Having said this I would like to remind our beloved and respected scientists that its not only INDIA that is interested in your successful achievements but there are many developing countries that INDIA is for them. I can assure that ISRO millions of optimistic eyes world wide are on ISRO's development in an conception that space would be in their reach with in their budget. YOU ARE THE HOPE OF RAY FOR ALL THE OPTIMISTIC under development countries kindly do not corrupt your image or reputation. GO INDIA GO!!!!
-
Hmm, those pictures look quite old. I remember seeing them some months after the most recent failure of GSLV-Mk2.
Yes, the pics are old. The dimensions of the PF are 10.65 m height and 5m diameter.
-
What sort of planetary mission capabilities does it have?
GSLV Mk 2 and GSLV Mk3/LVM3 have capability to deliver nearly 2300 kg and 4000 kg respectively in EPO.
Thanks for that info. Hoping it will be ready in time for their second Mars mission.
-
What sort of planetary mission capabilities does it have?
GSLV Mk 2 and GSLV Mk3/LVM3 have capability to deliver nearly 2300 kg and 4000 kg respectively in EPO.
Thanks for that info. Hoping it will be ready in time for their second Mars mission.
Yeah same here :).
Here is a possible payload accommodation for LVM3 and a comparison with PSLV
-
I believe that everything will depend on GSLV Mrk II success... isnt it? Because, I believe many systems are the same for both. So any Mrk II delay will definitely affect Mrk III too.
-
I believe that everything will depend on GSLV Mrk II success... isnt it? Because, I believe many systems are the same for both. So any Mrk II delay will definitely affect Mrk III too.
Actually they are not related. LVM3 is a next generation launcher of ISRO with a completely new design independent of GSLV Mk2. All the avionics sub systems are newly developed with a high degree of miniaturization and better performance and have already been tested in flight as a payload on PSLVs.
-
Any idea about the status of the third launch pad at SHAR? Is it ready? There is no mention on ISRO website on the ground facilities page.
-
Is ISRO so secretive about its work because it is never realistic about its launch schedules and needs to keep on postponing? Most schedules are never met. The initial announcement is made with a lot of fanfare and media glare. Then as the dates keep slipping there is total silence. Now that ISRO has commercial interest in its launch markets, it needs to learn to be more professional and set realistic schedules and stick to them.
-
Is ISRO so secretive about its work because it is never realistic about its launch schedules and needs to keep on postponing? Most schedules are never met. The initial announcement is made with a lot of fanfare and media glare. Then as the dates keep slipping there is total silence. Now that ISRO has commercial interest in its launch markets, it needs to learn to be more professional and set realistic schedules and stick to them.
The problem is that ISRO goes with over ambition some times and make their schedule so tight that they are not able to concentrate on all of them at a time. They should sketch the schedule based on reality instead of fantasy. ISRO has to realize that we depend on our own technology building from scratch. This needs a lot of time hence the schedules should be sketched accordingly instead of Jumping on things
-
At two or three launchers per year, India is hardly in the regime of a high launch rate.
-
As Steve said, we don't really have a high rate of launch. But hornbill2007, ISRO isn't really secretive about its schedules. Antrix has been operating for sometime now, and they're doing pretty well in terms of revenue generation for ISRO. You don't get there by being shoddy to work with. i.e. I'm sure there's a free flow of timeline (and other necessary) information with their customers.
The difference is that, in India, there's hardly any emphasis on proactive, public disclosure of information. So they don't bother making press-releases, or updating their websites. I'm sure if someone called up Antrix, and managed to speak to an officer and listed press as the reason for request, they wouldn't turn you down.
Edit: And, as has been pointed out - the reasons for the delay are numerous. You could say, though, that they track back to two primary causes : our position on the technology maturity ladder, and the second being shoestring budgets.
-
As Steve said, we don't really have a high rate of launch. But hornbill2007, ISRO isn't really secretive about its schedules. Antrix has been operating for sometime now, and they're doing pretty well in terms of revenue generation for ISRO. You don't get there by being shoddy to work with. i.e. I'm sure there's a free flow of timeline (and other necessary) information with their customers.
The difference is that, in India, there's hardly any emphasis on proactive, public disclosure of information. So they don't bother making press-releases, or updating their websites. I'm sure if someone called up Antrix, and managed to speak to an officer and listed press as the reason for request, they wouldn't turn you down.
Edit: And, as has been pointed out - the reasons for the delay are numerous. You could say, though, that they track back to two primary causes : our position on the technology maturity ladder, and the second being shoestring budgets.
Budget would be a major hurdle. But that is when ISRO needs targeted spending, instead of distributing funding inadequacy among a lot of programmes. I would not have wanted ISRO to go into something like Chandrayaan series without maturing on launch vehicle technology. And now ISRO is talking Mars.
-
"The first experimental flight of the GSLV Mark III will take place one year from now," K Radhakrishnan, Chairman, Indian Space Research Organisation
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/gslvmk-iii-experimental-flight-in-2014-isro-chairman-radhakrishnan/383001-3.html
-
ISRO chairman has revised his schedule:
India's heaviest rocket ever is expected to take to the sky next January (http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/india-to-test-fly-heaviest-rocket-next-year-isro-113040900540_1.html)
-
The LVM3-X mission will have crew module as its payload.
-
The LVM3-X mission will have crew module as its payload.
Can you tell us what LVM3-X stands for?
-
The LVM3-X mission will have crew module as its payload.
They got a boilerplate lying somewhere!? :o
-
The LVM3-X mission will have crew module as its payload.
Can you tell us what LVM3-X stands for?
Launch Vehicle Mark-3 eXperimental mission.
-
Thanks antriksh!
-
The LVM3-X mission will have crew module as its payload.
Can you tell me your source for this info? I couldn't find any article confirming this.
Meanwhile:
http://www.sawfnews.com/Health/70762.aspx
-
That article is saying that the launch is scheduled for April 2014.
-
Well, I'm more interested in the information about the Crew Module being the payload, because of its implications for the Human SpaceFlight program.
Also, if the Crew Module is the payload, I'm thinking that it would likely make the planned SRE-2 mission redundant and unnecessary. So I'm wondering if they'll cancel SRE-2.
-
Also, if the Crew Module is the payload, I'm thinking that it would likely make the planned SRE-2 mission redundant and unnecessary. So I'm wondering if they'll cancel SRE-2.
The goal of SRE is not to develop crew module, but to demonstrate reusable tech (like C-C materials, silica tiles etc), hypersonic reentry and NC&G tech, recovery and also it is a cheap platform to conduct micro-gravity experiments. SRE-2 will carry six experiments.
Well, I'm more interested in the information about the Crew Module being the payload, because of its implications for the Human SpaceFlight program.
source: Isro budget 2013-2014
-
The goal of SRE is not to develop crew module, but to demonstrate reusable tech (like C-C materials, silica tiles etc), hypersonic reentry and NC&G tech, recovery and also it is a cheap platform to conduct micro-gravity experiments. SRE-2 will carry six experiments.
I thought the main goal of SRE-2 was to further validate re-entry technologies such as thermal protection system, as well as some basic life support.
Usually, when such platforms are launched, they always carry some basic science experiments (microgravity, etc) to make productive use of the payload capacity.
Anyway, if the Crew Module is launched on the LVM3-X developmental flight, then what kind of measurement and validation will they be doing for the Crew Module? What kinds of data will they be gathering?
-
I thought the main goal of SRE-2 was to further validate re-entry technologies such as thermal protection system, as well as some basic life support.
Usually, when such platforms are launched, they always carry some basic science experiments (microgravity, etc) to make productive use of the payload capacity.
Anyway, if the Crew Module is launched on the LVM3-X developmental flight, then what kind of measurement and validation will they be doing for the Crew Module? What kinds of data will they be gathering?
You are right about the re-entry technologies part, but there is no plan to test the basic life support tech on SRE. Apart from that, it also demonstrates hypersonic flight profile and recovery technologies. All the tech demonstrated will feed into developing upper stage of the RLV-TSTO and will also help in the HSP.
Anyway, if the Crew Module is launched on the LVM3-X developmental flight, then what kind of measurement and validation will they be doing for the Crew Module? What kinds of data will they be gathering?
Well, one important measurement will be the g levels. Throughout the flight profile the g loads must not increase 4g, ISRO has to ensure that. They also have to ensure min level of oscillations in the module.
-
-
-
LVM3 Executive model for aerodynmic testing handing over to ISRO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUP4ZuxtjJs
-
The payload for GSLV Mk-3 experimental test is proposed to be the human space capsule
-
This article places the launch in third week of December:
http://bit.ly/18nN6DD (http://bit.ly/18nN6DD)
I. have. no. words. No words. Yes, it's ToI, but this is a new low - even for them.
" ... The GSLV Mark III variant, initial launch planned by April next year is a sub-orbital flight test having the first and second stage active solid and liquid propellants, its cryogenic stage will be passive," said Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) director S Ramakrishnan.
(Emphasis mine)
What. in. the. HELL. does that mean? Testing a rocket with an upper stage mass simulator is simply not the same as saying 'Yeah, we'll launch the rocket in the final operational flight configuration - with a fully fuelled, and fully operational upper (and most expensive) stage; but we won't start it' - which is what that quote seems to imply. Unbelievably, that seems to be a direct quote from the VSSC director. If I were him, I'd call back and clarify - but I doubt ToI'll run errata.
But wait.. that's not it.
"An advanced heavy cryogenic engine C-25 is being designed with 25 ton propellant loading with 20 tonnes of engine thrust for the GSLV Mk-3 D-1 mission in early 2017," he said. "The huge cryogenic engine is slated for completion and testing by 2015."
(Emphasis mine)
WHAT? 25 ton propellant loading, with 20 tonnes of thrust (yes, I noticed the inconsistency in spelling of 'tonne' in the same sentence) is not an engine... on the contrary, it's a very heavy piece of equipment that's going to fall out of the sky! Again, these figures might be accurate, if the stage has 25 tonnes of prop, and has 2 x 20 tonne thrust engines. (But that's quite an acceleration for the upper stage and payload, unless the engines are capable of deep throttling).
It might even be possible to have a 25 tonne upper stage (and this is prop weight only, and not engine weight) that is already orbital prior to its ignition. But I seriously doubt that - especially since the same 'article' has said that the GSLV-Mk III's first developmental flight is going to be sub-orbital.
Finally,
Oxygen remains a liquid only at temperatures below minus 1830 Celsius and Hydrogen at minus 2530 Celsius, developing a cryogenic engine from such propellants is a crucial test.
<Shaking head>
I swear all it takes to get the degree symbol into any commonly used text editor is googling "degree symbol" and copy pasting it. Like so. °
Don't tell me the typesetting software for the newspaper doesn't support it. They were extremely quick to chest-thump and use the rupee symbol (which still doesn't have a unicode character assigned to it) as soon as it was adopted (EDIT: before unicode support) - but they can't use "°" ? ESPECIALLY when, you know, being the country that's credited with the invention of 'zero' (atleast in the same chest thumping vein of popular culture), we should really understand place value. Screw that, you should really understand place value if you're literate. Forget country of origin.
Yeah, there's a vanishingly small chance that the 'reporter' was aware of research in negative absolute temperatures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTeBUpR17Rw), but that still doesn't change the boiling points of LOX and LH2.
Oh, and yes... I also noticed the use of a comma instead of a semicolon, and the telling lack of a conjunction.
</rant>
PS : I've sent feedback with the permalink to this message
regarding the gslv-3 the upper stage cannot be started even if they wanted to because the CE-20 engine that powers it is not ready. In the flight next year the C-25 stage will be filled with propellant to test the aerodynamic performance of the rocket in the upper atmosphere.
-
regarding the gslv-3 the upper stage cannot be started even if they wanted to because the CE-20 engine that powers it is not ready. In the flight next year the C-25 stage will be filled with propellant to test the aerodynamic performance of the rocket in the upper atmosphere.
Yes, my understanding is that a dummy C-25 stage will be flown instead of a working one. I wonder why they're doing it this way, instead of waiting for the CE-20 engine to be flight ready, so that they could test the full launch stack. It seems that they're only doing this "aerodynamic test flight" in order to keep up with a schedule, even if it means that flight test is only partial.
I'm not sure what they'd get out of putting a man-capable space capsule on there, if there's no active upper stage to deliver it high enough.
-
Yes, my understanding is that a dummy C-25 stage will be flown instead of a working one. I wonder why they're doing it this way, instead of waiting for the CE-20 engine to be flight ready, so that they could test the full launch stack. It seems that they're only doing this "aerodynamic test flight" in order to keep up with a schedule, even if it means that flight test is only partial.
I'm not sure what they'd get out of putting a man-capable space capsule on there, if there's no active upper stage to deliver it high enough.
CE-20 and C-25 are still a good 2-3 years away. There are just so many things that are still left to be done to get that stage qualified for flight. I guess due to number of delays this program has had, ISRO wants to get up and running with the program. IIRC the MkIII program when sanctioned planned on its first launch in 2004.
-
Remember that people from the same organisation were - very recently - praising their accurate engineering models, and software simulations; talking about how it helps them minimise the number of flight tests; minimise production of test hardware- enabling them to complete missions on shoestring budgets. They mentioned all that in the context of Mangalyaan.
The fact that they're thinking of conducting a test launch of a ROCKET (way more expensive) with a mass simulator is itself incongruous with such a design approach. On top of that, you're telling me that they care so much about the fidelity of the mass simulator distribution (to an operational stage's mass distribution) that they're going to put an incomplete engine there, and not fire it? That doesn't make sense. The error bars from the missing systems would dwarf the precision gains from making mass simulator as realistic as possible.
Finally, no upper stage firing = no payload delivery. Even to LEO. Why would you cut off one of the sources of funding for your test launch? Yeah, they wouldn't be able to charge much - given it's a first launch. But it's still something. They can easily find fifty cubesats for example. Offer the launch window to University teams across the country.
History too, isn't on the side of a dummy stage. All GSLV flights have had payloads - even the developmental flights.
All said and done, I really doubt they're going to have a test launch with a dummy stage. If it's not ready, they'll push the test back. They've already surprised many with the record pace on Mangalyaan. We've already had sometime with Russian engines so a) we know it can be done, b) you can reverse-engineer to a certain extent (and if pushed for time, mimic). [size=78%]P[/size]lus, I think the technology transfer embargo's been lifted now, and we're not subject to ITAR restrictions? So, I wouldn't be too surprised if their development cycles for CE-20 and C-25 are shorter than expected. Also, given ISRO's taciturnity, the space-fan public are probably underestimating how long they've been working on the cryogenic engines too.
-
AJA, I agree with what you've said, however I believe the flight has already been scheduled, and think it will take place anyway. The driver seems to be more political rather than engineering-driven. As you've pointed out, the Mark-III program is more than 10 years behind schedule, and the recent consecutive failures of the Mark-2 were a blow to ISRO's credibility. So they're now trying to fly this Mark-III aerodynamic test just to say "we're still making forward strides." In a way, the Chandrayaan mission has put that pressure on them, because it was that mission which suddenly put a media spotlight on ISRO and brought them a lot more attention from politicians in New Delhi.
-
IIRC the MkIII program when sanctioned planned on its first launch in 2004.
MK3 was sanctioned in 2005-6 with targeted first launch in 2010.
-
IIRC the MkIII program when sanctioned planned on its first launch in 2004.
MK3 was sanctioned in 2005-6 with targeted first launch in 2010.
Let me rephrase my post. IIRC when the MK3 program was conceived, ISRO planned on its first launch in 2004.
But you are wrong. The program was approved in 2002. At that time ISRO said it would have its first launch in 2007-2008.
Development of GSLV-Mk III approved (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2002-08-17/news/27341593_1_gslv-mk-iii-heavier-satellites-tonne-satellites)
PTI Aug 17, 2002, 08.04pm IST
BANGALORE: The government has given its approval for developing an advanced version of ISRO's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle, known as GSLV-Mk III, which will have the capability to launch four tonne satellites into Geo-synchronous Transfer Orbit.
According to ISRO, the development will take about six years.
-
IIRC the MkIII program when sanctioned planned on its first launch in 2004.
MK3 was sanctioned in 2005-6 with targeted first launch in 2010.
Let me rephrase my post. IIRC when the MK3 program was conceived, ISRO planned on its first launch in 2004.
But you are wrong. The program was approved in 2002. At that time ISRO said it would have its first launch in 2007-2008.
Development of GSLV-Mk III approved (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2002-08-17/news/27341593_1_gslv-mk-iii-heavier-satellites-tonne-satellites)
PTI Aug 17, 2002, 08.04pm IST
BANGALORE: The government has given its approval for developing an advanced version of ISRO's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle, known as GSLV-Mk III, which will have the capability to launch four tonne satellites into Geo-synchronous Transfer Orbit.
According to ISRO, the development will take about six years.
Again, 2004 was never a target date because ISRO required new facilities for 200t solid motor, and a new cryogenic engine development.
-
Again, 2004 was never a target date because ISRO required new facilities for 200t solid motor, and a new cryogenic engine development.
When the project was sanctioned in 2002 the target launch date was 2007. But when the project was conceived, as ISRO was ready to launch the original GSLV, the end of 1990s, was when the date of 2004 was mentioned. I remember having read it from one ArunS's articles and will try to look for it. But the GSLV itself had its first launch only in 2001 therefore the sanctioning for MkIII had to wait. And the other thing, ISRO knew it had to work on indigenous cryogenic engine for the GSLV soon after Russia signed the MTCR in early 1990s.
-
A prototype of the crew capsule that will be used for ISRO’s future manned space flight will be tested aboard the GSLV Mk-III
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/VSSC-Chief-Hints-at-Second-Mars-Mission-Using-GSLV/2013/12/21/article1957410.ece (http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/VSSC-Chief-Hints-at-Second-Mars-Mission-Using-GSLV/2013/12/21/article1957410.ece)
-
I'm curious - with the initial atmospheric test flight of GSLV-Mk3 only 4 months away, would it be conceivable to delay that launch date a little, in order to upgrade it to a full developmental test flight using an actual functioning cryogenic upper stage engine instead of a dummy load?
My understanding was that originally the first launch of GSLV-Mk3 was in fact intended to be a full developmental test flight with an actual cryogenic engine being part of that test. It seems to me that this was downgraded to an atmospheric test flight only because of the failure of the indigenous cryogenic engine on the preceding GSLV-Mk2 test flights.
With the cryogenic upper stage engine now having performed reasonably well according to predictions, it might be useful to return to the original plan of a full developmental flight including a working cryogenic upper stage engine, rather than just a mere atmospheric aerodynamic test flight with the dummy engine.
-
I'm curious - with the initial atmospheric test flight of GSLV-Mk3 only 4 months away, would it be conceivable to delay that launch date a little, in order to upgrade it to a full developmental test flight using an actual functioning cryogenic upper stage engine instead of a dummy load?
For a full developmental flight, ISRO will require the CE20 engine that is still under development. Only component level tests have been completed and engine level tests will take place this year. The cryo engines used on GSLV mk2 and LVM3 are totally different. GSLV mk2 uses CE7.5 which is a staged combustion cycle engine. LVM3 uses gas generator cycle engine.
-
Hmm, I thought gas generator is easier, and staged combustion is the hardest.
Oh well, I didn't know that CE20 was a different animal than CE7.5, instead of being a scaled-up model.
Why did they choose gas generator for CE20, instead of going with staged combustion?
-
Hmm, I thought gas generator is easier, and staged combustion is the hardest.
Oh well, I didn't know that CE20 was a different animal than CE7.5, instead of being a scaled-up model.
Why did they choose gas generator for CE20, instead of going with staged combustion?
Less complexity and components can be tested separately without being part of engine. GSLV mk2 failure delayed the CE20 development because then both CE7.5 and CE20 shared the same engine test facility. Now ISRO has built one for CE20.
-
...
GSLV mk2 uses CE7.5 which is a staged combustion cycle engine. LVM3 uses gas generator cycle engine.
The ISRO - DECU video clip detailing the cryogenic stage (http://www.isro.org/images/FLVPlayer.swf?flv=GSAT-14-d.flv) shown during today's launch coverage shows a stage with a gas-generator (2:06). I don't think they're talking about a generic cryo-stage either, given that the clip is talking specifically about the GSLV Mk-II, and therefore CES-7.5...
-
For a full developmental flight, ISRO will require the CE20 engine that is still under development. Only component level tests have been completed and engine level tests will take place this year. The cryo engines used on GSLV mk2 and LVM3 are totally different. GSLV mk2 uses CE7.5 which is a staged combustion cycle engine. LVM3 uses gas generator cycle engine.
Could they substitute in the existing CES7.5 cryogenic engine stage from GSLV-Mk-2 into the GSLV-Mk-3 on this initial flight, just to fly something better than a dummy payload? Fine, it won't be the desired CE20 gas-generator engine, but at least it would provide more useful data than a dummy payload, which to me seems the least useful of all. Then at least that flight could loft some useful payload into orbit - like the prototype manned capsule, for instance.
-
Could they substitute in the existing CES7.5 cryogenic engine stage from GSLV-Mk-2 into the GSLV-Mk-3 on this initial flight, just to fly something better than a dummy payload?
Even if they could, it's not at all clear they should.
Dummy payloads are cheap. High performance cryogenic stages are not. There are good reasons to fly the least expensive option on an initial test flight. Especially when the alternative is creating a one-off configuration you are never going to use again.
-
The next test will be a civilian version of a ballistic missile test albeit the "war-head" will probably be a crew capsule with a parachute
-
Even if they could, it's not at all clear they should.
Dummy payloads are cheap. High performance cryogenic stages are not. There are good reasons to fly the least expensive option on an initial test flight. Especially when the alternative is creating a one-off configuration you are never going to use again.
Well, it wouldn't have to be a one-off -- it could be used specifically for lunar/mars flights, while leaving the upcoming gas-generator for more routine nearby destinations. If you're going all the way to the Moon or Mars, then that extra little bit of performance from the staged-combustion might be more worth it. It seems like the farther you go, the more every tiny bit of Isp counts. Call it an "Earth Departure Stage" if you like.
-
A fully assembled GSLV-MK3 way back in 2012!
Photo Credit : ISRO
-
For a full developmental flight, ISRO will require the CE20 engine that is still under development. Only component level tests have been completed and engine level tests will take place this year. The cryo engines used on GSLV mk2 and LVM3 are totally different. GSLV mk2 uses CE7.5 which is a staged combustion cycle engine. LVM3 uses gas generator cycle engine.
Could they substitute in the existing CES7.5 cryogenic engine stage from GSLV-Mk-2 into the GSLV-Mk-3 on this initial flight, just to fly something better than a dummy payload? Fine, it won't be the desired CE20 gas-generator engine, but at least it would provide more useful data than a dummy payload, which to me seems the least useful of all. Then at least that flight could loft some useful payload into orbit - like the prototype manned capsule, for instance.
the production rate of CUS is very low and no flight worthy CUS is available.
-
...
GSLV mk2 uses CE7.5 which is a staged combustion cycle engine. LVM3 uses gas generator cycle engine.
The ISRO - DECU video clip detailing the cryogenic stage (http://www.isro.org/images/FLVPlayer.swf?flv=GSAT-14-d.flv) shown during today's launch coverage shows a stage with a gas-generator (2:06). I don't think they're talking about a generic cryo-stage either, given that the clip is talking specifically about the GSLV Mk-II, and therefore CES-7.5...
Both GG & SC cycles have gas generator.
In staged combustion cycle (SCC) the gas generator uses full LH2 flow rate and small quantity of LOX to generate
the hot gas at temperature acceptable to turbines. The hot gas expands in the turbines to develop the power required
for LOX/LH2 pumps and then it enters the combustion chamber where it burns with remaining LOX to develop
necessary thrust. Since combustion take place in staged manner in this cycle, hence it is called staged combustion cycle. In this cycle since gas generator gas enters the main combustion chamber there is no loss of ISP. Only draw back is that sub system level development is complicated and also pump/turbine power ratings are higher compared to GG Cycle for the
same chamber pressure.
In GSLV D5 brochure you can read about CUS.
-
the production rate of CUS is very low and no flight worthy CUS is available.
Yeah, I'd read they can only produce 1 CUS every 6 months. So if they delayed the Mark-3 maiden flight by say, 4 months, would that be enough time? At least it would allow for the test flight to test the whole launch stack, rather than a half-test ("aerodynamic flight"). It would also count as an additional qualification flight for the CUS.
-
the production rate of CUS is very low and no flight worthy CUS is available.
Yeah, I'd read they can only produce 1 CUS every 6 months. So if they delayed the Mark-3 maiden flight by say, 4 months, would that be enough time? At least it would allow for the test flight to test the whole launch stack, rather than a half-test ("aerodynamic flight"). It would also count as an additional qualification flight for the CUS.
The dimensions of CUS12 and CUS25 are different, so its not feasible to switch the stages.
-
The dimensions of CUS12 and CUS25 are different, so its not feasible to switch the stages.
Are you sure that swapping in the engine really amounts to swapping the entire stage? It seems to me that it's more feasible to swap in the smaller CE7.5 engine into the larger CUS of the Mark-3. Then do vibrational testing, etc. Anyway, just a thought. It really seems to be a shame that they're doing the initial Mark-3 flight without testing the full launch stack, because it's not a true test of the vehicle. Instead, it looks like this aerodynamic test is being done to save face, in spite of the CE20 not being ready. Oh well, I guess it's more baby steps - Gradatim Ferociter and so on.
-
The dimensions of CUS12 and CUS25 are different, so its not feasible to switch the stages.
Are you sure that swapping in the engine really amounts to swapping the entire stage? It seems to me that it's more feasible to swap in the smaller CE7.5 engine into the larger CUS of the Mark-3. Then do vibrational testing, etc. Anyway, just a thought. It really seems to be a shame that they're doing the initial Mark-3 flight without testing the full launch stack, because it's not a true test of the vehicle. Instead, it looks like this aerodynamic test is being done to save face, in spite of the CE20 not being ready. Oh well, I guess it's more baby steps - Gradatim Ferociter and so on.
That is way too complex for a single flight. The stage and the whole LV is built around the laid out specs. So, if I were to change the engine (or a stage) a lot of other stuff need to be changed and changes/effects needs to studied. ISRO has already invested significantly into the upperstage although they are still some distance from completion.
-
Both GG & SC cycles have gas generator.
I'm aware of that. I used the term gas-generator in the conventional sense, and wasn't referring either to the gas generated by LH2 boiling, through regenerative heat exchange between fuel-exhaust in the nozzle cooling jacket (for the expander cycle) or to the gas generated in the fuel-rich, lower temperature pre-burner combustion (the staged-combustion cycle).
The quote you mention is from this (http://www.me.iitb.ac.in/~fmfp/FMFP%20PROC/kn_1.pdf) paper titled "Turbomachines for Cryogenic Engines", presented by N K Gupta of LPSC at the Proceedings of the 37th National & 4th International Conference on Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Power, held at IIT-Madras between Dec 16-18, 2010; and not from the GSLV-D5 brochure (which doesn't specify the cycle used).
I did find an ISRO Press release about a hot-fire acceptance test of a cryogenic engine from 2008 (http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Dec20_2008) that talks about a 42,000 rpm integrated turbopump driven 73 kN (Vacuum) engine (with an Isp of 454 seconds, 2 x 2kN steering engines, and a 13% uprated thrust mode) -- that I assume is the CE-7.5 (not explicitly stated in the release)-- and says that this uses the staged combustion cycle.
Anyway, back to the paper you took the quote from. In the very next paragraph after the quoted text, the paper says that ISRO's planning to build an engine with a gas generator cycle
ISRO has embarked on a plan for realizing a gas generator cycle based cryogenic engine in the 12 to 20 tonne thrust range.
The graphs, diagrams and the data are for the CE-20 and the C25.
Interestingly, the gas-generator does burn LOX/LH2...
Hot gas at 853 K received from LOX/LH2 gas generator runs the turbine
But they then dump the exhaust instead of sending it into the main combustion chamber to realise staged combustion!!
And this is in 2010... TWO YEARS AFTER the acceptance test of the staged combustion engine. I don't understand why they went with staged combustion for the smaller engine, but are proceeding without it for a subsequent, larger engine. Surely the Isp and performance gains are more pronounced here? I know scaling introduces complexities... but it's still surprising.
-
Probably a booster engine where cost and T/W are more important than ISP?
-
The dimensions of CUS12 and CUS25 are different, so its not feasible to switch the stages.
Are you sure that swapping in the engine really amounts to swapping the entire stage? It seems to me that it's more feasible to swap in the smaller CE7.5 engine into the larger CUS of the Mark-3. Then do vibrational testing, etc. Anyway, just a thought. It really seems to be a shame that they're doing the initial Mark-3 flight without testing the full launch stack, because it's not a true test of the vehicle. Instead, it looks like this aerodynamic test is being done to save face, in spite of the CE20 not being ready. Oh well, I guess it's more baby steps - Gradatim Ferociter and so on.
In launch vehicle design certification, the most challenging part is LV's journey through the atmosphere where its subjected to maximum pressure, load and stress. Now, ISRO can wait for 3 more years and then conduct the same launch with an operational cryo stage just to find out that something is wrong in the LVM3 design or it can do that testing now and certify the design. They have the first two stages ready, so its better to sort out any aerodynamic challenges now rather than discovering them after 3 yrs.
-
And this is in 2010... TWO YEARS AFTER the acceptance test of the staged combustion engine. I don't understand why they went with staged combustion for the smaller engine, but are proceeding without it for a subsequent, larger engine. Surely the Isp and performance gains are more pronounced here? I know scaling introduces complexities... but it's still surprising.
ISRO started with russian cryo engine as a reference design, which was staged combustion. During the development process, they realised the complexities involved in testing the subsystems (in sc engine, subsystem level tests are not possible). It seems after mastering the SC tech, for the CE20 engine, they chose cost and development complexity over efficiency or payload gain (200 kg).
-
Just another article reiterating that the planned April 2014 flight of the GSLV-Mk3 will carry the crew module on a suborbital flight:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Isro-inches-closer-to-manned-mission/articleshow/28609291.cms
-
Just another article reiterating that the planned April 2014 flight of the GSLV-Mk3 will carry the crew module on a suborbital flight:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Isro-inches-closer-to-manned-mission/articleshow/28609291.cms
This is cool :) I'm eagerly waiting for crew module tests. By the way, what's the difference between the module used in SRE and this crew module - in terms of technology used?
-
I've no idea, but I'm imagining that testing the full crew module would sort of make SRE-2 redundant. SRE-2 is supposed to test communication blackout handling, as well as aerothermal structures and materials, and also carry some simple biological payload, I think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Capsule_Recovery_Experiment_II
If the crew module is being launched on Mk3, then I don't see why they couldn't do all the same tests on that flight. Anyway, just speculation.
Heh, I kind of like this rejiggering of the schedule along the way - it kind of keeps you on the edge of your seat, since nothing is totally set in stone.
-
Just another article reiterating that the planned April 2014 flight of the GSLV-Mk3 will carry the crew module on a suborbital flight:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Isro-inches-closer-to-manned-mission/articleshow/28609291.cms
Isro, as an additional feature, has also built in a separate escape module within the crew capsule. Sources said this module will in itself be a miniature space vehicle that can safely bring home its passengers.
::) :-\
-
Just another article reiterating that the planned April 2014 flight of the GSLV-Mk3 will carry the crew module on a suborbital flight:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Isro-inches-closer-to-manned-mission/articleshow/28609291.cms
Isro, as an additional feature, has also built in a separate escape module within the crew capsule. Sources said this module will in itself be a miniature space vehicle that can safely bring home its passengers.
::) :-\
Well, that's confusing!! It sounds like a crew module within a crew module ;D May be they're referring to "Launch Escape System" or even ejection seats, which separates the crew module from rocket in case of emergency during launch or first/second stage separation.
-
ISRO's going for a traditional Launch Escape System, so I think the reporter's just muddled up on their understanding.
-
ISRO aims to fly GSLV Mk3 X1 up to 120km altitude, at which point crew module will also be tested:
A manned space flight to a low-earth orbit (upwards of 160 km to a few hundred km) is on Isro's radar. Except the US' Apollo missions to the moon, all other human space flights took place in these zones.
The experimental flight, however, will not carry a functional cryogenic engine. The heavy-duty rocket will fly up to an altitude of 120 km, after which it will take a parabolic path and dive in the Bay of Bengal.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/379799/big-leap-indias-efforts-manned.html
When GSLV Mk-III will be tested in three months' time, the heavy-duty rocket will fly the module to an altitude of about 120 km to see if it is safe for human flight. “GSLV Mk-III will carry the crew module to study re-entry and thermal behaviour,” said Isro chairman K Radhakrishnan here on Friday.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/379831/india-test-human-crew-space.html
-
C25 stage & L110 Vikas engines!!!
-
;D Looking forward to LVM3-x!!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VEu9c2vpP74#t=6
-
Thanks for posting pics and video, antriksh. I had seen that video earlier. That opening song, which is from movie "Border", gives me goosebumps every time I hear it :)
-
Thanks for posting pics and video, antriksh. I had seen that video earlier. That opening song, which is from movie "Border", gives me goosebumps every time I hear it :)
;D
-
It looks like Reentry module will be tested with GSLV III
Is this same as SRE?
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/379799/big-leap-indias-efforts-manned.html
-
It looks like Reentry module will be tested with GSLV III
Is this same as SRE?
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/379799/big-leap-indias-efforts-manned.html
No. Crew module and SRE are different, although they may share some common bits of technology (just speculating here).
GSLV Mk3 will carry this 3 people capacity crew module: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISRO_Orbital_Vehicle
SRE-2, which is a smaller sized capsule compared to crew module, will be carried by a PSLV in near future: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Capsule_Recovery_Experiment_II
Check these earlier posts as well:
By the way, what's the difference between the module used in SRE and this crew module - in terms of technology used?
I've no idea, but I'm imagining that testing the full crew module would sort of make SRE-2 redundant. SRE-2 is supposed to test communication blackout handling, as well as aerothermal structures and materials, and also carry some simple biological payload, I think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Capsule_Recovery_Experiment_II
If the crew module is being launched on Mk3, then I don't see why they couldn't do all the same tests on that flight. Anyway, just speculation.
-
This is amazing. I just thought this was going to be over-hyped dummy test.
If the crew orbit vehicle soft lands, this will be huge moral booster. It is bound to open more doors for ISRO space cooperation.
I always wondered why ISRO does not approach Japan's JAXA for lunar rover collaboration.
-
Objectives of GSLV Mk3 X1: re-entry analysis of Crew Module and upper cryo stage. Here's an excerpt from ISRO 2013 status reports:
Re-entry Trajectory Design and Analysis of Two Closely Following Bodies with a Possibility of Break ups:
Re-entry trajectory design is complex as large amount of heat has to be dissipated and structural integrity of the body has to be ensured. Design becomes challenging when two bodies closely follow each other. This typically occurs in one of the missions where crew module and cryostage enters the Earth’s atmosphere and are in close vicinity. The possibility of cryostage breakup during the re-entry is to be analyzed. Number of pieces during the break-up is to be evaluated based upon detailed structural analysis of the cryo stage components. The survivability of these pieces and the effect of impact of these pieces on the ongoing crew module are to be assessed.
The below snippet is a bit old (2011-2012 budget report), but it looks like PSLV stage 4 (PS4) will be modified to be "service module" for Crew Module:
Mission design and analysis Development of critical technologies for Crew Module, PS4 modified service module and crew escape system. Initiation of setting up of essential facilities.
And, here's the status on pre-project activities of Crew Module: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1146805#msg1146805
-
Well, here's a previous posting on the PS4 stage being adapted for crew service module:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1046304#msg1046304
As for soft landing of crew capsule, I assume it's going to be a parachute landing in the Bay of Bengal somewhere.
Actually, since I see that ISRO's trajectory is often influenced by events in other countries, I was sort of hoping that once SpaceX fully demonstrates its pusher-configuration Launch Abort System with powered landing, that it might influence ISRO to design a further iteration with pusher configuration, using knowledge from development of the soft lunar lander for Chandrayaan-2.
-
Actually, since I see that ISRO's trajectory is often influenced by events in other countries,
??
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
MK3 version for April 2014 test is with a passive cryo stage other wise all the stages were ready in 2013 itself.
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
MK3 flight is for testing aerodynamic stability of the vehicle.
The real test flight is expected towards end of 2015 or 2016
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
You really have to look at the Mk II & the Mk III like the difference between the Delta 2 & the Delta IV.
I never figure out why IRSO have that unique vehicle configuration for the Mk II. A solid motor core with less burn time than the four hypergolic strap-on boosters. The Mk III have the more usual hypergolic core with two solid motor strap-on booster. It appears that the Mk II will be retire quite soon after a successful Mk III flight IMO. Of course presuming the new cryogenic upper stage have no developement issues.
-
MK3 version for April 2014 test is with a passive cryo stage other wise all the stages were ready in 2013 itself.
Very unlikely. If the CUS is going to remain passive on the sub-orbital test flight, why wait to get it qualified? Moreover, the MkIII is going to use a 20-tonne version, not the 7.5 tonne version that put GSAT-14 into orbit; and this hasn't been tested yet. I'm not even sure that they've run ground acceptance testing on the 20 tonne version.
Bottom line: If they were ready with the rest of the rocket, they'd have tested it. I don't think it is. They're close, but not there yet.
-
ISRO has completed static hot tests for S200 solid booster and L110 Vikas liquid motor. Here's the snippet from their latest budget outcome (http://www.isro.org/pdf/Outcome%20budget2013-14.pdf):
Both S200 & L110 stages have been qualified through static hot tests. Critical Design Reviews (CDR) of both S200 and L110 have been completed. Sub-systems for S200 & L110 flight stages have been realized.
Regarding C25 cryo upper stage:
All engine systems were realized for the integration of engine for development test for C-25 Project. C25 Stage assembled at SDSC-SHAR for Ground Resonance Test (GRT). Stage configuration and fluid circuits & measurement plans are finalized.
C25 integrated engine test is planned during 2013-2014
In a recent interview (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140113/commentary-op-ed/commentary/%E2%80%98we-have-succeeded-our-cryogenic-engine%E2%80%99), ISRO chairman mentioned that it could take 3 years to complete C25:
Can you tell us about the proposed GSLV-III?
The configuration of this launch vehicle is different from the earlier PSLV or the GSLV. Without waiting for realisation of the cryogenic stage, which could take another three years, we will launch GSLV-III in April, and will make various measurements of this heavy and advanced vehicle during its flight. That will be a major milestone in 2014.
-
MK3 version for April 2014 test is with a passive cryo stage other wise all the other stages were ready in 2013 itself.
I think my words were confusing
-
The current LVM3 is sized after looking at some design parameters viz. GTO payload (of 4 Tons or more), Max Q (Of Less than 40kpa), Payload mass fraction(> 0.71%), 5 Meter payload faring, lower stage impact at 96.5° E longitude, future growth potential (L110 vs semi cryo to increase GTO), stage compatibility (3.2 meter diameter boosters, 4 Meter diameter L110 stage, 5 Meter payload faring) , flexibility of sun synchronous/geo synchronous missions with single/multi burn cryo stage, development time, resource constraints etc.
Example.
1. S200 to optimize the payload mass fraction and impact
2. L110 altitude ignition was selected to optimize Max Q factor of LVM3 and impact
3. C25 single/multi burn cryo stage to optimize GTO capability to 4T and to ensure adequate propulsion after lower stage jettison before 96.5° E longitude
-
ISRO really does need to name their launch vehicles projects better. There is very little (or nothing) in common between the GSLV MK-2 and the GLSV MK-3.
Or is there some bureaucratic program funding limitations that make them name their launch vehicles this way, to allow a budget item to be used for both as needed? Surely there are other designations to use than PSLV and GSLV.
-
Yeah, they seem to be naming by the launch capability they're targeting, as opposed to a design heritage. Both GSLV-Mk2 and Mk-3 are targeting Geosynchronous Orbit capability, in spite of being different designs.
-
After GSLV it will probably be ULV and HLV Mk versions. ISRO internally refers GSLV-Mk3 as LVM3
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
I never figure out why IRSO have that unique vehicle configuration for the Mk II. A solid motor core with less burn time than the four hypergolic strap-on boosters. The Mk III have the more usual hypergolic core with two solid motor strap-on booster. It appears that the Mk II will be retire quite soon after a successful Mk III flight IMO. Of course presuming the new cryogenic upper stage have no developement issues.
GSLV Mk 3 will also be sort of half way between a 2.5 stage and a 3 stage rocket, since the core will not ignite on the pad but will ignite about 30 seconds before the solids burn out.
- Ed Kyle
-
Where do you get so much info on the MkIII ed?
-
This is all very rapid they have only just flown the one successful mission of the MK2 & now they are testing the MK3 version?
I never figure out why IRSO have that unique vehicle configuration for the Mk II. A solid motor core with less burn time than the four hypergolic strap-on boosters. The Mk III have the more usual hypergolic core with two solid motor strap-on booster. It appears that the Mk II will be retire quite soon after a successful Mk III flight IMO. Of course presuming the new cryogenic upper stage have no developement issues.
GSLV Mk 3 will also be sort of half way between a 2.5 stage and a 3 stage rocket, since the core will not ignite on the pad but will ignite about 30 seconds before the solids burn out.
- Ed Kyle
ASLV had similar design with core stage ignited only after two boosters burnt out.
-
-
Here's some info about GSLV Mk3 X1 and CE20 engine, from two interviews:
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/will-be-able-to-repeat-the-success/article5590227.ece
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/gslv-mkiii-the-next-milestone/article5596588.ece
On gas generator cycle CE20 engine (CS25 stage):
But in the gas generator cycle, you have the ability to test the individual elements. So if you look at the reliability aspects—establishing a reliable system and the time required for that—we can work in parallel. The issue is relevant in the context of GSLV MkIII, for which we were working on the engine and stage elements in parallel. The turbo pump, which has something like 5 megawatt of power, has already been tested and it has logged about 1,400 seconds on the ground. We have tested the thrust chamber along with the injector, igniter and the nozzle. We did two tests, and the third test is being done today [January 10]. [This test, which lasted for 50 seconds, was as predicted and was successful.] Now, when we have sufficient knowledge about the ignition characteristics, the combustion instability aspects and performance in different regimes of [LOX+liquid hydrogen, or LH2] mixture ratio, then we can start with engine test and then the stage test. So the time required from now to qualifying the stage becomes less. This is the main advantage. The flexibility that is available in a gas generator cycle is much more because individual systems can be tested from the input/output point of view and they can be qualified in parallel.
Steering and thrust vectoring in CE20:
The second aspect of the GSLV MkIII engine is that we are gimballing the nozzle for thrust vector control [and not the two using vernier (steering) engines as in the Russian engine and the cryogenic upper stage (CUS) of the indigenised MkII]. So we are only concerned about two ignitions, that is, the main engine and the gas generator. In the case of GSLV MKII’s CUS, the two steering engines have to ignite before the main engine ignites and that feed has to come from the main line.
On GSLV Mk3 X1 (officially known as LVM3-X) mission:
What is the next important milestone for the GSLV?
The immediate thing is GSLV MkIII, the experimental mission with the passive cryo stage.
What do you mean by passive cryo?
No engine will be burnt in the third stage. Actually, if you look at the GSLV, 50 per cent of the velocity is given by the non-cryo portion. So we will get about 5 km/s velocity, and it will be a suborbital flight. But what we want to test here is the atmospheric phase of the flight. While it is coming down, we will use it to characterise the crew module. We can measure the thermal stress when it is coming down. As far as the vehicle is concerned, its exterior will be ditto. Internally, the cryo will be passive.
You plan to do a suborbital flight of GSLV-Mk III in March this year without firing the cryogenic engine. What is a suborbital flight? What is its purpose? Is this flight going to carry a model of the crew module required for ISRO’s human space flight programme?
The suborbital flight test of GSLV Mk III, named LVM3-X mission, is primarily to characterise the new 600-tonne heavy-lift vehicle with two large solid strap-on boosters during its flight through the atmosphere.
The vehicle configuration will be in full and final form. However, the cryogenic stage, C25, will not be functional and will not develop any thrust. With this constraint, the vehicle can reach only about 5 km per second velocity, which falls short of the orbital velocity required. Hence the mission is suborbital, with the upper stage and payload re-entering atmosphere and falling back to the earth.
The whole objective of the LVM3-X mission is to validate a host of important parameters and characteristics of this totally new vehicle of relatively larger dimensions and large strap-ons. In effect, with this flight experience, when we attempt the first developmental launch, LVM3-D1, with a functional cryo stage, C25, we will have greater confidence that C25 will get an opportunity to ignite and perform in flight, which is indeed essential considering the enormous effort we put into realising the cryogenic engine and stage.
-
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/Now-ISRO-Well-on-Course-to-Test-Launch-Rocket-Giant/2014/01/30/article2027188.ece
The first stage of the hefty Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle Mk-III (GSLV Mk-III) is ready, officials of Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) here said.
Two S-200 boosters, which use solid fuel, comprise the first stage of Mk-III. This stage will burn for 130 seconds. “The stage is ready. Work is now progressing on the second stage at the Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre (LPSC) in Mahendragiri,” VSSC director S Ramakrishnan said. The GSLV Mk-III has three ‘stages’ in all.
“The GSLV Mk-III will have a sub-orbital flight in April. It will have as payload a prototype of the crew module meant for the manned mission,” Ramakrishnan said.
Mk-III will lift off from the second launchpad at Sriharikota, the same one the GSLV D-5 used on January 5. No modifications will be needed to the launchpad as it can accommodate the bigger GSLV, Ramakrishnan said. A regular flight of the Mk-III version is expected only by 2016.
-
Crew Module structural assembly ready for LVM3 X1 mission
-
Some update on engines:
The Stage-I comprising two identical S200 large solid boosters with 200 tonnes solid propellant, is already completed.
L110 re-startable liquid stage under the stage-II is also over, he explained.
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/isro-unveils-ambitious-plans/article5701463.ece
-
GSLV Mk3 X1 launch might happen in May-June:
ISRO is inching closer to launch its ambitious human space mission with the first experimental unmanned flight of the crew module on the newly developed Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) Mark III in May-June from Sriharikota, said Dr K Radhakrishnan, chairman ISRO and secretary, Department of Space.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/ISROs-Crew-Module-Flight-by-May-June/2014/02/23/article2072553.ece
-
GSLV Mk3 X1 status update:
1) L110 liquid core for second stage is ready.
2) One S200 booster for first stage ready. Second booster is undergoing assembly.
3) Crew module is undergoing structural engineering tests.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/gslv-mark-iii-ready-for-mission/article5845204.ece
-
The mission will take place in June or first week of July.
same article:
http://www.thehindu.com/news/gslv-mark-iii-ready-for-mission/article5845204.ece
-
Space buffs will have to wait at least until June this year to see the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle Mk-III (GSLV Mk-III), India’s biggest rocket, flight-tested. The original plan was to have the sub-orbital test flight of the GSLV-Mk III in April, but the mission has been put off by two months.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/Flight-Test-of-GSLV-Mk-III-to-be-Delayed-Till-June/2014/03/31/article2141009.ece
The article interchangeably uses terms cryo engine and cryo stage. But, it's a passive cryo stage without engine :)
-
Space buffs will have to wait at least until June this year to see the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle Mk-III (GSLV Mk-III), India’s biggest rocket, flight-tested. The original plan was to have the sub-orbital test flight of the GSLV-Mk III in April, but the mission has been put off by two months.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/Flight-Test-of-GSLV-Mk-III-to-be-Delayed-Till-June/2014/03/31/article2141009.ece
The article interchangeably uses terms cryo engine and cryo stage. But, it's a passive cryo stage without engine :)
I sincerely request ISRO Not to commit on launch date unless and until all the works have been thoroughly completed. No speculated dates please
-
GSLV to soar into sky with crew capsule in June
It would be identical to the “final crew capsule in structural and thermo-structural parts
We will take it beyond the atmosphere, make it re-enter the earth’s atmosphere, decelerate it and make a soft touchdown in the Bay of Bengal off the Andaman coast. We will make efforts to recover it.
evaluate the structural and thermal protection systems to withstand the re-entry load, and thermo-dynamic heating
We will be measuring the environment inside the capsule which will give inputs on the validation of the astronauts’ life-support systems in terms of temperature, vibration and shock which will be experienced inside the crew capsule. This will help us in designing the life-support systems when we actually fly the astronauts into space.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/gslv-to-soar-into-sky-with-crew-capsule-in-june/article5873835.ece
-
I had a couple of 'noob' questions on how the different attributes of rockets stages translate to payload gain. Not sure if this is the right place to post it. But it would be great if someone could shed light on it.
1. How scalable is the GSLV-III design as regards to GTO payload? Is it capable of attaining 6 tonnes with greater propellant loads in its three stages, or would it be a dead-end at 4.5-5 tonnes? As I understand, greater propellant load in solids only increase the thrust, while for liquids it translates to longer burn time. Would such payload capability require the introduction of a higher Isp Lox/Kerosene core stage?
2. How do increase in burn-time of the upper/lower stages, and thrust and Isp of its engines relate to payload gain? Is Isp the most critical among these? Are there any simplified thumb rules that would give a rough idea?
3. Are there any links or guides in the web which explains these aspects of rocket design in (relatively) layman terms?
Many thanks in advance!
-
I had a couple of 'noob' questions on how the different attributes of rockets stages translate to payload gain. Not sure if this is the right place to post it. But it would be great if someone could shed light on it.
1. How scalable is the GSLV-III design as regards to GTO payload? Is it capable of attaining 6 tonnes with greater propellant loads in its three stages, or would it be a dead-end at 4.5-5 tonnes? As I understand, greater propellant load in solids only increase the thrust, while for liquids it translates to longer burn time. Would such payload capability require the introduction of a higher Isp Lox/Kerosene core stage?
2. How do increase in burn-time of the upper/lower stages, and thrust and Isp of its engines relate to payload gain? Is Isp the most critical among these? Are there any simplified thumb rules that would give a rough idea?
3. Are there any links or guides in the web which explains these aspects of rocket design in (relatively) layman terms?
Many thanks in advance!
1. My guess would be no. There's always a trade off involved between how much propellant vs payload to carry. Increase in propellant load would also call for increase in stage size (dead weight) for the same engine capacity.
2. Isp is certainly one of the most deciding factor in determining efficiency of rocket propulsion. Thrust developed depends on nozzle chamber pressure which in turn depends on combustion efficiency of propulsion. Burn time alone can't help if the propellant combustion is not efficient. So, for fuels with high Isp, you can get higher thrust with less propellant burnt and can afford to carry a heavier payload.
3. a) Basic rocket principles : http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/TRCRocket/practical_rocketry.html
b) For deep dive, follow Prof. Ramamurthy's lectures on rocket propulsion (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL99EA5ECCC34949DB)
c) Finally, NSF's Q&A section covers all aspect of space flight and rocket principles:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=36.20
-
I had a couple of 'noob' questions on how the different attributes of rockets stages translate to payload gain. Not sure if this is the right place to post it. But it would be great if someone could shed light on it.
1. How scalable is the GSLV-III design as regards to GTO payload? Is it capable of attaining 6 tonnes with greater propellant loads in its three stages, or would it be a dead-end at 4.5-5 tonnes? As I understand, greater propellant load in solids only increase the thrust, while for liquids it translates to longer burn time. Would such payload capability require the introduction of a higher Isp Lox/Kerosene core stage?
2. How do increase in burn-time of the upper/lower stages, and thrust and Isp of its engines relate to payload gain? Is Isp the most critical among these? Are there any simplified thumb rules that would give a rough idea?
3. Are there any links or guides in the web which explains these aspects of rocket design in (relatively) layman terms?
Many thanks in advance!
1. My guess would be no. There's always a trade off involved between how much propellant vs payload to carry. Increase in propellant load would also call for increase in stage size (dead weight) for the same engine capacity.
2. Isp is certainly one of the most deciding factor in determining efficiency of rocket propulsion. Thrust developed depends on nozzle chamber pressure which in turn depends on combustion efficiency of propulsion. Burn time alone can't help if the propellant combustion is not efficient. So, for fuels with high Isp, you can get higher thrust with less propellant burnt and can afford to carry a heavier payload.
3. a) Basic rocket principles : http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/TRCRocket/practical_rocketry.html
b) For deep dive, follow Prof. Ramamurthy's lectures on rocket propulsion (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL99EA5ECCC34949DB)
c) Finally, NSF's Q&A section covers all aspect of space flight and rocket principles:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=36.20
Wow! Thanks a lot for the explanation and the links.. Exactly what I was looking for. 8)
-
"The experimental mission of GSLV Mark III would be carried out in the last week of July or in the first week of August," GSLV Project Director K Sivan told PTI over phone.
http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/experimental-mission-of-gslv-mark-iii-in-july-august-114060700558_1.html
-
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-india-powering-ahead-with-heavy-lift-launcher-399967/
-
Has the rocket been stacked yet?
-
Has the rocket been stacked yet?
Considering they only have one Vehicle Assemble Building (VAB) at disposal, I don't think they have started that yet. Things are about to change though - they will have a second VAB (esp. suited for LVM3) by 2017:
The second VAB, which will be linked to the second launch pad, would facilitate and augment the launchings to eight per annum, since two vehicles can be assembled simultaneously in the two VABs. This Rs 350-crore estimated project has been approved and the design is in progress. The second VAB will be housed in a 100- metre tall building equipped with cranes with a capacity to lift 400 tonnes.
Although all kinds of vehicles can be assembled in the proposed facility, the design is tailor-made for GSLV Mk III and it is expected to be ready by 2017.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140626/nation-current-affairs/article/shar-set-instal-hi-tech-radar-next-year
-
Has the rocket been stacked yet?
GSLV Mk3 X1 is being assembled now at SDSC SHAR. Info here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32095.msg1220573#msg1220573
-
Has the rocket been stacked yet?
-
Considering they only have one Vehicle Assemble Building (VAB) at disposal, I don't think they have started that yet. Things are about to change though - they will have a second VAB (esp. suited for LVM3) by 2017:
The second VAB, which will be linked to the second launch pad, would facilitate and augment the launchings to eight per annum, since two vehicles can be assembled simultaneously in the two VABs. This Rs 350-crore estimated project has been approved and the design is in progress. The second VAB will be housed in a 100- metre tall building equipped with cranes with a capacity to lift 400 tonnes.
Although all kinds of vehicles can be assembled in the proposed facility, the design is tailor-made for GSLV Mk III and it is expected to be ready by 2017.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140626/nation-current-affairs/article/shar-set-instal-hi-tech-radar-next-year
There is a separate solid stage assembly building already in place, where the solid boosters of the LVM-3 are assembled. Assembly of the entire vehicle takes place in the VAB of course, and currently there is only one of those. But given ISRO's launch schedule, it is not capacity constrained at the moment.
-
Considering they only have one Vehicle Assemble Building (VAB) at disposal, I don't think they have started that yet. Things are about to change though - they will have a second VAB (esp. suited for LVM3) by 2017:
Actually LVM3 is getting assembled in the VAB. PSLV-C23 was assembled on the first launch pad inside the Mobile Service tower (MST).
-
There is a separate solid stage assembly building already in place, where the solid boosters of the LVM-3 are assembled. Assembly of the entire vehicle takes place in the VAB of course, and currently there is only one of those. But given ISRO's launch schedule, it is not capacity constrained at the moment.
A separate building for solid stage assembly? Why? Are you talking about an unfinished second VAB, or is there a dedicated building?
-
There is a separate solid stage assembly building already in place, where the solid boosters of the LVM-3 are assembled. Assembly of the entire vehicle takes place in the VAB of course, and currently there is only one of those. But given ISRO's launch schedule, it is not capacity constrained at the moment.
Launche schedule is constrained by availability of VAB for second launch pad. ISRO can increase the launches especially commercial ones from second launch pad by building second VAB. First launch pad usage frequency can not be increased because its constrained by the fact that it can only use the MST. But the second launch pad can be used by any number of VABS and only requires one month of service time after a launch.(currently it takes 2-3 month between launches from second launch pad that includes one month servicing for launch pad and 1-2 months for VAB).
After second VAB goes live we might see simultaneous launch of two vehicles from first and second launch pads.
-
There is a separate solid stage assembly building already in place, where the solid boosters of the LVM-3 are assembled. Assembly of the entire vehicle takes place in the VAB of course, and currently there is only one of those. But given ISRO's launch schedule, it is not capacity constrained at the moment.
A separate building for solid stage assembly? Why? Are you talking about an unfinished second VAB, or is there a dedicated building?
There is one SSAB connected to VAB by rails
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2mdQxA0kck (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2mdQxA0kck)
Video shows the integration LVM3 in progress. We can see the 2 solid boosters starting 8 mins.
-
GSLV Mk3 project budget boosted from Rs. 10 crores to Rs. 171 crores:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/budget-2014/union-budget-2014/GSLV-Mark-3-gets-Rs-161-crore-boost/articleshow/38175979.cms
The first budget of the Narendra Modi government has given a powerful boost to the GSLV Mark 3 rocket programme with its budgetary allocation rocketing from Rs 10 crore to Rs 171 crore.
The massive hike for this much-delayed project assumes significance in the context of Prime Minister Narendra Modi assuring Isro at the launch of PSLV-C-23 on June 30 that his government would fully support India's space programme. The PM had said that "continued progress in space must remain a national mission. We must keep enhancing our space capabilities."
Hoping to see CE-20 real soon :)
-
And the full details of the ISRO budget...
http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2014-15/eb/sbe92.pdf
-
As of now there are plenty of issues with the vehicle. It may launch by the year end tentatively
Even though its an x mission designers are facing issues with aerodynamics (higher drag than expected) and structures....
hope this works and the actual flight with CE-20 is long way to go
-
As of now there are plenty of issues with the vehicle. It may launch by the year end tentatively
Even though its an x mission designers are facing issues with aerodynamics (higher drag than expected) and structures....
hope this works and the actual flight with CE-20 is long way to go
Thanks for this! Any public source for a new date?
-
As of now there are plenty of issues with the vehicle. It may launch by the year end tentatively
Even though its an x mission designers are facing issues with aerodynamics (higher drag than expected) and structures....
hope this works and the actual flight with CE-20 is long way to go
Higher drag on the launch pad ??? do you mean higher drag in recent wind tunnel tests? But how can that be,because wind tunnel model design should have been optimized by now.
How can they measure real world drag without even launching the vehicle? And its very natural to face problems like structures and higher drag in a x mission because that is what it is about, i.e., find out problems. Based on this mission, they will further optimize.
perhaps you can clarify a bit more with some details.
-
As of now there are plenty of issues with the vehicle. It may launch by the year end tentatively
You mean to say that they will not be launching in August ?
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : L-110 transported on Transportation cum tilting Trailer to Solid Stage Assembly Building (SSAB)
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : L-110 integrated with S200 solid stages
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : Cryo stage integrated with L-110 and S200 solid stages
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : Fully integrated GSLV Mk-III moved to Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) for static testing
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : From VAB GSLV Mk-III moved to Second Launch Pad (SLP)
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : Fully assembled GSLV-MKII on second launch Pad (SLP)
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : Fully integrated GSLV Mk-III moved to Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) for static testing
This photo is of the 2012 mock LVM3 launch sequence where the integrated vehicle is being moved to SLP after testing in VAB. Vehicle is integrated in VAB and eclectrical tests are conducted there. Each stage is separately tested and checked before moving to VAB for integration.
-
GSLV-MK3 Integration Sequence (File Photo: Credit ISRO) : Fully integrated GSLV Mk-III moved to Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) for static testing
This photo is of the 2012 mock LVM3 launch sequence where the integrated vehicle is being moved to SLP after testing in VAB. Vehicle is integrated in VAB and eclectrical tests are conducted there. Each stage is separately tested and checked before moving to VAB for integration.
Yes all are "File photos"
-
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=107740
The Cryogenic Engine of higher thrust (20 Tonne) meant for next generation of GSLV viz. GSLV-MkIII launch vehicle is under advanced stage of development. Design and Development tests of sub-system elements of this new high-thrust cryogenic engine have been carried out successfully.
So far, eleven cryogenic engines for GSLV and two higher thrust cryogenic engines for GSLV Mk-III have been realized.
In the twelfth five year plan, 192 Crores has been allocated for realisation of cryogenic engines and stages, under GSLV programme.
-
Does anyone know when GSLV MK III will be launched ? It was supposed to have been launched in late July. No news of lauch appear to be coming as the month July has passed by. ISRO has to maintain the launch schedule. Please no more slippage. India has to catch up China in the field of Launch Vehicle development, let alone manned mission. Long March 3B has an established capacity for GTO Launch of 5100 Kg. Next year, china will launch Long March 5 which will be comparable to Atlas 5, Delta IV and Falcon 9 with a maximum payload capability of 14 Ton to GTO.
Chota :
Are the GSLV photos that you have attached in the previous page of the forthcoming GSLV MK 3 suborbital mission ?
-
Does anyone know when GSLV MK III will be launched ? It was supposed to have been launched in late July. No news of lauch appear to be coming as the month July has passed by. ISRO has to maintain the launch schedule. Please no more slippage. India has to catch up China in the field of Launch Vehicle development, let alone manned mission. Long March 3B has an established capacity for GTO Launch of 5100 Kg. Next year, china will launch Long March 5 which will be comparable to Atlas 5, Delta IV and Falcon 9 with a maximum payload capability of 14 Ton to GTO.
Chota :
Are the GSLV photos that you have attached in the previous page of the forthcoming GSLV MK 3 suborbital mission ?
--- ( --- )
I appriciate and respect your views ---. But we need to understand that India and Isro are here not to compete with other countries. Our top priority is self sufficiency. we should not mind schedule slippage as long as purpose is served. Even it is late, it should be Perfect. I urge our scientists to take their own time and to be in hurry unless they themselves are satisfied with the progress. We cant afford failuers in hurry.
-
Chota :
Are the GSLV photos that you have attached in the previous page of the forthcoming GSLV MK 3 suborbital mission ?
--- ( --- )
They are for a mockup version and not of the upcoming flight
Latest on GSLV-MKIII
"We are planning an experimental flight of GSLV Mk III with passive cryogenic stage in August this year" (http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/two-months-left-for-mangalyaan-to-enter-mars/article1-1243406.aspx)
-
"We are planning an experimental flight of GSLV Mk III with passive cryogenic stage in August this year" (http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/two-months-left-for-mangalyaan-to-enter-mars/article1-1243406.aspx)
The first developmental flight of GSLV-Mk III is targeted for 2016," an Isro spokesperson said.
Two different nomenclatures? An experimental flight is still a developmental flight! Or has the FIRST flight of the GSLV-Mk III architecture been pushed back to 2016?
-
An experimental flight is still a developmental flight! Or has the FIRST flight of the GSLV-Mk III architecture been pushed back to 2016?
No, not in ISRO terminology at least. Experimental flight would essentially validate vehicle subsystems, flight dynamics etc. It may be orbital or suborbital, but wouldn't carry any live payload. Developmental flight would follow the experimental flights after all subsystems have been verified and the vehicle is ready to carry live payloads. Note that based on performance from developmental flights, they might make adjustments in the design before declaring the vehicle "operational" after two or three successful developmental flights.
So, we'd have an experimental flight this year and the developmental one (carrying a GSAT series satellite) in 2016 or later.
-
Looking at the statement below, it seems launch may be pushed to September.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/Desi-GPS-Services-Likely-by-Next-Yr-Says-ISRO-Scientist/2014/08/03/article2362577.ece
Stating that the launch of GSLV Mark III next month would provide a greater thrust to the country’s deep-space programme, he said “We are pragmatically pushing forward the development of semi-cryogenic technology.” Demonstration of larger launch vehicles that could carry around 4 ton satellites is being planned in the next couple of months. ‘Human in Space’ programme was also gaining momentum and GSLV Mark III would accommodate a special module on experimental basis.
-
Getting ready..
-
^ antriksh, Do you know the date of this pictures? If these are recent photos, most likely the launch will be towards year end rather than this month.
-
^ antriksh, Do you know the date of this pictures? If these are recent photos, most likely the launch will be towards year end rather than this month.
Most probably, One month old.
-
Another reference for GSLV Mk-3 X1 launch NET September
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/mangalyaan-on-track-no-path-correction-in-august/article1-1247284.aspx
-
It was mentioned in the annual report that the LVM3X will be launched in the 4th quarter meaning anytime between September and December.
-
^ antriksh, Do you know the date of this pictures? If these are recent photos, most likely the launch will be towards year end rather than this month.
Most probably, One month old.
javascript:alert(document.lastModified) on the Annual Report shows August 5, 2014 12:36:36 (That's usually GMT). So the report was published online at around 6 pm on August 5. Don't know how much proof-reading etc. goes into it, but I wouldn't say that the photos are that much older than the report. Especially since they'd want to demonstrate as much progress as possible. Then again, there's no "outwardly visible" stage-scale progress once assembly is complete probably.
-
It was mentioned in the annual report that the LVM3X will be launched in the 4th quarter meaning anytime between September and December.
Well, in the 2013-2014 annual report (http://www.isro.org/rep2014/STS.html), they say
An experimental sub-orbital flight (LVM3-X) with passive cryogenic stage is targeted during the third quarter of 2014, to validate the entire vehicle configuration during the complex atmospheric regime of flight including its controllability.
-
^3rd quarter in a 2013-2014 annual report for an Indian organization, may be pointing to Jan-Mar 2014.
IRC the initial date for this test launch was given as Jan 2014.
-
^ I don't think so, since this 2013-2014 ISRO annual report was published on the Web on August 5, 2014
-
Looks like this might get pushed towards the year end:
On its own part, Isro has bigger plans. Its human space flights through the experimental flight of GSLV Mark-III scheduled for "launch in the next 2-3 months".
http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/isro-set-for-next-generation-communication-satellites-114081000505_1.html
-
http://timesofindia.com/home/science/Isro-postpones-GSLV-MKIII-flight-scheduled-in-August/articleshow/40515679.cms
An Isro spokesperson, confirming the postponement, said: "...We don't have a date as of now. The priority is MOM," the spokesperson said.
-
http://timesofindia.com/home/science/Isro-postpones-GSLV-MKIII-flight-scheduled-in-August/articleshow/40515679.cms
An Isro spokesperson, confirming the postponement, said: "...We don't have a date as of now. The priority is MOM," the spokesperson said.
I knew that this would happen. I mean ISRO would postpone the launch of GSLV MKIII to focus on MOM. ISRO can't maintain the launch schedule. For the last 2 years, ISRO's main objective was to launch an inter-planetary mission like MOM without having a more powerful Rocket GSLV MK-III or GSLV MK-II at its disposal, while not giving more priority to GSLV MK III development.
How can the current ISRO chairman be made to understand that ISRO needs a more powerful rocket like GSLV MK-III to launch communication satellites in the 3 or 4 ton class, let alone over 5 or 6 ton class communication satellites which would be more common event in the foreseeable future ? Even Bolivia has a communication satellite in 5.5 ton class, launched and developed by China.
Japanese Launch Vehicle HIIA has an excellent record of 21 successful launches ( out of 22 ) in the category of 4.1 to 6 ton in the Geostationary Transfer Orbit. Japan's new launch vehicle HIIB has 4 out of 4 successful launches in the 8 ton GTO category. 2 of the last launches by HIIB were to the International Space Station ( ISS ) with HII Transfer Vehicle ( HTV ). With HIIB, Japan can launch 2 heavy communication satellites of 4 ton at one shot.
How can Dr. Radhakrishna dream of earning revenue through ANTRIX by launching communication satellites ? Firstly GSLV MK II has not been operationalized. It needs at least 1 more successful launch. Then GSLV MK II will be able to launch 2 ton communication satellite, whereas many countries these days even the developing countries have their communication satellites launched in the 3 to 3.5 ton category. ISRO doesn't have achieved that category. The kind of rapid success of launching satellites at low cost SpaceX has achieved at shot period of time will make ISRO's dream of making forays into the launch market of communication satellites more and more difficult. But is dr. Radhakrishna listening ?
GSLV MK III was supposed to have been launched in 2012. He is hesitant to take risks. Had ISRO not pushed the development of PSLV in the 80s, despite 2 repeated failures of ASLV, ISRO would not have its workhorse PSLV. Two more months will pass by with MOM. It seems to me that GSLV MK III does not seem to be the top priority of Dr. Radhakrishnan. The bottom line is that he is a bit paranoid and therefore he is taking the path of less risk approach. If such sluggish approach continues, I do not see GSLV MK III not being operationalized before 2020, thus putting to rest ISRO's plan to send Indians to the space before 2020.
-
An Isro spokesperson, confirming the postponement, said: "...We don't have a date as of now. The priority is MOM," the spokesperson said.
This is a bit hard to digest. The two missions are quite independent of each other. If my understanding is correct, ISTRAC team would be responsible for carrying out MOI manoeuvres. There has to be a separate team involved in LVM3 development and launch operations. Further, as it's a suborbital flight, it shouldn't require any assistance from ISTRAC. So, why would they prioritize one mission over another. I think they should openly admit about the challenges that they face here which are responsible for postponement.
@--- :
You are being quite unfair here. What you don't seem to realize is that it takes several years of development efforts and a lot of investment to master cryogenic technology. The space agencies that you're talking about have got a lot of backing in terms of investment and technology (for eg. SpaceX, NASA pumps in both money and the minds to get their projects going). You just don't seem to have any idea about this and making a lot of wrong presumptions like failed leadership at ISRO and what not. I'd suggest that you read A Brief History of Rocketry in ISRO (http://www.amazon.in/A-Brief-History-Rocketry-ISRO-ebook/dp/B008SC4FM6) to be able to appreciate the efforts spent by ISRO scientists towards realizing PSLV and GSLV projects.
-
SpaceX don't use cryogenic engines. If by cryogenic you mean the use of LH2.
-
SpaceX don't use cryogenic engines. If by cryogenic you mean the use of LH2.
LOX is cryogenic.
-
SpaceX don't use cryogenic engines. If by cryogenic you mean the use of LH2.
LOX is cryogenic.
Forgive me. In modern terminology cryogenic engines use LH2 & LOX do they not? The definition is due to LH2 being a *deep* cryogen. Am I wrong?
-
I thought rockets which use LOX and a non-cryo fuel are called "semi-cryogenic" -- at least that's how ISRO refers to it.
-
SpaceX don't use cryogenic engines. If by cryogenic you mean the use of LH2.
LOX is cryogenic.
Forgive me. In modern terminology cryogenic engines use LH2 & LOX do they not? The definition is due to LH2 being a *deep* cryogen. Am I wrong?
AFAIK, a cryogenic rocket engine is one that has either cryogenic fuel or oxidizer, or both. For a liquid to considered cryogenic it has to be below -150 C. LOX easily qualifies.
Outside of ISRO, I haven't seen the term semi-cryogenic.
-
If I am not wrong, LVM3-X mission was brain child of Dr. Radhakrishnan and he got it approved from government. Before there was no plan of any experimental mission. Also, Initial plan did not involve testing any crew module, but it was added later and this has made the mission very complex and challenging. It is no more a single mission , rather a combination of two experimental missions.
First mission involves launch of an experimental rocket and second mission involves reentry and recovery of a crew module (similar to SRE). This will require lots of planning, human resource and ISTRAC resources. ISRO will have to work with coast guard to use their ship for the recovery mission.
-
Where did the November 1-8 launch date come from?
-
Where did the November 1-8 launch date come from?
From here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1173.msg1244106#msg1244106)
-
This is a bit hard to digest. The two missions are quite independent of each other.
...
I think they should openly admit about the challenges that they face here which are responsible for postponement.
Certainly surprising that they'd tie it in with Mangalyaan. The general approach to find out what's happening is to follow (http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2014-15/eb/dg92.pdf) the money (http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2014-15/eb/sbe92.pdf). But looking at the breakdown of the budget (it was passed, with an eye-wash of a "debate", alongwith budgets for so many other departments at the same time) for this year doesn't help me much.
For the Mk-III - the capex is way down, and revenue expenditure has gone WAY up. This is usually supposed to happen after you deem your launch system has matured a little bit, and you start using it for commercial purposes. The Mk-III is certainly not ready! Hell.. the Mk-II isn't ready.
But there's another catch! ALL GSLV operational expenditure is under a different heading(!), which is itself divided into a very small capex and a large revex(!!) share and has seen a small (relative) increase in both. The SCRE budget (revex only) also increased 5x, and manned spaceflight's revex was increased, while its capex (minute to begin with) was decreased. (In this last case - last year's capex might've been something like land acquisition. They're not really building hardware yet). CUSP funding has stayed the same, but there's a new ISRO propulsion complex (for the cryogens I think) in the demand for grants which wasn't there last year. Semi-cryo spending is also up. They're also building a new trisonic wind tunnel.
Now, ISRO might be using the established, existing facilities for these new programs too - and that might allow project realisation with lower capex... but I'm not convinced. Don't know what's happening.
Mangalyaan's budget has seen a decrease (as expected). But it has still been sanctioned 65 crore rupees for capex... which is surprising. I can only think ISRO (ISTRAC) are expanding the I-DSN.
TL;DR - So yeah, while they're probably definitely facing challenges they didn't expect to - and while that has some part to play in the delay... might they also be waiting for the outcome of the Manglayaan's MOI, and maybe use that to either appropriate more money (to facilitate a slightly changed test) etc.?
Btw, --- isn't isolated in his criticism of the current ISRO leadership. I've been hearing it, both first, and second hand from people in the Indian scientific establishment - both ISRO and non ISRO for quite sometime now.
-
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Test-Flight-of-ISROs-GSLV-Mk-III-Deferred/2014/09/01/article2408518.ece
ISRO is now planning to test-fly the GSLV Mk-III from Sriharikota only by October end at the earliest, sources said.
The reason for the delay is that the prototype of a two-man crew module for future manned space missions which is to be tested aboard the GSLV Mk-III, is not ready yet. Secondly, in the next few weeks, all ISRO activity will be centred around the `450-crore Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM), whose tryst with the Red Planet is slated for September 24.
Work on an upgraded cryogenic stage - which would remain ‘passive’ in this test mission - is also over, M Chandra Dathan, director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), said. ‘’The crew module prototype was included in the plans only a year ago. Its work is nearing completion,’’ he said.
-
so it will be more wait for gslv mk3. hope things work out before the year is out.
-
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Test-Flight-of-ISROs-GSLV-Mk-III-Deferred/2014/09/01/article2408518.ece
ISRO is now planning to test-fly the GSLV Mk-III from Sriharikota only by October end at the earliest, sources said.
The reason for the delay is that the prototype of a two-man crew module for future manned space missions which is to be tested aboard the GSLV Mk-III, is not ready yet. Secondly, in the next few weeks, all ISRO activity will be centred around the `450-crore Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM), whose tryst with the Red Planet is slated for September 24.
Work on an upgraded cryogenic stage - which would remain ‘passive’ in this test mission - is also over, M Chandra Dathan, director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), said. ‘’The crew module prototype was included in the plans only a year ago. Its work is nearing completion,’’ he said.
Why do they need a complete cryogenic engine/stage if it is going to be passive? I was thinking, only a mass simulation is required, along with liquid oxygen and hydrogen tanks to simulate the sloshing if any. Using a actual cryogenic engine for this seem like an unnecessarily expensive option.
-
Why do they need a complete cryogenic engine/stage if it is going to be passive? I was thinking, only a mass simulation is required, along with liquid oxygen and hydrogen tanks to simulate the sloshing if any. Using a actual cryogenic engine for this seem like an unnecessarily expensive option.
Been discussed in this thread before. It's a passive STAGE with mass-simulator instead of the engine.
-
Why do they need a complete cryogenic engine/stage if it is going to be passive? I was thinking, only a mass simulation is required, along with liquid oxygen and hydrogen tanks to simulate the sloshing if any. Using a actual cryogenic engine for this seem like an unnecessarily expensive option.
Been discussed in this thread before. It's a passive STAGE with mass-simulator instead of the engine.
However the wording:
quote author=vyoma link=topic=15187.msg1249820#msg1249820 date=1409562222]
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Test-Flight-of-ISROs-GSLV-Mk-III-Deferred/2014/09/01/article2408518.ece
----
------
Work on an upgraded cryogenic stage - which would remain ‘passive’ in this test mission - is also over, M Chandra Dathan, director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), said. ‘’The crew module prototype was included in the plans only a year ago. Its work is nearing completion,’’ he said.
[/quote]
( bold letters mine)
indicates that a real stage or a prototype will be flown but not fired. Maybe they want to have sensors/cameras on the stage to see how it will handle the launch stresses like vibration and G-forces.
-
I knew that the postponement would happen. Because in the past, ISRO failed to keep up the launch schedule. I am even skeptic whether the launch would take place in this year. Lets take a look at the statements made by ISRO recently regarding GSLV MKIII Mission. The launch time line is getting delayed one after another.
GSLV Mark III ready for mission
http://www.thehindu.com/news/gslv-mark-iii-ready-for-mission/article5845204.ece
GSLV to soar into sky with crew capsule in June
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/gslv-to-soar-into-sky-with-crew-capsule-in-june/article5873835.ece?ref=relatedNews
Isro postpones GSLV-MKIII flight scheduled in August
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Home/Science/Isro-postpones-GSLV-MKIII-flight-scheduled-in-August/articleshow/40515679.cms
The GSLV-MKIII experimental flight was to also test the crew module structure of HSP. Stating that Isro aims at completing the the mission within this calendar year, the scientist said the crew module structure is in advance stage of realisation for the same.
Test Flight of ISRO's GSLV Mk-III Deferred
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Test-Flight-of-ISROs-GSLV-Mk-III-Deferred/2014/09/01/article2408518.ece
Originally planned for April this year, the GSLV Mk-III test-flight had been postponed to June end. Work on an upgraded cryogenic stage - which would remain ‘passive’ in this test mission - is also over, M Chandra Dathan, director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), said. ‘’The crew module prototype was included in the plans only a year ago. Its work is nearing completion,’’ he said. As per the present schedule, a PSLV mission is next in line - in the first or second week of October - after the Mars mission docks with the Red Planet.
So, it is now clear that the crew module has not been ready. But why had ISRO announced the launch of GSLV MKIII when they were uncertain about the time when the crew module would be ready.
-
GSLV Mark III ready for mission
http://www.thehindu.com/news/gslv-mark-iii-ready-for-mission/article5845204.ece
GSLV to soar into sky with crew capsule in June
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/gslv-to-soar-into-sky-with-crew-capsule-in-june/article5873835.ece?ref=relatedNews
Isro postpones GSLV-MKIII flight scheduled in August
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Home/Science/Isro-postpones-GSLV-MKIII-flight-scheduled-in-August/articleshow/40515679.cms
Test Flight of ISRO's GSLV Mk-III Deferred
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Test-Flight-of-ISROs-GSLV-Mk-III-Deferred/2014/09/01/article2408518.ece
You missed the following two links in the list. I guess that's where it should start.. ;)
http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2016/stories/20030815006111200.htm
The Union government has approved the project and the three-stage rocket will lift off in 2008.
:o
http://www.frontline.in/navigation/?type=static&page=flonnet&rdurl=fl2217/stories/20050826002409200.htm
THE first flight of the Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)-Mark III is expected to take place by the end of 2007.
:o
And this was in articles that appeared in 2003 and 2005! Not sure if this was a case of misreporting, as The Hindu and Frontline were usually more reliable than other Indian media on these stuff. After all, anyone with even the least idea of the complexities of launch vehicle development would have known that 2007-2008 timeframe as mentioned for the launch of this all-new rocket design would be plain unrealistic. But if it wasn't a case of misreporting, what was it? Just a plain instance of gross underestimation and over-confidence on the part of ISRO? Or an intentional tactic to get funds allocated from the Govt in advance so that project does not get delayed due to want of funds? This is not in any way to criticize ISRO or to belittle its achievements. For an Indian governmental organization with all its assorted inefficiencies and bureaucratic red tape, ISRO has been doing extremely well. But I do feel many times that it would have been better if ISRO had taken care to give more realistic (read pessimistic) estimates like "the rocket would be launched sometime in the 2015-2018 timeframe" etc...
Anyways, here's hoping for a successful test flight before the end of this year 8)
-
Just a plain instance of gross underestimation and over-confidence on the part of ISRO? Or an intentional tactic to get funds allocated from the Govt in advance so that project does not get delayed due to want of funds?
Any developmental program is going to be plagued by schedule and cost uncertainties. That's a consequence of operating at the edge of your knowledge, knowhow and experience base... and pushing that envelope. Of course, at the end of the day, you want a number, and the people at the helm get paid money for making these guesses, and get paid the big money for the accuracy of those guesses. In such cases, a responsible critic should resort to citing over-confidence and/or underestimation of complexities as proximal causes for delays only if these you can demonstrably show that the people in charge deviated from their own standards of guesswork they'd previously demonstrated. All circumstances are never going to be the same, certainly not technically - so you look at the calls and allowances they made for relatively constant things. e.g. in the learning curve expected from your technicians, in defining project specific administration procedures, and whether they were truly analogous, in ethos, to similar procedures in past projects etc.
More specifically though - remember that this is still the Mk-III. ISRO expected to have the Mk-II operational and running far earlier than they did. The problems with that rocket would've tied up the staff, as well as facilities, and these delays no doubt spilled over into the Mk-III. Not to mention the unexpected Devas fiasco. Again, you could say that a good organisation would comprise divisions where there would be a free flow of information and collaboration, but whose divisions would be insulated for external impedance.
Secondly, the longer something spends on the drawing board, the more extensive it tends to get. Well intentioned, and dedicated people whose bits of the project are not on the critical path, find some free time to think up more things to test, and start tacking things on, because "it's delayed anyway"; and "this would make the delay worthwhile". Before too long, you've ended up changing the project specification, and these additions interfere with one another, and you're in a mess. A fair amount of this probably happened :P
Btw, ISRO hasn't been funding limited for a while now. They've been getting whatever they asked for. However, you could argue that in this case, they should keep asking for more, until the government says no - that they can always devote more resources to whatever it is that's constraining them - whether it's staff, or infrastructure etc. - until they do become funding limited.
-
They told me that I would be looking for an R&D organisation after my master's degree," says Gupta. "So why not join ISRO and let them sponsor your master's course?" Now, Gupta works on the next generation Geostationary Launch Vehicle (GSLV), the heavy lifter that ISRO is developing for launch next year, and sits in its design review committee.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/42749182.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
GSLV MK3 launch once again postponed ? :o
-
They told me that I would be looking for an R&D organisation after my master's degree," says Gupta. "So why not join ISRO and let them sponsor your master's course?" Now, Gupta works on the next generation Geostationary Launch Vehicle (GSLV), the heavy lifter that ISRO is developing for launch next year, and sits in its design review committee.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/42749182.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/42749182.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst)
GSLV MK3 launch once again postponed ? :o
Sounds like it :(
-
Are the lower stages of the launcher already stacked in VAB? If so, and assuming the launch is indeed postponed to next year, are they likely to destack it to make the VAB available for IRNSS-1D launch later this year?
-
What next for Isro? (http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/what-next-for-isro-114092400194_1.html)
“The launch of Mark-III would be after the PSLV C26 launch. It could be late October or November, based on the weather conditions,” he said.
Before Mark-III, Isro is planning to launch PSLV C26, with IRNSS 1B satellite, which will be the third navigation satellite. It may be noted, first one in the series was launched in July, followed by the second in April.
“Third one will be in the first half October. Operations are going at the moment, spacecraft is at Sriharikotta, vehicle assembly has already started,” said Radhakrishnan, adding that by December fourth navigation satellite will also be launched.
-
Great. So it seems the test flight isn't delayed as yet, though it might.
“Full engine has been assembled now, we are going to start the ground testing of the engine in few months now. This engine will have a thrust level of nearly 20 tonne as compared to 7.5 tonne of the GSLV we flew in January 2014,” he said.
Radhakrishnan said that the ground test for the cryogenic engine is currently underway at Mahendragiri.
The statements looks kind of self-contradictory. Maybe it was problem with the reporting. But anyways its good to hear that the CE-20 is inching closer to reality. Haven't been hearing much about it for some time.
-
This engine has to be taken through a series of ground test and then the cryogenic stage will be integrated to it and it will be tested on the ground. Once it qualifies, Isro will use it for the flight. By the time the cryogenic stage is ready for the flight we will also study from the experimental mission about the vehicle's configuration and aerodynamic behaviour, and if any marginal improvement is needed, we can will do that
GSLV Mark-III test flight before December[/url] (http://www.business-standard.com/article/specials/gslv-mark-iii-test-flight-before-december-114092500031_1.html)
-
With the two S-200 boosters firing, this could very well be the 'smokiest' launch yet for ISRO.. 8)
-
GSLV Mark-3 launch in first week of November (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140926/nation-current-affairs/article/biz-usual-vssc-post-mangalyaan)
GSLV-MkIII launch depends on PSLV-C26 launch date and weather (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/gslvmkiii-is-isros-next/article6447463.ece)
-
With the two S-200 boosters firing, this could very well be the 'smokiest' launch yet for ISRO.. 8)
add to that vapor cloud due to S200 exhaust meeting water from acoustic suppression system.
-
With the two S-200 boosters firing, this could very well be the 'smokiest' launch yet for ISRO.. 8)
add to that vapor cloud due to S200 exhaust meeting water from acoustic suppression system.
That would be a spectacle! Good to see the mission is on track to launch before the end of the year, if weather holds good. If it works out as planned, 2014 could very well become a historic year for ISRO - Indigenous cryo success, Mars mission and GSLV-III test flight. Radhakrishnan can retire as one big happy man, considering the challenges he faced at start.. :)
-
I wonder how much time and effort would be required to see possible further iterations like a Mark-IV (4 SRBs) or a Mark-V (6 SRBs)?
I realize that ISRO wants to move to development of the ULV family, but I was hoping that GSLV Mark-IV and Mark-V might be easy enough to upgrade to, so that their iterations might make an early appearance, even if only briefly.
-
I wonder how much time and effort would be required to see possible further iterations like a Mark-IV (4 SRBs) or a Mark-V (6 SRBs)?
I realize that ISRO wants to move to development of the ULV family, but I was hoping that GSLV Mark-IV and Mark-V might be easy enough to upgrade to, so that their iterations might make an early appearance, even if only briefly.
I think it wont be economical and so ISRO might not prefer using 4-6 SRBs. ISRO might use more SRBs only if there is an urgent requirement to launch > 5 ton payload. My understanding is that once semi-cryo stage (SC-160, ground lit) is ready, it will replace core of lvm3.
-
I think it wont be economical and so ISRO might not prefer using 4-6 SRBs. ISRO might use more SRBs only if there is an urgent requirement to launch > 5 ton payload. My understanding is that once semi-cryo stage (SC-160, ground lit) is ready, it will replace core of lvm3.
SC160 will be some time coming. I personally believe that ISRO should have pursued development of semi-cryo propulsion ahead of cryogenic propulsion. This would have allowed Indian launch capabilities to progress beyond PSLV much faster, instead of treading water in the meantime. Oh well, 20-20 hindsight, I guess.
But so LMV3 with SC160 is then essentially ULV. What more does ULV need besides that, since C-25 will already be developed by then.
-
I wonder how much time and effort would be required to see possible further iterations like a Mark-IV (4 SRBs) or a Mark-V (6 SRBs)?
I realize that ISRO wants to move to development of the ULV family, but I was hoping that GSLV Mark-IV and Mark-V might be easy enough to upgrade to, so that their iterations might make an early appearance, even if only briefly.
Correct me if I am wrong here, but I remember reading somewhere (maybe in NSF itself, not sure though) that adding two more SRBs to make MK-IV will only add another 500kg or so to the GTO payload capability. If that were so, it may not be worth the extra effort.
But so LMV3 with SC160 is then essentially ULV. What more does ULV need besides that, since C-25 will already be developed by then.
As per reports, ULV would have the SC-160 and C-25 as the 'core' and solid strapons of various sizes added to achieve a broad range of payload capabilities. antariksh had posted a concept image in this forum (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31827.0) It may not be the final plan, but the image implies reuse of solid stages of PSLV (S-12, S-139) and what seems to be a new intermediate S-60 strapon.
It makes me wonder though, if the intention of ULV is to replace PSLV/GSLV entirely, wouldn't it be worthwhile to standardize strapons to, maybe, two types (maybe an S-40 and S-139, just guessing) and have combinations of 2/4 to get the desired payload range? That might simplify logistics in the long term. Maybe I'm going a bit overboard here, and this needs to be discussed in the ULV thread. ;D
-
This is not the thread but I have made exactly that suggestion on the ULV thread.
AIUI, the S200 are huge and adding more is not an easy step. I'm more interested in what human rating standards are they going to apply to the GSLV mkIII to carry the Indian Capsule. And how long will they use it once they transition to ULV. If it can have a heavy version, they might do away with solids.
In other words, will the GSLV mkIII be used only to certificate the Indian capsule or will it carry Indian crew?
-
This is not the thread but I have made exactly that suggestion on the ULV thread.
AIUI, the S200 are huge and adding more is not an easy step. I'm more interested in what human rating standards are they going to apply to the GSLV mkIII to carry the Indian Capsule. And how long will they use it once they transition to ULV. If it can have a heavy version, they might do away with solids.
In other words, will the GSLV mkIII be used only to certificate the Indian capsule or will it carry Indian crew?
Yep... My bad. Should have referred to your comment here. Sorry. :)
If ULV variants replaces the current PSLV/GSLV-II/GSLV-III fleet, ISRO is gonna have to meet a large demand for the core stages and the boosters, and I reckon that is something which can be met only by a greater level of involvement by the private industry. Having less number of booster types could be a big advantage there. I envision a wonderland where these rocket stages are built by private consortiums and shipped to the launch center to be assembled and launched by ISRO. But thats another story..
As for your question, my guess is that it would depend on when ISRO plans to have a manned mission. SCE-160 is going to take time to develop, so if ISRO plans to have manned launches by early 2020s it may have to man-rate GSLV-III.
-
This is not the thread but I have made exactly that suggestion on the ULV thread.
AIUI, the S200 are huge and adding more is not an easy step. I'm more interested in what human rating standards are they going to apply to the GSLV mkIII to carry the Indian Capsule. And how long will they use it once they transition to ULV. If it can have a heavy version, they might do away with solids.
In other words, will the GSLV mkIII be used only to certificate the Indian capsule or will it carry Indian crew?
from ISRO report :
For meeting the requirements of HSP, human rating of GSLV MK III or LVM3 will also be initiated in the 12th plan period. The work will involve the following:
1.Redesign of vehicle structures including propellant tanks and motor cases if necessary.
2. Re-qualification tests including stage functional tests of S200, L110 and C25.
3. Intelligent systems to monitor and identify the imminent failure of systems are to be developed.
4. Redundancy schemes in all the avionics, control systems, pyro systems and mechanisms are to be re-looked and re-qualified.
4. Additional facilities for structural test are to be developed for conducting these tests.
I think heavy version of ULV will depend mainly on the requirement to launch heavier payload. My guess, TSTO-RLV will be doing the heavy lifting of 10 ton to GTO. BTW, I would love to see a Manned version of TSTO-RLV with a Human spacecraft as second stage.
-
So, GSLV mk.III is nowhere human rated and doing that is left as an exercise for the next administration?
I believe that it might be easier to go to ULV directly. But that's just me. ISRO has shown a great capability for improving their vehicles at a fraction of Western costs.
-
So, GSLV mk.III is nowhere human rated and doing that is left as an exercise for the next administration?
I believe that it might be easier to go to ULV directly. But that's just me. ISRO has shown a great capability for improving their vehicles at a fraction of Western costs.
LVM3 development is not complete and will take 3 more years to start development flights. But man rating is concurrent and an ongoing program to be completed in the 12th 5 year plan by 2017. All the subsystems like s200, l100 etc will be manned rated during this period. There is no rush for human space flight.
-
So, GSLV mk.III is nowhere human rated and doing that is left as an exercise for the next administration?
I believe that it might be easier to go to ULV directly. But that's just me. ISRO has shown a great capability for improving their vehicles at a fraction of Western costs.
LVM3 development is not complete and will take 3 more years to start development flights. But man rating is concurrent and an ongoing program to be completed in the 12th 5 year plan by 2017. All the subsystems like s200, l100 etc will be manned rated during this period. There is no rush for human space flight.
Ok, I misunderstood, I thought that it was going to be initiated by 2017. If they are doing it concurrently, then its more logical. I still wonder about the standards. But I guess that this design will have a lot less failure modes than GSLV mk.I/II.
-
We hope to move the prototype to Sriharikota spaceport in ten days’ time,’’ GSLV Mk-III project director S Somnath said. An important component of ISRO’s Human Spaceflight Programme, such capsules, fitted aboard rockets, are intended to carry astronauts to orbit and return them safely to earth. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) was responsible for the basic structure of the dummy module, but VSSC has been handling all the critical aspects including integration, heat shields and control and guidance systems.
Crew Module Prototype to be Tested Aboard GSLV MK-III
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/Crew-Module-Prototype-to-be-Tested-Aboard-GSLV-MK-III/2014/10/01/article2457591.ece
-
India Poised To Expand Presence in Global Launch Market (http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/42055india-poised-to-expand-presence-in-global-launch-market)
one GSLV Mark 3 vehicle should be available per year for commercial sale starting in 2017. The vehicle is designed to launch telecommunications satellites weighing around 4,000 kilograms.
-
India Poised To Expand Presence in Global Launch Market (http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/42055india-poised-to-expand-presence-in-global-launch-market)
one GSLV Mark 3 vehicle should be available per year for commercial sale starting in 2017. The vehicle is designed to launch telecommunications satellites weighing around 4,000 kilograms.
What is the reason for such a low volume?
-
Perhaps their production line isn't capable of a higher rate.
-
What is the reason for such a low volume?
My 2 cents..
The initial volume of commercial GSLV-III launches might be constrained due to:
a) Lower initial production capacity
During the said period, ISRO would need to assemble stages for three launch vehicles (assuming GSLV-II isn't retired by then). Unless they expand the production capabilities and workforce (or transition PSLV to a private consortium), its going to be difficult for them to produce more rockets.
b) Availability of launch infrastructure
When the second VAB becomes operational, ISRO might to be able to make 8-10 launches a year - a large number of them could be PSLV launches. Supporting more number of launches beyond that they may require the Third Launch Pad.
c) Larger domestic demand for satellite launches
Due to skyrocketing demands from the domestic media industry, ISRO currently faces a large shortfall of available transponders in its comsats, which they are currently trying to offset by leasing transponders from other sats. The demand for transponders are likely to accelerate further in the future and can be met only by launching more number of heavier GSATs by available GSLV-IIIs.
My hunch is that GSLV-III wouldn't be ready for commercial operations by 2017. The CE-20 needs to complete all its tests and then they would need to build and test the C-25 stage with it. They might start development flights during the said period and then make it available for commercial launches after 2-3 successful flights.
-
India Poised To Expand Presence in Global Launch Market (http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/42055india-poised-to-expand-presence-in-global-launch-market)
one GSLV Mark 3 vehicle should be available per year for commercial sale starting in 2017. The vehicle is designed to launch telecommunications satellites weighing around 4,000 kilograms.
What is the reason for such a low volume?
Domestic launches would be more, but only one launch will be used for commercial purpose. Over time when production stabilizes more commercial space would be available.
-
I was just reading about how many Indians signed up for NASA's offer to send up people's names on their ETF-1 experimental test flight of the Orion spacecraft:
http://www.asianage.com/international/21729-indians-submit-names-be-sent-space-nasa-717
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/1009/Why-do-we-love-leaving-our-mark-in-space-video
I think it would be nice if ISRO could offer people a similar opportunity in connection with the upcoming LVM3-X1 maiden experimental test flight of the GSLV Mk-III. This could result in a lot of positive social outreach.
-
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/science/after-mangalyaan-to-mars-isro-plans-to-send-an-indian-into-space/articleshow/44818505.cms (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/science/after-mangalyaan-to-mars-isro-plans-to-send-an-indian-into-space/articleshow/44818505.cms)
Within a few weeks, the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) will team up with the Indian Air Force to conduct a simple experiment: it will drop a 3.7-tonne capsule from a height of 3.5 km and try to land it softly with parachutes. If successful, Isro will take this capsule in November-end to a height of 120 km on a rocket and eject it from there, to be recovered from the sea after a soft landing.
-
As per ISRO chairman, launch is planned in the next 45 days
-
Safe to think the launch will be in first week of Dec '14
As per ISRO chairman, launch is planned in the next 45 days
-
Well, given the usual likelihood of delays, I'll be happy if it just launches before year-end:
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/141017/nation-current-affairs/article/gslv-mk-iii-flight-test-cmm
-
Crew module dispatched to Sriharikota (http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-international/crew-module-dispatched-to-sriharikota/article6517791.ece)
The integration of the GSLV-MkIII is going on in full swing at Sriharikota,” said Mr. Dathan. The vehicle’s two huge strap-on booster motors, each with 200 tonnes of solid propellants, have been assembled and strung around the core stage, which will use 110 tonnes of liquid propellants. Above this liquid core stage will be the indigenous cryogenic stage, which will use 25 tonnes of propellants. In the coming mission, the cryogenic stage will not fire. It will be a passive stage. It will not carry cryogenic propellants. It will carry 25 tonnes of simulated fuel.
“Next weekend, the cryogenic stage will be moved to the vehicle and integrated with it. The 3.65-tonne crew module will undergo checks for 16 to 20 days. By mid-November, the unmanned crew module will be integrated with the vehicle. Then, it takes another two weeks for the launch,” Mr. Dathan added. If the weather does not help, the lift-off will be in the first week of December.
-
I've x-posted this to the Indian Human Spaceflight program thread, since it has details relevant for that too:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/437480/isros-human-space-flight-endeavour.html
The three-and-a-half tonne module will transport two astronauts to space. The astronauts inside the module will be able to see flight data during the flight.
Once injected into orbit at a height of 270 km in the actual flight, the module will orbit the earth for seven days and then prepare itself for the flight back to the earth.
The module has to withstand temperatures running to 1,500 degrees centigrade during the re-entry.
The heat shields will have to shake off the pressure on its re-entry.
and then there was some erroneous comment about GSLV-Mk3 having made 6 previous successful flights - the writer was obviously clueless on the different between previous versions of GLSV and the Mk3.
-
In the long term, ISRO's choice is to obviously move on to the ULV and derivatives for heavy lifting.
But, I was just thinking about the quickest way to achieve payloads heavier than the current 4-5 tonnes of the LVM3. How about removing the 2 solid boosters and instead replace them with 6 L40 boosters from the GSLV? The bigger core should be able to accommodate 6 strapons. This should result in payload capacity a tad higher than current deign of MkIII.
-
In the long term, ISRO's choice is to obviously move on to the ULV and derivatives for heavy lifting.
But, I was just thinking about the quickest way to achieve payloads heavier than the current 4-5 tonnes of the LVM3. How about removing the 2 solid boosters and instead replace them with 6 L40 boosters from the GSLV? The bigger core should be able to accommodate 6 strapons. This should result in payload capacity a tad higher than current deign of MkIII.
Hmm, interesting idea -- maybe that one could be called the "GSLV-XL" 8)
-
LVM3 wind tunnel model
-
In the long term, ISRO's choice is to obviously move on to the ULV and derivatives for heavy lifting.
But, I was just thinking about the quickest way to achieve payloads heavier than the current 4-5 tonnes of the LVM3. How about removing the 2 solid boosters and instead replace them with 6 L40 boosters from the GSLV? The bigger core should be able to accommodate 6 strapons. This should result in payload capacity a tad higher than current deign of MkIII.
Hmm, interesting idea -- maybe that one could be called the "GSLV-XL" 8)
A bunch of questions in my mind.. ;)
Wouldn't this still involve a substantial re-engineering and testing effort?
Since the L-110 is not ground-lit, would the six L40s have sufficient thrust to lift the rocket off the ground?
Also, if it were feasible, how would the cost of such a configuration using the six L40s compare to the one using two S200 solids? I was just referring a presentation (http://www.bsxindia.com/SomnathProjectDirector.pdf), where there is a cost breakup of PSLV and GSLV. The 4 L40s seem to account for 35% of GSLV's cost, compared to 15% for the solid S139 core.
-
In the long term, ISRO's choice is to obviously move on to the ULV and derivatives for heavy lifting.
But, I was just thinking about the quickest way to achieve payloads heavier than the current 4-5 tonnes of the LVM3. How about removing the 2 solid boosters and instead replace them with 6 L40 boosters from the GSLV? The bigger core should be able to accommodate 6 strapons. This should result in payload capacity a tad higher than current deign of MkIII.
Hmm, interesting idea -- maybe that one could be called the "GSLV-XL" 8)
A bunch of questions in my mind.. ;)
Wouldn't this still involve a substantial re-engineering and testing effort?
Since the L-110 is not ground-lit, would the six L40s have sufficient thrust to lift the rocket off the ground?
Also, if it were feasible, how would the cost of such a configuration using the six L40s compare to the one using two S200 solids? I was just referring a presentation (http://www.bsxindia.com/SomnathProjectDirector.pdf), where there is a cost breakup of PSLV and GSLV. The 4 L40s seem to account for 35% of GSLV's cost, compared to 15% for the solid S139 core.
It will obviously be costly. Hypergolics are costly. Much costlier than the solid boosters. But they do offer advantage in terms of specific impulse and hence better payload capacity.
With L110 not being ground lit, the thrust to weight ratio would be just over 1 not really. The approach here would be to increase the propelllant of L110 (it would be no longer L110). I would say 200 tonnes of propellant on the core stage. T
-
It will obviously be costly. Hypergolics are costly. Much costlier than the solid boosters. But they do offer advantage in terms of specific impulse and hence better payload capacity.
With L110 not being ground lit, the thrust to weight ratio would be just over 1 not really. The approach here would be to increase the propelllant of L110 (it would be no longer L110). I would say 200 tonnes of propellant on the core stage. T
Okay. It brings another question to my mind..
Despite having twice the payload capability of GSLV-II, wouldn't GSLV-III be a cheaper launcher than the former? Though it has two larger solids, it has lesser hypergolic propellant (110 vs 200), less number of Vikas engines (2 vs 5) and a more powerful but less complex (and possibly cheaper? just guessing here) cryo stage.
If this were so, it would make every bit of sense to retire GSLV-II as soon as GSLV-III is operational. Has there been any indications so far from ISRO regarding this?
-
This may move to second week of Dec. Source (http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report-gslv-mk-iii-expected-to-be-launched-in-first-half-of-december-2030711)
The experimental mission of India's Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle-Mark III (GSLV-Mk III) is expected to be launched in the first half of December. "Certain reviews are going on at the moment, we expect by December first half we should be able to have the launch," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chairman K Radhakrishnan told reporters here.
Speaking on the sidelines of Engineers' Conclave-2014, he said the launch date would depend on preparedness, certain analysis and reconformation for the new vehicle and weather which would be bad from October to first week of December. "...Also need to have the recovery of the crew module...., we are getting ready for the launch, it should happen in the first half of December," he said.
Radhakrishnan said the integration of the vehicle was complete and it was at vehicle assembly building in Sriharikota, and the electrical tests are going on "at the moment."
On the crew module, Radhakrishnan said as it comes down, there will be lot of heat experienced by the module. "We want to measure that and then as it comes down and splashes we have to locate and recover it also," he said, adding that it is expected to splash down in Bay of Bengal about 450 km from Andaman. Noting that a couple of tests have to be done on the crew module, the ISRO Chairman said, "One is the parachute has to be ejected and it has to reduce the velocity, and we also need to lift the module from the sea using helicopters. These two trials are now going on; today one trial has been done for the parachute...
"The crew module is sitting now in Sriharikota. By end of this month we should be able to have the vehicle and crew module all integrated and tested," he said.
He said the engine-related tests had been conducted. "In another five to six weeks, we should be able to have the first firing of that engine on the ground, which we call hot touch- it will be done in Mahendragiri..."
-
This may move to second week of Dec.
In the interview Dr Radhakrishnan used the word "tentative" meaning there is a big chance that the launch may not happen this year but early Jan 2015
-
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/science/news/isro-to-test-crew-module-in-december-for-indias-first-human-space-flight-614360
http://www.mobiletor.com/120089/gslv-mk-iii-may-ready-launch-first-half-december/
-
Personally, I'd rather have a delay for further checks than take risks of a failure. After all, this is an all new behemoth that we are talking about, very unlike from anything else that ISRO has now. What bugs me though, is that until this thing lifts off, the SLP will remain blocked impacting the schedule of ISRO's other launches. Any idea whether the construction of second VAB is currently in progress? Looks like this is a necessity if ISRO needs to stick to its launch schedules.
-
Quote from: ss1_3 on 10/30/2014 06:17 PM
This may move to second week of Dec.
In the interview Dr Radhakrishnan used the word "tentative" meaning there is a big chance that the launch may not happen this year but early Jan 2015
I knew, the launch schedule would slip further. Instead of making early announcement of launch schedule date and then changing it repeatedly ll the time, ISRO should rather stop making announcement unless it is completely ready to do the launch.
Apathetic attitude shown by the current ISRO chairman during his tenure has put paid to the development of ISRO’s medium and heavy lift launch vehicle such as GSLV MK II and GSLV MK III. As I predicted last month, GSLV MK III launch might slip into next year because of the following reasons. As reported by Business Standard in 2011, he seems a bit paranoid when reminded about GSLV project.
Twin GSLV failures one with the indigenous and the next with the Russian engine jolted his morale. Even though he overcame his sagging morale with successive satellite launches albeit belatedly with the work horse PSLV and successful insertion of MOM into MARS recently, his apathetic attitude to other ISRO projects did not help ISRO reduce asymmetrical widening gap Chinese Space Programme has made in the domain of Launch Vehicle Development let alone its esteemed manned space mission.
Had the twin GSLV failures not taken place, we would have seen him go on pilgrimage to Sabarimala many more times as he did in the very beginning of his taking over and we would not have seen devas-antrix controversy to erupt and possibly no Mangalyaan Mission which I presume was given the go-ahead by the previous Government to restore the sagging morale of Dr. K. Radhakrishna and ISRO as well. Had he been involved with the launch vehicle development like his predecessor, he would have understood how important it is for ISRO to complete the development of heavy lift vehicle as soon as possible so that ISRO can stop being dependent on ARIANE SPACE for launching heavy communication satellite.. In 2009 I heard Dr. Kasturirangan as saying that ISRO space shuttle would take to sky next year. It did not happen. Then the Space Capsule Recovery Experiment 2 was supposed to have taken place in 2010, it did not happen.
Unless ISRO gets a new chairman with involvement in launch vehicle development like G. Madhavan Nair and strong proclivity towards pushing forward vigorously the launch vehicle projects, ISRO will not be able to reduce gap with Chinese and Japanese Space Programme
-
Personally, I'd rather have a delay for further checks than take risks of a failure. After all, this is an all new behemoth that we are talking about, very unlike from anything else that ISRO has now. What bugs me though, is that until this thing lifts off, the SLP will remain blocked impacting the schedule of ISRO's other launches. Any idea whether the construction of second VAB is currently in progress? Looks like this is a necessity if ISRO needs to stick to its launch schedules.
Found this:-
http://www.isro.org/Tender/shar/SDSCSHAR-HPS-PT-04-2014-15.pdf
The SVAB is targeted for realisation within 42 months.
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=99332
-
Unless ISRO gets a new chairman with involvement in launch vehicle development like G. Madhavan Nair and strong proclivity towards pushing forward vigorously the launch vehicle projects, ISRO will not be able to reduce gap with Chinese and Japanese Space Programme
--- ( --- )
Dr S Kiran Kumar will be the next ISRO chief, I read somewhere. Well, each project has its own chief too, and isn't purely dependent upon the attentions of the ISRO chief. Maybe it's too many chiefs, not enough Indians. :P
If they expanded the technical teams more, then they could achieve more progress at a faster pace. You remember for the Mangalyaan launch, they had people seriously sacrificing sleep around that launch window period. It was putting them under a lot of strain, but they made the launch window.
-
Unless ISRO gets a new chairman with involvement in launch vehicle development like G. Madhavan Nair and strong proclivity towards pushing forward vigorously the launch vehicle projects, ISRO will not be able to reduce gap with Chinese and Japanese Space Programme
--- ( --- )
Dr S Kiran Kumar will be the next ISRO chief, I read somewhere. Well, each project has its own chief too, and isn't purely dependent upon the attentions of the ISRO chief. Maybe it's too many chiefs, not enough Indians. :P
If they expanded the technical teams more, then they could achieve more progress at a faster pace. You remember for the Mangalyaan launch, they had people seriously sacrificing sleep around that launch window period. It was putting them under a lot of strain, but they made the launch window.
I guess, you meant 'engineers' ;)
-
Is this the type of booster that will send India's first manned spacecraft into LEO?
-
You know? I'm betting there's a lot of people at ULA who are wishing that they'd developed a reusable launch system by now!
I'm betting that they're going to be losing a lot of international launch contracts! And with India developing their own launcher...
-
You know? I'm betting there's a lot of people at ULA who are wishing that they'd developed a reusable launch system by now!
I'm betting that they're going to be losing a lot of international launch contracts! And with India developing their own launcher...
I don't know, I'm still rather skeptical of this new GSLV version (which really has little if any in common with previous GSLV). I look forward to seeing it launch, but it seems like an awkwardly overbuilt design with a surprisingly small payload capacity. (Similar or less performance compared to F9, with a lot more parts)
-
You know? I'm betting there's a lot of people at ULA who are wishing that they'd developed a reusable launch system by now!
I'm betting that they're going to be losing a lot of international launch contracts! And with India developing their own launcher...
I don't know, I'm still rather skeptical of this new GSLV version (which really has little if any in common with previous GSLV). I look forward to seeing it launch, but it seems like an awkwardly overbuilt design with a surprisingly small payload capacity. (Similar or less performance compared to F9, with a lot more parts)
F9 has a more complex design with its 9 engines in the first stage.
-
I don't know, I'm still rather skeptical of this new GSLV version (which really has little if any in common with previous GSLV). I look forward to seeing it launch, but it seems like an awkwardly overbuilt design with a surprisingly small payload capacity. (Similar or less performance compared to F9, with a lot more parts)
It has a lower payload capacity because of it's core liquid stage which has a thrust of 1400 KN.It will be replaced by a semi cryogenic engine with a thrust of 2000 KN in the near future,thus enabling the LV to carry a payload of 6000 kgs.
-
It has a lower payload capacity because of it's core liquid stage which has a thrust of 1400 KN.It will be replaced by a semi cryogenic engine with a thrust of 2000 KN in the near future,thus enabling the LV to carry a payload of 6000 kgs.
Will that newer version of the vehicle with the 2000 KN semi-cryo engine have a different name designation?
If so, then what?
-
It has a lower payload capacity because of it's core liquid stage which has a thrust of 1400 KN.It will be replaced by a semi cryogenic engine with a thrust of 2000 KN in the near future,thus enabling the LV to carry a payload of 6000 kgs.
Will that newer version of the vehicle with the 2000 KN semi-cryo engine have a different name designation?
If so, then what?
Since such a configuration maps to that of the proposed ULV, my take would be to name it as a ULV variant (maybe ULV-4). They could have varying number of smaller solids for realizing the other versions as described as antariksh's post (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31827.msg1047204#msg1047204)
-
You know? I'm betting there's a lot of people at ULA who are wishing that they'd developed a reusable launch system by now!
I'm betting that they're going to be losing a lot of international launch contracts! And with India developing their own launcher...
I don't know, I'm still rather skeptical of this new GSLV version (which really has little if any in common with previous GSLV). I look forward to seeing it launch, but it seems like an awkwardly overbuilt design with a surprisingly small payload capacity. (Similar or less performance compared to F9, with a lot more parts)
F9 has a more complex design with its 9 engines in the first stage.
If engine count is your only metric, sure. But fewer stages, same propellants, and one engine family is another way to measure complexity.
I have no doubt that India could produce a launch vehicle that could conquer the commercial market. But like many government aerospace programs, they seem more interested in *developing* technology instead of *operating or using* it. Why does this launcher need three different stages all using very different engines and propellants? And many of them different from previous GLSV/PSLV vehicles. Why? The Indian space program now has experience with solids, storable/hypergolic, semi-cryo, and cryogenic propulsion. When are they going to actually pick one or two technologies and run with them?
-
When are they going to actually pick one or two technologies and run with them?
That seems more likely to happen with the ULV family, which will be run on semi-cryo (RP-1) lower stages and cryo (LH2) upper stage.
-
Why does this launcher need three different stages all using very different engines and propellants? And many of them different from previous GLSV/PSLV vehicles. Why?
This Mid-heavy launcher is a new kind of rocket and is not a successor of any other Indian rockets.
Untill India develops powerful RP-1/LOX and LH2/LOX engines,it will be forced to use N2O4 / UDMH and MMH/MON based liquid engines as well as SRB's
As said earlier in this post,the N2O4/UDTM based liquid core stage of this rocket will be replaced by a RP-1/LOX rocket which is under development.
-
Why does this launcher need three different stages all using very different engines and propellants? .......
Because it was designed to optimize f(cost, efficiency) given technology available to ISRO at that time (Solids, hypergols, under developed cryo). ISRO does not have mature semy-cryo tech and has only recently matured its cryo tech. LVM3 will be the highest efficiency launcher of ISRO with its first and second stages derived from PSLV/GSLV tech. Its design is different than PSLV/GSLV to reduce complexity and improve efficiency while keeping the vehicle cost close to current GSLV.
I feel in the futre when semi-cryo and high thrust cryo are ready, ISRO will have
1) expendable LVs as a combination of Solids, semicryo and cryo to have a balance between cost, complexity and efficiency.
2) resuable LVs as a combination of semi-cryo and cryo to achieve highest efficiency as re-usability will take care of the cost.
-
Is this the type of booster that will send India's first manned spacecraft into LEO?
Yes.
-
Experimental flight of GSLV Mark 3 in December: ISRO chief (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/experimental-flight-of-gslv-mark-3-in-december-isro-chief/articleshow/45110347.cms)
India will conduct an experimental test of its Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle
(GSLV) Mark 3 in mid-December, ISRO
Chief K
Radhakrishnan said Tuesday.
The satellite launch vehicle will have
a capacity of carrying approximately four tonnes of load, and will be able to
launch heavier satellites in space, Radhakrishnan said giving the 50th
Foundation Day Address at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
(IDSA).
-
If they configure this LV with 2x SEC200 lox/ rp1 engines plus Ce25 upper stage (similar specs to Centuar) India will have Atlas V equivalent LV.
But at a lot cheaper price than ULA.
-
Launch now expected in mid-December
http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/experimental-flight-of-gslv-mark-3-in-december-isro-chief-114111100839_1.html
-
-
Any idea about drop test of Crew Module? Did it take place? I guess one or two drops tests from helicopter were planned for Crew Module before its flight aboard GSLV Mk-3 X1.
-
all-set-to-put-unmanned-crew-module-into-orbit (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/all-set-to-put-unmanned-crew-module-into-orbit/article6631187.ece)
-
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/all-set-to-put-unmanned-crew-module-into-orbit/article6631187.ece (http://all-set-to-put-unmanned-crew-module-into-orbit)
“We are ready. Everything is pucca,” said M.C. Dathan, Director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre
Hmmm.. That appears to be a statement of confidence. Maybe their on-pad tests have gone well so far and we might see a launch next month itself after all. 8)
There is a glaring instance of misreporting as well, where in one place it states that the rocket will put the crew module to orbit, whereas in another place it states correctly that it will be a sub-orbital flight.
@antriksh, just FYI.. there is a slight problem with the link in your post. Seems like the url and the label of the link got mixed up a bit.
-
From The Hindu article posted above:
The 3.65-tonne module will get de-mated from the topmost cryogenic stage at an altitude of 125 km and return to the earth. At an altitude of 15 km, there will be an “aerial ballet,” featuring three huge parachutes which will open up one after the other to slow down the module’s descent. The module is expected to splash down in the sea near the Andaman archipelago and will be recovered by the Indian Coast Guard and ISRO personnel. The entire flight from the lift-off to the splash-down will last about 20 minutes.
Two gigantic strap-on motors, each of which will use 200 tonnes of solid propellants, have been strapped around the core stage in the second launch pad. The core stage will use 110 tonnes of liquid propellants. Above the core stage is the cryogenic stage. The module will be “encapsulated” with the cryogenic stage on November 26, said Mr. Dathan.
Looks like GSLV Mk3 X1 is getting ready on SLP. Excited ;D :D Hope Doordarshan covers crew module splashdown as well :) Anyone travelling to SDSC SHAR for this launch?
-
Still no concrete target launch date for this at such a late stage? You guys are risking to lose out any publicity to Orion-EFT1, rockets with legs from some-company-which-must-not-be-named, Angara-5 Heavy and maybe Hayabusa 2 if no news is coming through soon..... :-X
-
re-posting from Human spaceflight thread :-
(http://s30.postimg.org/v95hqhwrl/ISRO_Crew_Module_650.jpg)
The crew module will be launched as a payload on the GSLV-Mark III, which will blast off for the first time.
The crew module will not carry any astronauts on its first test flight, which is scheduled between December 15 and 20. After rising more than a hundred kilometres into space, the crew module would be brought back to Earth, and its reentry trajectory will be studied. The capsule will then be recovered using Indian coast Guard ships from close to the Andaman Nicobar islands. A simulated recovery was carried out recently in the region.
While the rocket would cost Rs. 140 crore, the crew module would cost Rs. 15 crore, said MYS Prasad, Director of the Satish Dhawan Space Centre.
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/india-to-push-next-space-frontier-with-launch-of-crew-module-in-mid-december-627603
-
Still no concrete target launch date for this at such a late stage? You guys are risking to lose out any publicity to Orion-EFT1, rockets with legs from some-company-which-must-not-be-named, Angara-5 Heavy and maybe Hayabusa 2 if no news is coming through soon..... :-X
Unfortunately this kind of event would generate negative publicity,specially in international media for reasons known to all and therefore the more silence we keep,the better it is 8)
Anyways according to the program director the launch will happen anywhere between 15th to 20th and as shown in the pic,the CM is undergoing integration with the rocket.
-
(http://s30.postimg.org/dxmu0x1gh/Rock.jpg)
-
Unfortunately this kind of event would generate negative publicity,specially in international media for reasons known to all and therefore the more silence we keep,the better it is 8)
Very true abhishek. Especially considering this mission carries a crew module boilerplate for future manned spaceflight, ISRO would do well to keep publicity within limits. Else, there's going to be a lot of bashing that the agency is wasting its funds over unnecessary, expensive projects.
-
Unfortunately this kind of event would generate negative publicity,specially in international media for reasons known to all and therefore the more silence we keep,the better it is 8)
Very true abhishek. Especially considering this mission carries a crew module boilerplate for future manned spaceflight, ISRO would do well to keep publicity within limits. Else, there's going to be a lot of bashing that the agency is wasting its funds over unnecessary, expensive projects.
Isro should stop publishing the dates in first place. It should publish the target date only when they are confident of their schedule. Or it should work more hard to attain the published dates. Tentative dates should not be encouraged. Scientist should be well aware that they are being followed.
-
Very true abhishek. Especially considering this mission carries a crew module boilerplate for future manned spaceflight, ISRO would do well to keep publicity within limits. Else, there's going to be a lot of bashing that the agency is wasting its funds over unnecessary, expensive projects.
They will bash us for anything,even for gazing at stars in the night.In view of the fact that Indian technological advancement does not go too well with western media ,ISRO should rather keep quite without creating much
of a melodrama over it's projects.
-
Test launch to take place in the third week of December
(source in Telugu (http://www.andhrabhoomi.net/node/188095))
-
Back to the thread subject
ISRO to launch GSLV Mark III between Dec 15 and 20 (http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-isro-to-launch-gslv-mark-iii-between-dec-15-and-20-2039762)
(Some of the recent posts were too far from the subject to be kept)
-
Very true abhishek. Especially considering this mission carries a crew module boilerplate for future manned spaceflight, ISRO would do well to keep publicity within limits. Else, there's going to be a lot of bashing that the agency is wasting its funds over unnecessary, expensive projects.
They will bash us for anything,even for gazing at stars in the night.In view of the fact that Indian technological advancement does not go too well with western media ,ISRO should rather keep quite without creating much
of a melodrama over it's projects.
I think primarily it appears unprofessional and poorly planned. The unintended effect being loss of confidence.
ISRO has been delaying this mission for a while. Perhaps it would have helped to share the challenges and keep the rest of us abreast of the changes and so forth.
This black-box, date-shifting approach isn't good for science nor for inspiring public confidence to secure further funding.
-
Still no concrete target launch date for this at such a late stage? You guys are risking to lose out any publicity to Orion-EFT1, rockets with legs from some-company-which-must-not-be-named, Angara-5 Heavy and maybe Hayabusa 2 if no news is coming through soon..... :-X
Unfortunately this kind of event would generate negative publicity,specially in international media for reasons known to all and therefore the more silence we keep,the better it is 8)
Anyways according to the program director the launch will happen anywhere between 15th to 20th and as shown in the pic,the CM is undergoing integration with the rocket.
I disagree - I think ISRO has done a great job with public outreach through social media, which has provided a direct gauge of public support for its work. That's more than enough to offset any foreign criticism.
I wish that ISRO had borrowed another chapter from NASA and its Orion ETF-1 experimental test flight, by letting people submit their names through the internet, to have them recorded on a chip and flown on the GSLV-Mk3's LVM3-X1 experimental test flight. That would have been another cheap and useful way for ISRO to engage the public, by helping fulfill peoples' aspirations of going to the heavens.
Anyway, here's an article on the parachute system that will be used on this test flight:
http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/2014/11/30/India%E2%80%99s-Manned-Mission-Tied-to-its-Biggest-Parachute-Yet/article2547970.ece
-
L110 stage engine nozzles will be covered initially.
-
Holy Lord! Launch date shifts again
the launch of Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle-Mark III (GSLV-Mk III) anytime between Dec. 20 and 25, dependin on weather conditions, said officials.
http://www.microfinancemonitor.com/2014/12/02/isro-celebrates-mangal-mahotsav-gears-up-for-gslv-mark-iii-launch-in-dec-20-25/#
-
Nah, that's just one site - not even a major news portal - which said that, so I wouldn't put much credence in that statement.
-
GSLV Mark III faces its first experimental flight (http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-sci-tech-and-agri/gslv-mark-iii-faces-its-first-experimental-flight/article6660089.ece)
Reducing the total number of propulsion modules that make up the GSLV Mark III was seen as crucial to increasing the rocket’s reliability and reducing launch costs, according to ISRO experts this correspondent spoke to. The GSLV Mark III has just four propulsion modules while its predecessor, the GSLV, has seven.
The rocket will, however, give the crew module a velocity of 5.3. km/second when the latter separates at a height of about 125 km. The capsule will then descend and splashdown in the Bay of Bengal, about 600 km from Port Blair in the Andaman Islands.
a totally new configuration, so if there are issues with respect to the configuration and we need to take care of that, it is better to take care of [them] early.” It was not necessary to wait till the cryogenic stage was qualified.
The GSLV Mark III is more sensitive than the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) and the current GSLV to disturbances that might occur as it accelerates through the dense atmosphere. The ability of the rocket’s control systems to effectively handle such perturbations without violating the vehicle's structural capabilities will be tested during the experimental flight
The closely matched thrust levels required from the two S200 boosters was achieved by carefully controlling both the quality of the raw materials used and their subsequent processing. Another major achievement is that the S200’s large nozzle has been equipped with a ‘flex seal.’ The nozzle can therefore be swivelled when the rocket’s orientation needs correction.
The GSLV Mark III’s two S200 boosters fire at lift off, together generating a thrust of over 800 tonnes. The sheer volume of sound produced at lift off could potentially damage the rocket and the spacecraft. A sound suppression system has therefore been installed on the launch pad that will be spray about 20 tonnes of water per second to reduce noise levels during lift off.
In flight, as the thrust from the S200 boosters begins to tail off, the decline in acceleration is sensed by the rocket’s onboard sensors and the twin Vikas engines on the ‘L110’ liquid propellant core stage are then ignited. Before the S200s separate and fall away from the rocket, the solid boosters as well as the Vikas engines operate together for a short period of time.
The thermal environment at the base of the L110 stage will be monitored during the experimental mission. The transition of control over the vehicle’s orientation from the S200s to the L110 will also be closely watched.
-
Crew module will be actively contorlled
-
Actively controlled in what way? You mean telecommanded from the ground? For doing what? During what portion of the flight trajectory?
-
Actively controlled in what way? You mean telecommanded from the ground? For doing what? During what portion of the flight trajectory?
My guess actively controlling the flight profile by onboard computers using thrusters. Just after the separation from the CUS, we can see a flight phase where active control is applied.
-
Expected Launch Date: 18-Dec-2014
-
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-tamilnadu/women-power-the-most-powerful-rocket/article6669203.ece
The digital auto pilot (DAP), the software that controls the rocket, was designed by V.R. Lalithambika and her team. D.S. Sheela is the group director; V. Brinda is the head of the Control Design Division; and Manju Unnikrishnan and Rani designed the onboard software and its integration.
The simulation of the flight of LVM3 requires special software. S. Anitha, A. Sreelatha and Jayachithara are among the seniors who worked on the software.
B. Valsa is an expert in software engineering and deputy director responsible for the system reliability of the VSSC. “She and her team, comprising 200 engineers and other technical staff, are responsible for the quality and reliability of the systems as well as testing,” says Mr. Somanath.
Structural designer A.P. Beena, along with her young colleague Geethu Abraham and others, designed the Crew Module Atmospheric Re-entry Experiment (CARE) structure for this mission. “Beena has designed the propellant tanks of the L110 stage of LVM3,” Mr. Somanath notes.
Rachel SKD, a veteran in structural design, has earlier designed many structures of the PSLV and the GSLV. For LVM3, she and her colleagues have designed the most critical structures, very complex in design.
-
Expected Launch Date: 18-Dec-2014
Seems to be confirmed by NOTAM announcing closure of airways East of Chennai (MMV VOR) from December 18, 0330UTC
A2212/14 - CLOSURE/ALTN ROUTINGS: I) P574 NOT AVBL BTN MMV VOR AND DUBTA ALTN RTE: MMV VOR-DCT-ADKIT-POINT Z 0854N08626E-DCT-DUBTA-P574 (BIDIRECTIONAL) II) P761 NOT AVBL BTN MMV VOR AND IDASO ALTN RTE: MMV VOR - TR319/139DEG-53NM-TTP VOR-DCT- POINT A 142225N0800303E-DCT- GURAS-DCT-IDASO(BIDIRECTIONAL) III) P762 NOT AVBL BTN BIKEN AND DUGOS ALTN RTE: BIKEN-DCT-POINT Z 0854N08626E-DCT -DUGOS-P762 (BIRECTIONAL) IV) W20 NOT AVBL BTN MMV VOR AND BODEL ALTN RTE: MMV VOR- TR319/139DEG-53NM-TTP VOR- TR357/177DEG-81NM- BODEL (BIDIRECTIONAL) V) A465 NOT AVBL BTN MMV VOR AND DOKET ALTN RTE: MMV VOR-TR319/139DEG-53NM-TTP VOR- DCT- POINT A 142225N0800303E-DCT-DOKET (BIDIRECTIONAL) VI) ATS RTE N563,B466,Q10,Q11,V003,V004,V006,V008,V009 AND V011 NOT AVBL. GND - UNL) END PART 1 OF 2, 0330-0730, 18 DEC 03:30 2014 UNTIL 31 DEC 07:30 2014. CREATED: 03 DEC 16:49 2014
-
GSLV Mark-III launch on Dec. 18
Indian Space Research Organisation’s heaviest and upgraded rocket -Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV – Mark III) will lift off from the second launch pad at Satish Dhawan Space Centre SHAR, Sriharikota on December 18.
On Monday, a high level meeting was held and all activities done so far were cleared.
“The launch will happen on December 18. Anytime between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. We will announce the exact time closer to the launch,” S. Somanath, project director, GSLV Mark III, said.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/gslv-markiii-launch-on-dec-18/article6674261.ece
-
from past: Effective thermal shield made up of silica tiles and cc material -SRE-1 before and after reentry
-
Captions:
gslv-mkiii-x-1.jpg: The two S200 Strap-ons during the integration of the vehicle
gslv-mkiii-x-2.jpg: L110 Liquid Core Stage being prepared at Stage Preparation Facility
gslv-mkiii-x-3.jpg: The partially integrated vehicle with S200 Strap-ons and L110 Core Stage outside the Vehicle Assembly Building
gslv-mkiii-x-4.jpg: The passive C25 Cryogenic Upper Stage being hoisted at Vehicle Assembly Building
gslv-mkiii-x-5.jpg: Integration of the passive C25 Cryogenic Upper Stage with L110 liquid Core Stage in Progress at Vehicle Assembly Building
gslv-mkiii-x-6.jpg: CARE at clean room before its launch
Source:
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx
-
I wish ISRO settles on a single name for the rocket. Either GSLV Mk-III or GSLV-III or LVM3. Right now, it says LVM3 in the cryo stage mockup, but GSLV-Mk-III elsewhere.
-
Lets hope they have installed inflight video telemetry system
-
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Isro-to-test-GSLV-Mk-III-crew-module-on-December-18/articleshow/45444522.cms
... Geo-Synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV-MIII) on December 18 between 9am and 12pm from Sriharikota.
Somanath said that 325 seconds after the lift off, the crew module — made of aluminium alloy and with a lift-off mass of 3,735kg — will separate from the rocket at an altitude of 126km. Three different types of parachutes tested at facilities in Chandigarh and at Sriharikota by dropping them from a helicopter will be deployed during the descent. About 1,280 seconds after the launch the module will splashdown in the Bay of Bengal at a point 600km from Port Blair. It will be recovered by the Indian Coast Guard.
Somanath said that the module has an ablative thermal protection system because during re-entry into the atmosphere, it will experience heat around 1,600 degrees C.
-
The 3.7-tonne crew module being tested next week will be the same size, shape and weight as the capsule that is being developed to accommodate up to three astronauts. It will be equipped with the heat-protecting tiles and parachute system of the manned version.
While a capsule in orbit around Earth will re-enter with a velocity of over 28,000 km per hour, next week’s test will see the GSLV Mark III leave the crew module at a height of about 125 km with a velocity of around 19,000 km per hour. The crew module carries sensors that will make measurements of over 200 parameters during the flight, including the temperature, pressure and stress experienced at various points in the structure.
After separation from the GSLV Mark III, six liquid-propellant thrusters on the crew module will be used to correct any perturbations that occur during separation and bring the capsule down at the correct angle for re-entry into the atmosphere.
Once re-entry starts at a height of about 80 km, the thrusters will cease to operate. As the crew module streaks through the atmosphere, the air around it heats up and the spacecraft slows down.
The crew module carries two independent sets of parachutes, both of which are simultaneously deployed. First, the 2.5-metre diameter pilot parachutes come out, followed by the 6.5-metre drogue parachutes, which cut the capsule’s velocity down to 180 km per hour.Then the main parachutes are deployed at a height of about 5 km. These parachutes, each 31 metres in diameter, are the largest ever made in the country and were developed by the Aerial Delivery Research & Development Establishment, an Agra-based national defence laboratory.
On splashdown, the main parachutes will be immediately detached from the crew module and a beacon giving its position activated. A fluorescent green dye will also be emitted to aid in locating the spacecraft.
In the coming test, the crew module could experience decelerations of up to 13 g, said Mr. Nair. But, in a mission with humans onboard, the capsule’s thrusters would continue to operate till parachute deployment began, adjusting the spacecraft's orientation and trajectory, and keeping deceleration levels to less than 4 g. (One g being equivalent to the tug of Earth's gravity.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/unmanned-crew-module-to-be-tested/article6679866.ece
-
In the coming test, the crew module could experience decelerations of up to 13 g, said Mr. Nair. But, in a mission with humans onboard, the capsule’s thrusters would continue to operate till parachute deployment began, adjusting the spacecraft's orientation and trajectory, and keeping deceleration levels to less than 4 g. (One g being equivalent to the tug of Earth's gravity.
I am translating the above to mean that a nominal descent would use thrusters to control the vehicle's attitude during re-entry by rotating around the vehicle c/g (to generate lift), whereas this test will use a ballistic return.
-
The 3.7-tonne crew module being tested next week will be the same size, shape and weight as the capsule that is being developed to accommodate up to three astronauts.
This is another data point indicating that the capsule is larger than Soyuz, although it is unclear whether the 3.7 ton mass is just the capsule, or if it includes peripheral equipment.
For reference, Soyuz has a mass of 3 tons for the descent module. The 3.7 ton mass implies a larger diameter, perhaps 2.5 meters - 3 meters.
-
In the coming test, the crew module could experience decelerations of up to 13 g, said Mr. Nair. But, in a mission with humans onboard, the capsule’s thrusters would continue to operate till parachute deployment began, adjusting the spacecraft's orientation and trajectory, and keeping deceleration levels to less than 4 g. (One g being equivalent to the tug of Earth's gravity.
I am translating the above to mean that a nominal descent would use thrusters to control the vehicle's attitude during re-entry by rotating around the vehicle c/g (to generate lift), whereas this test will use a ballistic return.
For this test, capsule's flight profile will be actively controlled till the point of reentry. From renetry onwards, the flight profile will be ballistic.
For manned capsule, flight profile up to the point of deployment of parachutes would be controlled by thrusters.
-
The 3.7-tonne crew module being tested next week will be the same size, shape and weight as the capsule that is being developed to accommodate up to three astronauts.
This is another data point indicating that the capsule is larger than Soyuz, although it is unclear whether the 3.7 ton mass is just the capsule, or if it includes peripheral equipment.
For reference, Soyuz has a mass of 3 tons for the descent module. The 3.7 ton mass implies a larger diameter, perhaps 2.5 meters - 3 meters.
Dia = 3.1 m, Ht = 2.6 m
-
The 3.7-tonne crew module being tested next week will be the same size, shape and weight as the capsule that is being developed to accommodate up to three astronauts.
This is another data point indicating that the capsule is larger than Soyuz, although it is unclear whether the 3.7 ton mass is just the capsule, or if it includes peripheral equipment.
For reference, Soyuz has a mass of 3 tons for the descent module. The 3.7 ton mass implies a larger diameter, perhaps 2.5 meters - 3 meters.
Dia = 3.1 m, Ht = 2.6 m
Would love to know how the habitable volume of this capsule would compare to that of Soyuz and Shenzhou reentry modules, since this has a more conical rather than 'headlight' shape. Initially, when Shenzhou reentry capsule was found to be larger than Soyuz, there were some speculations that the Chinese were planning to accommodate 4 persons, though it did not happen. Since this capsule looks quite a bit larger than either of them, I wonder if it would be feasible (or even possible) to accommodate a crew of 4, albeit a bit cramped.
-
Drum roll !! ;D
-
Drum roll !! ;D
Great! 8) So 'LVM3' seems to be the name ISRO has settled to. Its written all over (S-200, L-110 and C-25)
-
LVM3 Moving out of VAB
-
Tracks from Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) to Second Launch Pad (SLP).
Solid Stage Assembly Building (SSAB) in the background
-
Tracks from Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) to Second Launch Pad (SLP).
Solid Stage Assembly Building (SSAB) in the background
Was just going to ask what was the building that I was seeing behind VAB. Thanks Chota!
Btw, what is that launch pedestral-like thing with rails which I see on the left bottom corner of the first image (kind of midway between SSAB and VAB)?
-
LVM3 Moving out of VAB
Though called a 'giant' rocket, it kind of looks puny when seen in front of the VAB. ;) Maybe its because it is shorter than PSLV/GSLV.
-
Old photos of SRE-1 splash down (from helicopter) and recovery by a coast guard vessel
Something similar for CARE this time.
Photo Credits: ISRO
-
Tracks from Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) to Second Launch Pad (SLP).
Solid Stage Assembly Building (SSAB) in the background
Was just going to ask what was the building that I was seeing behind VAB. Thanks Chota!
Btw, what is that launch pedestral-like thing with rails which I see on the left bottom corner of the first image (kind of midway between SSAB and VAB)?
That is one of the PSLV/GSLV Mk. I/Mk. II MLPs on one of the MLP storage tracks in the VAB siding complex.
-
Interesting arrangement on that second stage (a dummy on this launch). The open section is not where the engine is located, it is the intertank section of the second stage. The engine is completely enclosed by the interstage below the open section.
- Ed Kyle
-
Interesting arrangement on that second stage (a dummy on this launch). The open section is not where the engine is located, it is the intertank section of the second stage. The engine is completely enclosed by the interstage below the open section.
- Ed Kyle
Yes it's the same in the GSLV. Although I am not so sure about it's visual value (the LV could look better if it were completely covered).
Btw..OT..love your website! Great treasure trove of info. Keep up the good work! :)
-
That is one of the PSLV/GSLV Mk. I/Mk. II MLPs on one of the MLP storage tracks in the VAB siding complex.
Thanks! I kind of forgot that GSLV-III would have to use a different MLP design as against the one used by PSLV/GSLV-II
Interesting arrangement on that second stage (a dummy on this launch). The open section is not where the engine is located, it is the intertank section of the second stage. The engine is completely enclosed by the interstage below the open section.
- Ed Kyle
Ed, I believe you meant the C-25 cryo-stage when you mentioned the second stage, but (correct me if I am wrong) that seems to be the third stage as L-110 is air-lit around 10s before S-200s separate.
I guess C-12/15 stage of GSLV-II has a similar inter-tank section, but there the engine appears to be enclosed within the cryo-stage structure and not by a lower inter-stage.
-
Ed, I believe you meant the C-25 cryo-stage when you mentioned the second stage, but (correct me if I am wrong) that seems to be the third stage as L-110 is air-lit around 10s before S-200s separate.
Yes, it is a third stage, similar to Titan 3/4, although, since the first stage ignites about 20 seconds before the solids burn out and separate, it might be tempting to call it a 2.85 stage launch vehicle!
- Ed Kyle
-
Interesting arrangement on that second stage (a dummy on this launch). The open section is not where the engine is located, it is the intertank section of the second stage. The engine is completely enclosed by the interstage below the open section.
- Ed Kyle
We can see the engine after separation of the stages
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
May be it's there for backup/testing purposes. Even GSLV Mk1 D1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx) flight had SITVC mounted on S125 solid motor even though L40 strapons had engine gimballing; and SITVC was removed in subsequent GSLV Mk1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx)/Mk2 flights.
-
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
May be it's there for backup/testing purposes. Even GSLV Mk1 D1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx) flight had SITVC mounted on S125 solid motor even though L40 strapons had engine gimballing; and SITVC was removed in subsequent GSLV Mk1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx)/Mk2 flights.
The L110's air-lit isn't it? You'd need SITVC on the S-200s to steer until the core kicked in.
Also, it's interesting to note how the parachute harness on the SRE-1 was attached to the bottom of the capsule, (i.e. the flat part of the cone) rather than the top (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1301248#msg1301248). The illustrations in those schematics of CARE (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1300273#msg1300273), as well as the picture (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1289110#msg1289110) of the skeleton of the capsule (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1292987#msg1292987) seem to indicate that they're reversed this, and that the parachute will be attached to the top.1 But the integration stage picture still shows the crew module being handled/processed while "upside down" (i.e. heat shield on top) (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1300236#msg1300236). Hell, it even seems to be interfaced to the payload adapter while "upside-down" (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1294475#msg1294475).
Is it launching upside down? :-O lol
1 (Or does it? I'm guessing that the green-bag stowed on the top shelf is the packed canopy, and that the risers are the green straps. They seem to be hanging down - and I initially attributed this to them not having been attached as yet.)
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
May be it's there for backup/testing purposes. Even GSLV Mk1 D1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx) flight had SITVC mounted on S125 solid motor even though L40 strapons had engine gimballing; and SITVC was removed in subsequent GSLV Mk1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx)/Mk2 flights.
The L110's air-lit isn't it? You'd need SITVC on the S-200s to steer until the core kicked in.
S200 boosters have flex nozzles (here (http://www.isro.org/newsletters/scripts/newslettersin.aspx?page5jan2010mar2010), here (http://iafastro.directory/iac/archive/browse/IAC-10/C4/2/8908/)), so I guess they don't need additional SITVC?
Is it launching upside down? :-O lol
Yes, crew module seems to be launched upside down. There were some discussions regarding that here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294883#msg1294883), here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294983#msg1294983) and here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1295120#msg1295120).
-
Drum roll !! ;D
Great! 8) So 'LVM3' seems to be the name ISRO has settled to. Its written all over (S-200, L-110 and C-25)
actually LVM3 is the most appropriate name instead of GSLV MK III that media is reporting.
This being a suborbital flight as it does not carry active Cryogenic Upper stage ...and calling it GSLV will be paradoxical as it is neither intended nor capable of reaching Geo -synchronous orbit .
ISRO is particular about how and why it names and numbers its launch vehicles ...
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
May be it's there for backup/testing purposes. Even GSLV Mk1 D1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx) flight had SITVC mounted on S125 solid motor even though L40 strapons had engine gimballing; and SITVC was removed in subsequent GSLV Mk1 (http://www.isro.org/gslv-d3/gslv-d3.aspx)/Mk2 flights.
right! i feel they will be keeping the SITVC for redundancy. just like the fins on the gslv mk2.
-
S200 boosters have flex nozzles (here (http://www.isro.org/newsletters/scripts/newslettersin.aspx?page5jan2010mar2010), here (http://iafastro.directory/iac/archive/browse/IAC-10/C4/2/8908/)), so I guess they don't need additional SITVC?
From second link you provided it says
The flex nozzle system with vectoring capability of + 8o
What does it mean? Is it +/- 8° ?
-
GSLV MK-III launch date to be fixed on Tuesday
:-\
The Mission Readiness Review (MRR) of the experimental flight of GSLV MK-III — the most powerful rocket built by Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to date — will meet at Sriharikota on December 16 and take a call on the date of its launch.
ISRO sources said the launch was expected to take place two days later on December 18. “If everything was found satisfactory, the countdown for the launch will begin after the meeting of the MRR on December 16 and the launch will take place in the morning of December 18,” the sources said.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/gslv-mk-iii-launch-date-to-be-fixed-on-tuesday/17963.html
-
Can you please point me to the expected flight profile of this launch vehicle ?
-
Can you please point me to the expected flight profile of this launch vehicle ?
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294575#msg1294575
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1300610#msg1300610
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15187.msg1300914#msg1300914
-
GSLV Mark-III launch rehearsal to begin tonight
Indian Space agency Isro will begin the launch rehearsal of the Geo-synchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle-Mark III (LVM3 X mission) on Sunday night, a top official said.
"The rehearsal for the launch of GSLV Mark III will begin tonight," Isro chairman K Radhakrishnan told reporters at the airport here today.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/GSLV-Mark-III-launch-rehearsal-to-begin-tonight/articleshow/45514581.cms
-
The weatherman has predicted isolated rain over the coastal region in the next few days due to a low pressure trough formed over the Bay of Bengal under the influence of the North-East monsoon, which is active over the region.
Isro officials, however, are confident that the launch would not be affected even in case of heavy downpour.
“The rain does not matter as the vehicle is fully rain-proof. Even if it is drenched, the launch would take place as per schedule,” the official said.
;D
The official, who is inspecting the launch activities with other scientists, added that several design changes have been incorporated in the rocket after studying previous GSLV rockets and the issues faced by them
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/447651/isro-send-gslv-mark-iii.html
-
S200 boosters have flex nozzles (here (http://www.isro.org/newsletters/scripts/newslettersin.aspx?page5jan2010mar2010), here (http://iafastro.directory/iac/archive/browse/IAC-10/C4/2/8908/)), so I guess they don't need additional SITVC?
From second link you provided it says
The flex nozzle system with vectoring capability of + 8o
What does it mean? Is it +/- 8° ?
Yes, going by the same abstract posted in this page (http://www.linknovate.com/publication/s200-solid-booster-development-2586686/), it should be +/- 8 degrees.
-
What does it mean? Is it +/- 8° ?
Yeah. Which is the same (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:uclrOuTD1vUJ:science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/srb.html) as the flex nozzles on the shuttle's SRBs (http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/Forum30/HTML/001086.html). (Picture (http://www.skyroadster.com/forums/attachments/f2/41877d1320634558-houston-car-show-may-9th-pics-0014lopy-640x456-b.jpg) of post-launch SRB)
(http://www.skyroadster.com/forums/attachments/f2/41877d1320634558-houston-car-show-may-9th-pics-0014lopy-640x456-b.jpg)
S200 boosters have flex nozzles (here (http://www.isro.org/newsletters/scripts/newslettersin.aspx?page5jan2010mar2010), here (http://iafastro.directory/iac/archive/browse/IAC-10/C4/2/8908/)), so I guess they don't need additional SITVC?
Haha.. my bad. I assumed by flex-nozzle, you were referring to engine gimballing on the L-110. (Akin to how ISRO insistently calls their Payload Fairings "Heat shields"). But having read about it - where's the source that says that the S-200s have SITVC in the first place?
This (http://www.ssdl.gatech.edu/papers/mastersProjects/KranzuschK-8900.pdf) analysis demonstrates that there was sufficient margin on the Space Shuttle SRBs, to maintain control authority - even when they sustained a failure of one (of two total) Hydraulic power unit (which drives the nozzle flexion). Given that the S-200 is a smaller booster, and the LVM-3 a smaller stack, I don't think the SITVC is needed for redundancy. (Although, the margin available would also depend on the power of the HPUs ISRO's using, and possibly different thrust characeristics - burn rates/slag build up/transient pressure oscillations of the different grain used.)
Having said that, a flexible bearing that's supposed to confine super hot gases at high pressure is simply prone to all sorts of complications (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster). Pliability, and resiliency varying with temperature, flight profile, chemical reactions with exhaust etc. etc. IANAE, but doesn't SITVC also have faster response, and greater controllability? Instead of waiting for those massive hydraulics to slowly slew your nozzle, you get impulses of thrust?
Yes, crew module seems to be launched upside down. There were some discussions regarding that here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294883#msg1294883), here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294983#msg1294983) and here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1295120#msg1295120).
I don't get the arguments there. The heat shield is presumably the heaviest part of the spacecraft .... and it should point nadir naturally. (Think of a shuttle in badminton) i.e. the moment it hits Entry-interface... even if it was pointing upside down, it should right itself. The entry angle, and the aerodynamic loads are hardly going to be that pristinely axi-symmetric enough to allow the heat shield to stay on top.
Launching it right side up, on the other hand, mimics "operational" flights to a greater degree.
-
Isro officials, however, are confident that the launch would not be affected even in case of heavy downpour.
“The rain does not matter as the vehicle is fully rain-proof. Even if it is drenched, the launch would take place as per schedule,” the official said.
...
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/447651/isro-send-gslv-mark-iii.html
Because water on the rocket is the only concern? lol. Winds, Triboelectrification... weather conditions conducive to a parachute descent, as well as recovery?
At any rate, even though they're soliciting media participation through the maadhyam of Maadhyam (http://maadhyam.isro.gov.in/), and have made the "Chennai based media persons may register to cover the launch" page (http://maadhyam.isro.gov.in/Register.aspx) live.. (closes at 1400 IST today, btw) - there's still no (http://msi.nga.mil/NGAPortal/MSISiteContent/StaticFiles/Files/NAVWARN.kmz) NOTAM (http://msi.nga.mil/NGAPortal/MSI.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=msi_portal_page_63)!! (It hasn't been updated since 12th December, but still)
PS - The Indian government regulations on eligibility requirements for press accreditation (http://pib.nic.in/prs/accreditationguidelines.pdf), as well as the requirement for official accreditation before you're officially entertained by ISRO at a launch, pretty much seems to rule out an NSF representative attending. :-/ (Even if any of us regularly wrote articles for the site). Anyone else interpret the regulations differently?
ISRO! Y U NO Tweetup?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG8tfN7FBJw&index=6&list=PLFRYpSofeZTd1xYYUwWraCqX7zEev3LLl
-
I don't get the arguments there. The heat shield is presumably the heaviest part of the spacecraft .... and it should point nadir naturally. (Think of a shuttle in badminton) i.e. the moment it hits Entry-interface... even if it was pointing upside down, it should right itself. The entry angle, and the aerodynamic loads are hardly going to be that pristinely axi-symmetric enough to allow the heat shield to stay on top.
Launching it right side up, on the other hand, mimics "operational" flights to a greater degree.
Maybe this 'upside down' flight was due to the complexities involved in developing an interfacing of the rocket with the bottom of the space capsule without affecting the integrity of the bottom heat shield? In an actual flight scenario of the manned spacecraft, it would be the service module which would be interfaced with the rocket. Of course there is still the question of interfacing between the capsule and the service module. Maybe that is something ISRO is still working upon?
Disclaimer: Just my wild guess, and could be pretty stupid too.. ;)
-
-
LVM3 at launch pad
-
Because water on the rocket is the only concern? lol. Winds, Triboelectrification... weather conditions conducive to a parachute descent, as well as recovery?
Oct to Dec is prime Cyclonic season and not the right time to test the new LV.But as the report stated the rain is going to be isolated in nature and therefore not much of a worry.
-
I don't get the arguments there. The heat shield is presumably the heaviest part of the spacecraft .... and it should point nadir naturally. (Think of a shuttle in badminton) i.e. the moment it hits Entry-interface... even if it was pointing upside down, it should right itself. The entry angle, and the aerodynamic loads are hardly going to be that pristinely axi-symmetric enough to allow the heat shield to stay on top.
Launching it right side up, on the other hand, mimics "operational" flights to a greater degree.
Maybe this 'upside down' flight was due to the complexities involved in developing an interfacing of the rocket with the bottom of the space capsule without affecting the integrity of the bottom heat shield? In an actual flight scenario of the manned spacecraft, it would be the service module which would be interfaced with the rocket. Of course there is still the question of interfacing between the capsule and the service module. Maybe that is something ISRO is still working upon?
Disclaimer: Just my wild guess, and could be pretty stupid too.. ;)
You are right, this is the main reason. So there is no need to design a mission specific adaptor for the heatshield. The same principle was used for the ARD on Ariane-5.
-
ISRO @isro 2 hours ago
The 9 hr 30 minutes launch rehearsal of #ISROLVM3 has just been successfully completed.
-
I don't get the arguments there. The heat shield is presumably the heaviest part of the spacecraft .... and it should point nadir naturally. (Think of a shuttle in badminton)
Are you sure about that? Source?
I always guessed that if the tilting angle at reentry overcome some limit the capsule would capsize as, unlike for badminton shuttlecocks, the minimum aerodynamic friction is obtained in that position. So, if the reentry is perfectly upside down the capsule wouldn't necessarily tip over and would quickly disintegrate.
-
This NASA animation video shows Orion crew module re-orienting itself after it detaches from service module (upper stage). So, by mounting the crew module upside down on payload adpater, ISRO will be avoiding this re-orientation maneuver.
(03:45 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjglwMPvzVo#t=225
-
There's one thing that leaves me curious: how are the boosters attached to the core stage? How is the load path?
The way this thing looks on the launch pad it looks like the main load is transferred through the forward attachment, much like Shuttle SRBs. But that forward attachment point connects to the interstate and this would mean that the whole structure has to be designed to pull the completely fueled first stage. But designing the whole thing including the interstate to cope with these tensile loads has to add a lot of weight, doesn't it? OTOH they don't have to design a load path that carries both the first and second stage weight through the bottom of the second stage during maximum acceleration by the boosters and the core stage probably pulls fewer g's when it's still fully loaded so this might offset it a bit.
But still... How did this work out for the ET for Shuttle, it must have pulled the LH2 tank section, too, plus the orbiter, although with at least some compensating thrust by the SMEs.
-
LVM3 lift off at 9 AM, 18-Dec (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/launch-rehearsal-of-isros-lvm-3-successful/article6693913.ece)
Edit by mod
9am IST = 0330UTC
-
Is it launching upside down? :-O lol
Yes, crew module seems to be launched upside down. There were some discussions regarding that here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294883#msg1294883), here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294983#msg1294983) and here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1295120#msg1295120).
Interesting!.
SRE-1 came down with the pointed cone facing down. It has re-orientation and de-boost operations
CARE will come down with the bigger blunt side facing down
-
Are you sure about that? Source?
I always guessed that if the tilting angle at reentry overcome some limit the capsule would capsize as, unlike for badminton shuttlecocks, the minimum aerodynamic friction is obtained in that position. So, if the reentry is perfectly upside down the capsule wouldn't necessarily tip over and would quickly disintegrate.
No specific source as such... but check out any discussion of centre of pressure and centre of mass, and the torque produced due to a separation between them - in an aircraft static and dynamic equilibrium context. No re-entry is "perfectly" upside down, and this system with a higher CoG than a CoP, is in an unstable equilibrium. The same system with the CoP higher than the CoG is in a stable equilibrium.
This NASA animation video shows Orion crew module re-orienting itself after it detaches from service module (upper stage). So, by mounting the crew module upside down on payload adpater, ISRO will be avoiding this re-orientation maneuver.
Orion came in after two orbits. If you discount attitude perturbations due to residual drag, as well as small torque due to finite size (There's a difference in the gravitational force experienced by the part of the spacecraft that's "higher" compared to the part of the spacecraft that's "lower") in a gravitational field, then spacecraft don't change their attitude. So something that's injected into an orbit nose first, will - after half an orbit - be orbiting tail first.
Ours is a sub-orbital flight test. It's basically throwing a rock up (really) high, and waiting for it to fall back. The ascending and descending trajectory arms both lie on the same side of the Earth... so there is no passive attitude reversal with reference to the ground. In other words, they WILL have to fire the jets.
But even if I'm off the mark with that, ISRO have stated they're firing jets for re-orientation anyway.
After separation from the GSLV Mark III, six liquid-propellant thrusters on the crew module will be used to correct any perturbations that occur during separation and bring the capsule down at the correct angle for re-entry into the atmosphere.
Once re-entry starts at a height of about 80 km, the thrusters will cease to operate. As the crew module streaks through the atmosphere, the air around it heats up and the spacecraft slows down.
.....
In the coming test, the crew module could experience decelerations of up to 13 g, said Mr. Nair. But, in a mission with humans onboard, the capsule’s thrusters would continue to operate till parachute deployment began, adjusting the spacecraft's orientation and trajectory, and keeping deceleration levels to less than 4 g. (One g being equivalent to the tug of Earth's gravity.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/unmanned-crew-module-to-be-tested/article6679866.ece (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/unmanned-crew-module-to-be-tested/article6679866.ece)
So there is no need to design a mission specific adaptor for the heatshield. The same principle was used for the ARD on Ariane-5.
Funny... I thought they've ended up doing exactly what you say they would've preferred not to. Surely that's not a standard payload adapter they're using to interface with the top of the capsule? I mean, for starters ... the weight's massively different from your run-of-the-mill satellite. Why tinker with an adapter, instead of building one that you'll use later anyway? (i.e. make an interface with the service module, except you connect the other end to the load transfer structure, instead of a service module). But I guess the devil's in the details
....
Disclaimer: Just my wild guess, and could be pretty stupid too.. ;)
I'm speculating too, nothing's stupid :)
-
Yet another photo. Source:ISRO (http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx)
-
Is it launching upside down? :-O lol
Yes, crew module seems to be launched upside down. There were some discussions regarding that here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294883#msg1294883), here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294983#msg1294983) and here (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1295120#msg1295120).
Interesting!.
SRE-1 came down with the pointed cone facing down. It has re-orientation and de-boost operations
CARE will come down with the bigger blunt side facing down
SRE-1 has ablative heat shield on the cone itself. So, re-entry with cone facing Earth is the correct way for SRE-1. Whereas, CARE crew module has heat shield on the blunt side. So, blunt-side re-entry is the correct way for CARE.
-
You cannot launch a manned capsule upside down as the crew would face improper acceleration during the launch OR during reentry. Unless a complicated inflight seats rotation is considered.
You can use this trick only if the capsule is unmanned.
Surely it has been already pointed out, but couldn't find it.
-
There's one thing that leaves me curious: how are the boosters attached to the core stage? How is the load path?
The way this thing looks on the launch pad it looks like the main load is transferred through the forward attachment, much like Shuttle SRBs. But that forward attachment point connects to the interstate and this would mean that the whole structure has to be designed to pull the completely fueled first stage. But designing the whole thing including the interstate to cope with these tensile loads has to add a lot of weight, doesn't it? OTOH they don't have to design a load path that carries both the first and second stage weight through the bottom of the second stage during maximum acceleration by the boosters and the core stage probably pulls fewer g's when it's still fully loaded so this might offset it a bit.
But still... How did this work out for the ET for Shuttle, it must have pulled the LH2 tank section, too, plus the orbiter, although with at least some compensating thrust by the SMEs.
To my eyes it looks like the load path is through the upper solid rocket motor connection, which is near the top of the interstage. Yes, the interstage structure has to be strong enough to handle the tensile loads produced by the hanging core stage, but the design also relieves the core stage and interstage from having to be designed to handle the likely greater loads produced by the solids. (Also, wouldn't the interstage have to be able to handle compression loads of the same magnitude regardless?) Shuttle used a similar setup, though loads were transferred via. a beam rather than by trunnions (or whatever the connections are called on GSLV Mk 3). On Titan III/IV, which in my mind are similar to GSLV Mk 3, the solids, interestingly enough, pushed from the base of the core stage.
- Ed Kyle
-
Well, push and pull loads are still a pretty different story. For push loads you can pretty much just stack aligned tubes while for pull loads you need to design your interconnects to carry the load.
Plus, I disagree that the design relieves the interstage and the first stage because they now have to carry both push and pull loads.
I think it was the same for shuttle but that's why I was wondering whether there were estimates about how much of a weight penalty it meant.
-
Thrusters in action (after 9:18).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5P7w4dFPAU#t=566
-
Well, push and pull loads are still a pretty different story.
...
Plus, I disagree that the design relieves the interstage and the first stage because they now have to carry both push and pull loads.
Huh? I get that materials may have different tensile and compressive strengths.... but let me illustrate my doubts with an example.
Isn't a beam that's being loaded with 20 N of compressive force, equivalent (structural dynamics wise) to an I-beam that's being loaded with 80 N of compressive force, and 60 N of tensile force... ON THE SAME BEAM?
Or is this something to do with how the force will remain 20 N compression even in the case of some small strain in the first beam, but might reach 75 N compression, with 60 N tension in the second case - given the same strain? Leading to a net effect of 15 N compression... which then leads to more (possibly) divergent behaviour between the behaviour of the beams.
-
Huh? I get that materials may have different tensile and compressive strengths.... but let me illustrate my doubts with an example.
Isn't a beam that's being loaded with 20 N of compressive force, equivalent (structural dynamics wise) to an I-beam that's being loaded with 80 N of compressive force, and 60 N of tensile force... ON THE SAME BEAM?
Or is this something to do with how the force will remain 20 N compression even in the case of some small strain in the first beam, but might reach 75 N compression, with 60 N tension in the second case - given the same strain? Leading to a net effect of 15 N compression... which then leads to more (possibly) divergent behaviour between the behaviour of the beams.
The question is a different one: you can have completely different profiles you apply force to.
Extreme example:
1. Take a glass.
2. Put a plate on top of it (just lay it down)
3. Lift the glass. You can lift the plate along with the glass (compressive force)
4. Lift the plate. The glass will stay where it is (no tensile force transferred).
In this case you will have attachment points between the stages and even the pressure vessels and outer skirts within a stage and all of this will have to take very different load distributions whether you push or pull. Now the first stage will have to _both_ push and pull so you will probably have a rigid structure that can take pull and push loads equally well and the separation plane to the 3rd stage is still above the booster attachment points so it may be possible to design the whole thing to take both forces equally well, I just wonder (and I don't know the answer) whether there still will be a cost in terms of structural weight.
-
A0920/14 - IN VIEW OF DNG ZONE DECLARED BY INDIAN AUTHORITIES DUE TO LAUNCH OF FLIGHT VEHICLE MARK III (REF A2212/14 VOMMYNYX) FLW AREA WI COLOMBO FIR DECLARED AS DNG ZONE. 0615N 09055E 0624N 09101E 0600N 09200E 0532N 09200E THE LAUNCH WILL BE ON ANY ONE OF THE DAY DURING THE PERIOD. ACTUAL DATE OF LAUNCH WILL BE INTIMATED 24HRS IN ADVANCE THROUGH A SEPARATE NOTAM WHEN DECLARED BY INDIA. MSL - UNL, DLY BTN 0330-0730, 18 DEC 03:30 2014 UNTIL 31 DEC 07:30 2014. CREATED: 05 DEC 09:32 2014
-
No brochures yet? :D
-
No brochures yet? :D
yeah :(
-
- Mission Readiness Review (MRR) and Launch Authorisation Board (LAB) met on Dec 16, 2014 to review progress of prelaunch activities and cleared launch for Dec 18, 2014 at 09:30 hrs (IST)
- 24 and a half hour countdown for the mission will commence at 09:00 hrs (IST) on Dec 17, 2014
-
What are the chances of any hi-res's of this new vehicle. I find it impossible to pay attention to a program that only releases tiny postage-stamp images. Like going to see the Mona Lisa and looking at it through a pair of back-to-front binoculars from the other side of the room :(
-
Is there a broadcast link for this launch ? I do not see it on ISRO's website
-
24 and a half hour countdown for the launch begins
-
Is there a broadcast link for this launch ? I do not see it on ISRO's website
Yes!
You can watch it live on DD's Youtube channel or else in ISRO's website directly tomorrow.
-
What are the chances of any hi-res's of this new vehicle. I find it impossible to pay attention to a program that only releases tiny postage-stamp images. Like going to see the Mona Lisa and looking at it through a pair of back-to-front binoculars from the other side of the room :(
They have uploaded three 1300X2000 res images...You can download it from ISRO's Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/ISRO
1) Link 1https://www.facebook.com/ISRO/photos/a.1448404935382864.1073741828.1448364408720250/1581845015372188/?type=1&theater (https://www.facebook.com/ISRO/photos/a.1448404935382864.1073741828.1448364408720250/1581845015372188/?type=1&theater)
2) https://www.facebook.com/ISRO/photos/a.1448404935382864.1073741828.1448364408720250/1581068018783221/?type=1&theater
3) https://www.facebook.com/ISRO/photos/a.1448368715386486.1073741827.1448364408720250/1580759245480765/?type=1&theater
-
You can watch it live on DD's Youtube channel or else in ISRO's website directly tomorrow.
Could you give a link for DD's Youtube Channel? I don't know what DD stands for and couldn't find it in a Google search.
-
You can watch it live on DD's Youtube channel or else in ISRO's website directly tomorrow.
Could you give a link for DD's Youtube Channel? I don't know what DD stands for and couldn't find it in a Google search.
https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational (https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational)
DD stands for Doordarshan
Door (Hindi) = far, distant
Darshan (Hindi) = see, view
edit: fixed the hyperlink.
-
Could you give a link for DD's Youtube Channel? I don't know what DD stands for and couldn't find it in a Google search.
"https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational"
DD stands for Doordarshan
Door (Hindi) = far, distant
Darshan (Hindi) = see, view
Given that link doesn't seem to lead anywhere, here's (https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational) a working one.
-
Here's a quick airbrush of one of them, minus the idiotic text.
-
Does anyone have a good image of CARE before encapsulation? The only ones currently in this thread are one with a clearly erroneous aspect ratio and one with a logo crudely photoshopped onto it.
-
That rocket does look the business.
Here's a quick airbrush of one of them, minus the idiotic text.
-
Does anyone have a good image of CARE before encapsulation? The only ones currently in this thread are one with a clearly erroneous aspect ratio and one with a logo crudely photoshopped onto it.
The first is one taken in clean room from ISRO's web page (http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx) for the mission.
EDIT: Attaching a second one that has been taken from the Indian Human Spaceflight Program thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28405.msg1294927#msg1294927)
-
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/mkiii-x-updates.aspx
Dec 17, 2014
N2O4 propellant filling operation of Second Stage - L110 is completed by 17:15 hrs (IST)
N2O4 propellant filling operation of Second Stage - L110 has commenced at 15:30 hrs (IST) and under progress
UH25 propellant filling operation of Second Stage - L110 is completed by 13:00 hrs (IST)
UH25 propellant filling operation of Second Stage - L110 is under progress
24 and a half hour countdown for the mission has commenced at 09:00 hrs (IST) on Dec 17, 2014
Dec 16, 2014
24 and a half hour countdown for the mission will commence at 09:00 hrs (IST) on Dec 17, 2014
Mission Readiness Review (MRR) and Launch Authorisation Board (LAB) met on Dec 16, 2014 to review progress of prelaunch activities and cleared launch for Dec 18, 2014 at 09:30 hrs (IST)
Live Telecast by Doordarshan and Webcast of the Launch will be available on Dec 18, 2014 from 09:00 hrs (IST) onwards
http://webcast.isro.gov.in/ (alternate links available at the bottom of the page)
http://webcast.gov.in/live/
https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational (https://www.youtube.com/user/DoordarshanNational)
-
Brochure:
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/pdf/GSLV-MK-III-X-brochure.pdf
-
-
No Silica tiles. Side and apex cover Thermal protection is based on medium density ablative (MDA) tiles, forward area uses carbon phenolic composite.
-
From the Brochure ...No where the term GSLV MK3 is mentioned,It appears that LVM3 is the official name.
-
From the Brochure ...No where the term GSLV MK3 is mentioned,It appears that LVM3 is the official name.
The original name is/was GSLVM3. LVM3 is a shortened notation for simplification
-
Doordarshan Broadcast Link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBIcP7V8MKo
-
Vehicle Integration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2S-pB_n974
-
From the Brochure ...No where the term GSLV MK3 is mentioned,It appears that LVM3 is the official name.
The original name is/was GSLVM3. LVM3 is a shortened notation for simplification
The first page of the brochure refers to the project as 'GSLV Mk-III project'. I do remember that for some time they used to write as 'gsLVM3' in their models/brochures (with 'gs' in small letters and 'LVM3' in caps), possibly to de-emphasize its primary orbital role and transition to a more neutral name. Still I personally would have preferred a Sanskrit name like the way DRDO's missiles are named. ;)
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
But is it SITVC for sure? Brochure says "S200 FNC oil tank" (Flex nozzle control?).
-
Whats the use of first stage SITVC when the stage has flex nozzles ? redundancy?
But is it SITVC for sure? Brochure says "S200 FNC oil tank" (Flex nozzle control?).
yeah, got it wrong. its oil tank for nozzle actuation system.
100 N RCS thruster is a new development?
-
Moved for live coverage.
-
From the Brochure ...No where the term GSLV MK3 is mentioned,It appears that LVM3 is the official name.
The weight of CREW Module is 3.6 Ton. But GSLV MK III is intended to be tested for 4 or more tonnes. How the weight parameter will be achieved if we have to launch satellite weighing more than 4 tonnes?
-
From the Brochure ...No where the term GSLV MK3 is mentioned,It appears that LVM3 is the official name.
The weight of CREW Module is 3.6 Ton. But GSLV MK III is intended to be tested for 4 or more tonnes. How the weight parameter will be achieved if we have to launch satellite weighing more than 4 tonnes?
Since its the first flight, there will be margins. The GTO payload is stretchable to 5.5 tons with semi cryo booster which is a future option.
The current configuration is designed to keep max flight acceleration to less than 4g and qmax to less than 40kpa. Increasing the L110 to L130 and making cryo stage with double burn option can increase the payload to 4.3 tons.
-
Now here's something smart. Look at the servicing/integration structure and see how they keep the opening narrow by having the rocket exist sideways, as opposed to the wide door approach with TITAN and DELTA IV HEAVY. There's some practical thinking.
-
I'm looking forward to the launch!
I have two questions about the LV, though, after seeing the latest schematic from the PDF:
1. Why do they leave the intertank area open on the upper stage of this LV? Or is this just for the inert test upper stage that isn't loaded with (semi) cryogenics? Has there ever been a launch vehicle that has had an enclosed interstage but exposed intertank section?
2. It looks like the the main load bearing for the SRBs is at the top, connected to the interstage. So since the core stage is not lot at launch, the interstage is pulling along the entire filled core stage?
-
2. It looks like the the main load bearing for the SRBs is at the top, connected to the interstage. So since the core stage is not lot at launch, the interstage is pulling along the entire filled core stage?
There are 2 joints between S200 and L110 stages, the top joint and the bottom joint.
Top joint helps in transferring the thrust from S200 SRB to the core vehicle
Bottom joint takes care of lateral, tensile and compressive loads
-
FINALLY! A brochure! \m/ I'll take advantage of it not being launch-day yet, to interrupt the updates with ...
A few questions:
1. That plot of differential thrust on page 2 is interesting.
a) They've gone right up to (and possibly even past) the limit of what they can accept (between 20-30 seconds). Wonder if that's a real concern on this test. If you watch the PM's visit to SHAR, where he was meeting the scientists with their posters, one of them was also impressing how well the boosters were performing, and how they were well within the allowed asymmetries.
b) I also notice that there's a kink in the nominal curve too. i.e. some level of differential thrust is EXPECTED - and not even in a symmetric sense. They except a particular booster to have more thrust than another - even in their models? (see t~=120s) Why?
c) What are "paired/sim sorted propellants"
2. In the validation of base-heating/aerothermal design box:
a) they mention that they expect reverse flow at ~85 seconds. Huh? The rocket sure as hell doesn't start FALLING... even if 85 seconds was around staging (it's not). The L-110 ignition is also much later than 85 seconds. So what is this reverse flow they're talking about?
b) What's "nozzle closure performance" ?
3. Is the collet separation mechanism standard issue on other LVs (both ISRO and non-ISRO)?
Independent Telecommand system for each stage
Methinks that's a direct fallout from the shroud-gate, and that wire-tunnel deformation and loss of communication between the computer and the lower stages
The LOX and LH2 tank are filled with Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) and Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2) respectively
Clever :D. LN2 would weigh around as much as LO2 of the same volume (assuming they have similar liquid state densities)... and they can chill GN2 until it probably weighs as much as LH2, albeit without turning liquid, and nightmarish.
4. I notice that the launch azimuth is a 120 degrees. This probably had a lot to do with bringing CARE down near extant Naval facilities in Port-Blair, for expedited transfer back to the peninsula, as well as sticking to the no-fly zones. But, given the high trajectory, could they not have gotten a bit more "free" energy - translated into height... if they'd flown at the optimum azimuth? (i.e. at 90- ~13 = 77 degrees- as measured clockwise from North, where ~13 is the latitude of the launch pad?) Would that have entailed overflying some of our coastal areas? At first glance it seems like we'd be able to splash-down near WB... or even in the Chandipur test range, if they went higher, rather than longer.
5. (They changed the acronym from GNC to NGC <aargh>). What are "mini resins" that they're referring to when they talk about navigational aids for CARE?
Finally, to nitpick.. why are there no secondary sounding-rocket-type high atmosphere science payloads? Securely mounted to the inside wall of the PLF, without posing a major threat to the heat-shield.
Now here's something smart. Look at the servicing/integration structure and see how they keep the opening narrow by having the rocket exist sideways, as opposed to the wide door approach with TITAN and DELTA IV HEAVY. There's some practical thinking.
Isn't there a drawback too? You'd have to wait for a booster to get into place before you began integration. (Assuming that each door was either an entry and/or exit door only, and that there wouldn't be enough manoeuvring room - horizontally.. inside the VAB). And what about moving the crane, and or equipment, if they needed to be changed out? Making the doors slide a bit more doesn't add a lot more in terms of cost does it?
-
I'm looking forward to the launch!
I have two questions about the LV, though, after seeing the latest schematic from the PDF:
1. Why do they leave the intertank area open on the upper stage of this LV? Or is this just for the inert test upper stage that isn't loaded with (semi) cryogenics? Has there ever been a launch vehicle that has had an enclosed interstage but exposed intertank section?
GSLV-MK2 has a similar setup. Weight reduction?
-
-
I'm looking forward to the launch!
I have two questions about the LV, though, after seeing the latest schematic from the PDF:
1. Why do they leave the intertank area open on the upper stage of this LV? Or is this just for the inert test upper stage that isn't loaded with (semi) cryogenics? Has there ever been a launch vehicle that has had an enclosed interstage but exposed intertank section?
The structure is called Inter Tank Structure (cryo) or ITSc for this particular vehicle (GSLV Mk III). The reason continuous structure is not used here is because it connects two cryo tanks - LH2 (top) and LOX (bottom) which shrinks considerably when they are filled with liquids in cryo temperature. Truss type structure used here can be designed to have such degree of freedom that it can accommodate tank deformations without getting stressed. Similar truss-type structure is also used right above LH2 tank and right below LOX tank (they are covered with a protective shroud).
-
Wishing the India program all the best, your having a very good 2014 :)
-
Now here's something smart. Look at the servicing/integration structure and see how they keep the opening narrow by having the rocket exist sideways, as opposed to the wide door approach with TITAN and DELTA IV HEAVY. There's some practical thinking.
Titan 3/4 was oriented "sideways" with respect to its Mobile Service Tower and other ground infrastructure in the same manner.
- Ed Kyle
-
I'm looking forward to the launch!
I have two questions about the LV, though, after seeing the latest schematic from the PDF:
1. Why do they leave the intertank area open on the upper stage of this LV? Or is this just for the inert test upper stage that isn't loaded with (semi) cryogenics? Has there ever been a launch vehicle that has had an enclosed interstage but exposed intertank section?
The structure is called Inter Tank Structure (cryo) or ITSc for this particular vehicle (GSLV Mk III). The reason continuous structure is not used here is because it connects two cryo tanks - LH2 (top) and LOX (bottom) which shrinks considerably when they are filled with liquids in cryo temperature. Truss type structure used here can be designed to have such degree of freedom that it can accommodate tank deformations without getting stressed. Similar truss-type structure is also used right above LH2 tank and right below LOX tank (they are covered with a protective shroud).
So having that truss structure and the tanks exposed underneath doesn't introduce any turbulent flow problems? I'm assuming that there's less turbulence when you have a smooth shroud.
(http://www.isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle_images/gslv-mkiii-x-4.jpg)
And while the Cryo engine is a dummy on this particular flight, would it normally be expected to be exposed without a shroud like that on future flights?
-
William Graham's excellent launch overview:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/
-
William Graham's excellent launch overview:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/
Very nice William. I really enjoyed that read, thanks.
19 minute event from launch to splashdown - the longest part seems to be the wait! ;)
-
So having that truss structure and the tanks exposed underneath doesn't introduce any turbulent flow problems? I'm assuming that there's less turbulence when you have a smooth shroud.
And while the Cryo engine is a dummy on this particular flight, would it normally be expected to be exposed without a shroud like that on future flights?
Yes there will be turbulence issues but they must have worked out something.As for the second part,yes this is the final configuration,while the inter-stage has truss structure as well as protective shroud,the Inter tank remains open.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBIcP7V8MKo
-
William Graham's excellent launch overview:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/india-gslv-mk-iii-prototype-crew-capsule/
excellent article William did a decent job of bringing a person up to speed on the program. ;)
-
So having that truss structure and the tanks exposed underneath doesn't introduce any turbulent flow problems? I'm assuming that there's less turbulence when you have a smooth shroud.
And while the Cryo engine is a dummy on this particular flight, would it normally be expected to be exposed without a shroud like that on future flights?
Yes there will be turbulence issues but they must have worked out something.As for the second part,yes this is the final configuration,while the inter-stage has truss structure as well as protective shroud,the Inter tank remains open.
I'd be worried that the slipstream will come in there and rip some cables or hoses off the cryo engine during Qmax.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBIcP7V8MKo
Live feed shortly....
-
Four minutes until start of broadcast.
-
Starting soon...
-
Webcast has begun!
-
-
here we go...
-
Coverage has started.
-
Commentators.
-
On the pad.
-
some larger pics...
-
L-25 minutes.
Dignitaries.
-
There is a very slight reminder of "Stumpy" in this vehicle. Remember Stumpy? :)
-
Another view.
-
-
Control room.
-
control room
-
Side view.
-
-
Viewing room.
L-21 minutes.
-
There is a very slight reminder of "Stumpy" in this vehicle. Remember Stumpy? :)
More like a Titan IIIC/D with a super Centaur in place of the 2nd/3rd stage. (see Ed's photo on the previous page) ;)
-
outside
-
Motor segment.
-
Stacking segment.
-
S200 solid booster is a 3-segmented motor, joined using wet joints:
1. Nozzle end segment
2. Middle segment
3. Head-end segment
Total propellent loading 207 tons.
-
Core stage.
-
Entire weight of the launch vehicle is supported by two S200 boosters on launch pad.
-
Stacking dummy upper stage.
L-16 minutes.
-
L110 with two Vikas engines being assembled.
-
L-15 minutes. Clear for launch.
-
CARE being assembled.
-
Launch displays.
-
10 min
-
L-14 minutes.
-
L-13 minutes.
-
the Key...
-
-
L-12 minutes. Crew module is healthy.
-
L-11 minutes. Launch is authorised.
-
Launch authorized by Mission Director and Vehicle Director. ALS initiated.
-
Ding Dong. L-10 minutes.
-
It looks very stumpy if you are watching on You Tube because it is shown in the wrong aspect ratio of 16:9 rather than 4:3
Only Steven is showing it correctly. How did you force it to 4:3 Steven?
-
ALS checklist.
-
L-9 minutes.
-
L-8 minutes.
-
into auto launch
-
L-7 minutes. Ground winds OK.
-
Ground winds are benign. Permissible limits are 15m/s to 20m/s. Currently it's in the range of 10m/s to 12m/s. Good to go.
-
L-6 minutes.
Flight coefficients being loaded.
-
Visitors/guests are probably going out towards portico/terrace to view launch :)
-
L-5 minutes.
Mission computer accepting data.
-
going outside for the launch..
-
-
-
L-4 minutes.
-
L-3 minutes.
-
L-2 minutes.
-
L-1 minute.
-
PSLV: Lift-off mass 320 tons, payload to GTO 1.2 tons
GSLV Mk2: Lift-off mass 420 tons, payload to GTO 2.2 tons
LVM3: Lift-off mass 630 tons , payload to GTO 4 tons
-
Liftoff!
-
LAUNCH!!
-
Wow!!!! That's one monster solid booster. S200 performance normal.
-
S200 nominal.
-
Nominal performance.
-
-
L110 ignited. S200 going to be separated in few seconds. L110 performance normal.
-
Booster staging.
-
L+2 minutes.
L110 ignition.
-
Both S200 solid motors separated. L110 performance normal.
-
-
S200 separation.
Close loop guidance initiated.
-
launch....
-
T+4 minutes. Heat shield (payload fairing) separated. L110 performance normal.
-
Heatshield separation.
-
more
-
L110 nominal.
-
L110 shut-off. L110 separated. CARE module is separated.
-
CARE separated!
-
L+6 minutes.
-
Crew Module propulsion kick-started. Closed loop guidance correcting and controlling the attitude and re-entry of Crew Module.
-
L+7 minutes.
-
Crew Module re-entering atmosphere now. T+8 minutes. Aerodynamic re-braking happening now at altitude of 80 kms.
-
L+8 minutes.
Module re-entry has started.
-
This is like EFT-1's highlight reel with the short mission duration!
-
Launch pics.
-
L+9 minutes.
-
CHUTES!!
-
Crew Module apex cover separated. Pilot parachutes deployed.
-
Pilot chute deployed.
-
India I'm enjoying the lean mean show.
New Space A new hope......
-
L+11 minutes.
-
-
Main chutes have deployed! Good work to India!
-
L+12 minutes.
-
Parachute deployed.
L+13 minutes.
-
T+741 seconds. Crew Module main parachutes deployed. Ship-bound station at Port Blair waiting for Crew Module recovery and reception of telemetry from Crew Module.
-
L+14 minutes.
-
When L110 shut off, the expected velocity was 5.3 Km/sec. However, the plot showed only 4.97 Km/sec. Does it indicate below nominal performance ?
-
L+15 minutes.
-
L+16 minutes.
-
Strange that relatively velocity started increasing after main parachute deployment! Maybe incorrect telemetry data.
-
T+16 minutes. Waiting for telemetry from crew module for touch down. Crew module has a beacon that's activated when it touches down in Indian ocean. Ship-bound terminal are within 100km of proposed splashdown area.
-
L+17 minutes.
-
Strange that relatively velocity started increasing after main parachute deployment! Maybe incorrect telemetry data.
They said due to orientation of crew module at low altitude, it may happen that they might experience some loss of telemetry.
-
When L110 shut off, the expected velocity was 5.3 Km/sec. However, the plot showed only 4.97 Km/sec. Does it indicate below nominal performance ?
Apparently the 5.3 km/s shown in the brochure is the INERTIAL velocity, which includes the ~400 m/s from Earth's rotation. So 4.97 km/s looks about right.
-
L+18 minutes.
-
L+19 minutes.
Waiting for landing confirmation.
-
Waiting for beacon from crew module.
-
Early congratulations.
Still waiting for confirmation.
-
Very significant day.
-
Sounds like what they know went well!
-
S200 and L110 performance were as expected. Unmanned crew module re-entry worked extremely well. Splashdown in Bay of Bengal.
-
All stages performed well.
Crew module has splashed down in Bay of Bengal.
-
Announcement regarding LVM3 D1 (first developmental flight) to be expected in next 2 days.
-
"We have a new launch vehicles" - holds the model.
-
"India, you have a new launch vehicle"
-
India you have a new launch vehicle.
First development flight in two years. We call it LVM-3.
-
Control changeover from S200 to L110 was very good. S200 separation is novel too, uses 12 solid motors for graceful separation.
-
A new launcher
-
First transition from solid to liquid.
-
There have a separation video as well!
-
"Each S200 and L110 have performed to the dot" - Vehicle Director.
-
Vehicle director. Performed to the dot.
-
Associate vehicle director.
-
Talking about module descent.
-
Lost data 2 km altitude. Recovery crew on the way.
-
Spent a lot of time looking at configurations for this vehicle.
-
Introducing project director.
Go through tremendous amount of analysis.
-
Crew module performed as expected. Till 80km the control was ON and capsule was kept at right orientation. During re-entry crew module velocity was reduced from 5.3km/s to 230m/s and at 15 km altitude apex covers separated and pilot chute deployed (2.5m diameter). Later main chute deployed (31m diameter) and velocity reduced to 50m/s. Telemetry data was not received when altitude was less than 2km. Later telemetry acquired at splashdown via beacon. It is being recovered and brought to SDSC SHAR later.
"Fly an experiment on an experiment" - Crew Module mission director :)
-
Great landmark in development of GSLV Mk.III vehicle.
-
L110 project director.
-
Dr. Kasturi Rangan, ex-chairman ISRO, congratulating teams.
-
S200 project director.
Third largest solid in world.
-
"Coolest first launch" - S. Ramakrishan, ex-director, VSSC :)
-
LVM-3 to be launch vehicle for human spaceflight program.
-
Learnt a lot from this mission.
-
Have completed a number of tests, including cold start, for cryogenic stage.
-
Have been working since February 2014.
-
Loaded 110 t with 7 kg difference.
-
ISRO satellite director.
GSAT-16 launched into correct orbit. Everything has gone precisely.
-
IRNSS-1D February or early March.
-
LPSC is working on C25 cryo stage. In very good shape. Already completed sub-system level test. Integrated engine test going on. Cold start test successfully completed. About to start a series of hot-firings. Targeting to do stage-level test by end of next year. Will be able to supply C25 cryo stage by the end of next two years.
-
Developing front-end chip sets for IRNSS.
Astrosat getting ready. Launch in coming year.
-
No compromise on quality.
-
Thank to government of India for support of this program and PM.
Back in first week of March 2015 for the next PSLV carrying IRNSS-1D.
-
"We have loaded 110 tons of Earth-storable propellent (into LVM3 L110 stage) with 7kg difference" - SDSC SHAR director
-
Thanks. Coverage has ended.
-
Congratulations to ISRO!
-
Overall a very bad coverage...the only thing i saw during the liftoff was the camera shake and smoke....
But congrats to ISRO!
-
Well, that's the way to do it! A very smooth countdown and launch with everything seeming to go very well. Looking forward to hearing on the recovery of CARE.
Congratulations to ISRO and India!
-
Fantastic job India, couldn't ask for a better first flight, that is certainly a unique rocket. And great coverage by everyone here.
-
Working on ground receiver system development for IRNSS. Happy with accuracy, signals being received as far as 5000km from the original locations. Will have fully operational IRNSS by 2015. Development for front-end chips for RF and digital systems ongoing.
Astrosat is getting ready. Expected launch in coming year (2015?).
-
"No compromise on quality and reliability" - Deputy director, VSSC, responsible for system reliability.
-
"Thanks to Indian government and PM for support and encouragement. We will be back by first week of March 2015 for launch of PSLV with 4th IRNSS satellite onboard"
-
Congratulations to ISRO. Hoping to see some pics or video of Crew Module recovery.
-
Looks like the S200s burned a little slow, resulting in the altitude being less than expected at burnout.
-
Well done ISRO, looking forward to when Indian Astronauts orbit in Indian space craft...
and Thank you Steven and Vyoma for the coverage.. as usual, NSF coverage was the best...
-
Looks like the S200s burned a little slow, resulting in the altitude being less than expected at burnout.
Can it be corrected or compensated on-the-fly by next stage? If not, what would be corrective steps to be taken in next flights?
-
Well done ISRO, looking forward to when Indian Astronauts orbit in Indian space craft...
and Thank you Steven and Vyoma for the coverage.. as usual, NSF coverage was the best...
Much better than the TV coverage... ;D
-
Can it be corrected or compensated on-the-fly by next stage? If not, what would be corrective steps to be taken in next flights?
The red plot was the nominal path, but without knowing what the error bars were, it's premature to assume there is an actual problem.
Congratulations to ISRO on a very impressive test flight either way :)
-
-
LVM3-X page:
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/gslv-mk-iii-x.aspx
CARE page:
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/care.aspx
Mission updates page:
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/mission.aspx
http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/mkiii-x-updates.aspx
-
Photo Credit: The Hindu (K. Ravi Kumar )
-
Can it be corrected or compensated on-the-fly by next stage? If not, what would be corrective steps to be taken in next flights?
The red plot was the nominal path, but without knowing what the error bars were, it's premature to assume there is an actual problem.
Looks like nominal deviation to me. A landmark success for India, an inaugural success denied Europe on its initial Ariane 5 attempts. This was the second of three landmark launches in the world late in the year or early next year. First came EFT-1. Next is today's LMV3-X. Now we await Angara A5.
- Ed Kyle
-
M. Chandradathan saying Govt. has done its work as far as funding is concerned was good to hear :D Did he say he expects minimal two launches every year !
Patiently awaiting images of recovery of crew module and video of s200 separation(S Somnath mentioned it was a beauty to watch)!
Thank you ISRO for new launch vehicle 8)
-
It looks very stumpy if you are watching on You Tube because it is shown in the wrong aspect ratio of 16:9 rather than 4:3
Only Steven is showing it correctly. How did you force it to 4:3 Steven?
I used IrfanView to change the width to 960 pixels, for a 720 pixel high image.
-
Launch replay in correct aspect ratio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTTd9P690yU
-
TV Grab immediately after L110 separation and just a moment before CARE separation. Parameters (except velocity) are in-line with estimated values for CARE separation. Ref : [url]http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/pdf/GSLV-MK-III-X-brochure.pdf]http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/pdf/GSLV-MK-III-X-brochure.pdf]
(http://[url=http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/pdf/GSLV-MK-III-X-brochure.pdf)
-
Looks like the S200s burned a little slow, resulting in the altitude being less than expected at burnout.
Can it be corrected or compensated on-the-fly by next stage? If not, what would be corrective steps to be taken in next flights?
I think this is the first time ISRO is testing a large capacity SRB such as this.
Some immediate thoughts are to improve the exhaust nozzles design for more thrust. And/Or improve the burn rate of HPTB solid propellant. Or improve the thrust in the 2nd second. But it is probably easier and prudent to address it in the SRBs.
In any case, it appears the "deviations" are within tolerable limits and as others stated are nominal. I am sure ISRO will address if it at all needs to be.
-
http://isro.org/pressrelease/scripts/pressreleasein.aspx?Dec18_2014
December 18, 2014
First Experimental Flight of India's Next Generation Launch Vehicle GSLV Mk-III Successful
The first experimental flight (GSLV Mk-III X/CARE) of India's next generation launch vehicle GSLV Mk-III was successfully conducted today (December 18, 2014) morning from Satish Dhawan Space Centre SHAR, Sriharikota. Also known as LVM3-X/CARE, this suborbital experimental mission was intended to test the vehicle performance during the critical atmospheric phase of its flight and thus carried a passive (non-functional) cryogenic upper stage.
The mission began with the launch of GSLV Mk-III at 9:30 am IST from the Second Launch Pad as scheduled and about five and a half minutes later, carried its payload - the 3775 kg Crew Module Atmospheric Re-entry Experiment (CARE) - to the intended height of 126 km. Following this, CARE separated from the upper stage of GSLV Mk-III and re-entered the atmosphere and safely landed over Bay of Bengal with the help of its parachutes about 20 minutes 43 seconds after lift-off.
Two massive S-200 solid strap-on boosters, each carrying 207 tons of solid propellants, ignited at vehicle lift-off and after functioning normally, separated 153.5 seconds later. L110 liquid stage ignited 120 seconds after lift-off, while S200s were still functioning, and carried forward for the next 204.6 seconds.
CARE separated from the passive C25 cryogenic upper stage of GSLV Mk-III 330.8 seconds after lift-off and began its guided descent for atmospheric re-entry.
After the successful re-entry phase, CARE module's parachutes opened, following which it gently landed over Andaman Sea about 1600 km from Sriharikota, there by successfully concluding the GSLV Mk-III X/CARE mission.
With today's successful GSLV Mk-III X / CARE mission, the vehicle has moved a step closer to its first developmental flight with the functional C25 cryogenic upper stage.
-
;D Congrats ISRO and Thanks for giving us such an exciting year!!
Next year would be so boring :(
-
Next year would be so boring :(
;D
We'll have Astrosat and GSLV Mk2 D6 next year. Also, we might start to get data from MOM.
-
Next year would be so boring :(
;D
We'll have Astrosat and GSLV Mk2 D6 next year. Also, we might start to get data from MOM.
I am hoping for the launch of SRE-2 or ATV d2 ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvmdGxi4ahM
-
Nice amateur video there, antriksh! This guy did a better job than the ISRO cameraman. Has to be one of the worst ever launch coverage. Congrats to ISRO, anyway, for the successful launch!
-
Nice amateur video there, antriksh! This guy did a better job than the ISRO cameraman. Has to be one of the worst ever launch coverage. Congrats to ISRO, anyway, for the successful launch!
Yeah, disappointing coverage by DD guys. Anyways, launch pics from ISRO
-
2. It looks like the the main load bearing for the SRBs is at the top, connected to the interstage. So since the core stage is not lot at launch, the interstage is pulling along the entire filled core stage?
Probably gives a lighter core structure with the SRB load on the core in tension rather than compression. Also reduces max load in the period when both core and SRBs are burning.
-
My congrats to ISRO on the launch.
And thanks for the coverage guys; I just couldn't stay up...
-
Launch replay in correct aspect ratio.
First rate cleanup mate ;) Made an enjoyable launch that much better.
-
ISRO scores a double in one shot (http://www.bangaloremirror.com/bangalore/others/ISRO-scores-a-double-in-one-shot/articleshow/45560768.cms)
The re-entry successfully tested the crew module's heat shield which was found to withstand the intense heat generated due to friction caused by the Earth's dense atmosphere during descent.
It then deployed a triple parachute to break its free fall with an uncontrolled trajectory. The module touched down in the Bay of Bengal about 180 km off the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, and was retrieved by the Coast Guard.
-
This one has tracking all the way till SRB separation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uOaTpzBQEY
-
Here comes the pics of Crew Module post splashdown :D
Source: http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx
-
Here comes the pics of Crew Module post splashdown :D
Source: http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx
No charring at all !? :o
-
No charring at all !? :o
Might've been washed off? Or even blown off? It didn't face the kind of heating that an orbital re-entry would, so maybe the chemistry's different too.
Also, no flotation collar! Unless it's submerged.. but there doesn't seem to be anything under the capsule.
What are those two white things in the water, next to the capsule? Beacons? Dye containers which haven't released the dye yet? EDIT: There's a spool like thing on the near-side cord, and you can see the slack (assuming parachute's been jettisoned) risers (a lot more meaty than those cords) in the alternate bays, so they're not risers..
PS: Additionally, I think this is our first look at the top of the CARE module, and the "hatch" configuration (aside from a couple of pictures of an unfinished module's skeleton posted earlier in this thread). It seems like there are a lot of equipment bays that weren't packed to the brim with instrumentation. That's a bit surprising. Especially given that they jettisoned the apex covers (which presumably covered all that we're now seeing)... I'd have thought they'd have outfitted it with sensors to monitor atmospheric and wake parameters etc...
-
Here comes the pics of Crew Module post splashdown :D
Source: http://isro.org/gslv-mkiii-x/Imagegallery/launchvehicle.aspx
No charring at all !? :o
LVM3-X only got to 5.2 km/sec at cutoff.
- Ed Kyle
-
No charring at all !? :o
Might've been washed off? Or even blown off? It didn't face the kind of heating that an orbital re-entry would, so maybe the chemistry's different too.
Also, no flotation collar! Unless it's submerged.. but there doesn't seem to be anything under the capsule.
What are those two white things in the water, next to the capsule? Beacons? Dye containers which haven't released the dye yet? EDIT: There's a spool like thing on the near-side cord, and you can see the slack (assuming parachute's been jettisoned) risers (a lot more meaty than those cords) in the alternate bays, so they're not risers..
PS: Additionally, I think this is our first look at the top of the CARE module, and the "hatch" configuration (aside from a couple of pictures of an unfinished module's skeleton posted earlier in this thread). It seems like there are a lot of equipment bays that weren't packed to the brim with instrumentation. That's a bit surprising. Especially given that they jettisoned the apex covers (which presumably covered all that we're now seeing)... I'd have thought they'd have outfitted it with sensors to monitor atmospheric and wake parameters etc...
I am guessing, atleast some of them may be chute compartments.
-
That's a huge win for India.
Even Mr. Hale's praising them!
Wayne Hale @waynehale 7m7 minutes ago
Triumph for Indian space program-good test for upcoming manned flight. they may beat the US in building indigenous new human spacecraft!
-
I am hoping for the launch of SRE-2 or ATV d2 ;)
What about RLV TD ?
-
The capsule seems immaculate. Is it from the real thing or from a rehearsal ?
-
The capsule seems immaculate. Is it from the real thing or from a rehearsal ?
It only had 5.3km/s, or about 45% of the heat flux of a LEO entry.
-
Yeah but I had first hand view of ARD which was pretty much with the same heat flux and it was not that pristine.
(http://eurospace.free.fr/ariane/ar5_ard_04.jpg)
-
I was thinking about ARD too but didn't it reentered at ~7.5 km/s ? Also any close up shots of ARD from sides?
-
That's a huge win for India.
Even Mr. Hale's praising them!
Wayne Hale @waynehale 7m7 minutes ago
Triumph for Indian space program-good test for upcoming manned flight. they may beat the US in building indigenous new human spacecraft!
He is right.......NASA is pure pork, fat and lazy. India is lean, and mean something NASA needs to obtain again.
-
He is right.......NASA is pure pork, fat and lazy. India is lean, and mean something NASA needs to obtain again.
But you have SpaceX and Elon Musk ;D
-
Great job India! :) Congratulations!
After seeing the capsule in the water, the design looks like an interesting hybrid between an Orion/Apollo shape and a Dragon shape. The parachute placement of Orion, but the sidewall angle of Dragon.
-
Going forward plan for the GSLV is to use CE20 (200kn) engine upper stage. This engine is due to hit test stand next year, as for flight ready??.
They are also developing a kerosene 2000kn engine (RD181 size), this is still a few years away. I think plan is to use it to power 1st stage of a TSTO LV, (CE20 2nd stage?) should be in Atlas V class if 2 engines are used. This engine may also power a reusable flyback booster.
Besides helping Indian's exploration plans there is also a lucrative commercial GEO sat market for this launcher.
-
Congratulations India! Good work on successfully testing a new rocket & crew capsule.
Is the capsule the actual command module design of the craft that will take Indian astronauts into space, like the Orion CM on EFT-1 was the "real deal" but without its service module? Or is this more like the European ARD demonstrator?
-
... launch pics from ISRO
If I'm not seeing things, there is something that disturbs me about these ISRO launch images. Two of them show the letters "GSLV MkIII" on the side of the upper propellant tank of the L110 second (core) stage. One of them does not. The letters were NOT visible on live video and were NOT visible in any pre-launch images.
Now why would ISRO feel compelled to alter its press release images? It leaves me wondering what else was changed.
I believe that press release images should be provided using the same practices that news media follows. http://www.ap.org/company/news-values
("We do not alter or digitally manipulate the content of a photograph in any way.")
- Ed Kyle
-
... launch pics from ISRO
If I'm not seeing things, there is something that disturbs me about these ISRO launch images. Two of them show the letters "GSLV MkIII" on the side of the upper propellant tank of the L110 second (core) stage. One of them does not. The letters were NOT visible on live video and were NOT visible in any pre-launch images.
Now why would ISRO feel compelled to alter its press release images? It leaves me wondering what else was changed.
- Ed Kyle
Paint fell off.
-
Paint fell off.
I'll need to see some better photos to believe that explanation. Perhaps there is some fall-away insulation, for example, but it isn't apparent in the video.
- Ed Kyle
-
Sharp eyes Ed.. I didn't notice that.. ;)
Maybe they did a last minute shoddy paint job (or sticker?) on the core that washed off during the rain. The night photo of the rocket published earlier seem to show the rocket all wet and does not have this marking. And they photoshopped 'GSLV Mk III' instead of 'LVM3-X' in Hindi as was the original. ???
I do hope they haven't photoshopped the capsule pics after splashdown to 'beautify' it and remove any burn marks.. :o
-
Paint fell off.
I'll need to see some better photos to believe that explanation. Perhaps there is some fall-away insulation, for example, but it isn't apparent in the video.
- Ed Kyle
They really just changed the name haphazardly I think. Covered 'GSLV MKIII' and painted 'एलवीएम3.X' then repainted it over it for some reason.. :P
-
Launch replay in correct aspect ratio.
First rate cleanup mate ;) Made an enjoyable launch that much better.
Thanks, but in case there is any confusion, that is not my video.
-
I think they wrap some insulation around points where there are umbilical cords that feed the fuel.
They are blown away when the vehicle takes off
Shown below are the debris from a PSLV launch.
-
Meanwhile CARE with the color dye
-
If I'm not seeing things, there is something that disturbs me about these ISRO launch images. Two of them show the letters "GSLV MkIII" on the side of the upper propellant tank of the L110 second (core) stage. One of them does not. The letters were NOT visible on live video and were NOT visible in any pre-launch images.
Now why would ISRO feel compelled to alter its press release images? It leaves me wondering what else was changed.
I believe that press release images should be provided using the same practices that news media follows. http://www.ap.org/company/news-values
("We do not alter or digitally manipulate the content of a photograph in any way.")
- Ed Kyle
it was covered by insulation that fell off during ascent. we see falling insulation in the video starting 1:49
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSl31FMSxrI
-
I am hoping for the launch of SRE-2 or ATV d2 ;)
What about RLV TD ?
dont see it happening next yr. :( but i would love to be wrong
-
Congratulations India! Good work on successfully testing a new rocket & crew capsule.
Is the capsule the actual command module design of the craft that will take Indian astronauts into space, like the Orion CM on EFT-1 was the "real deal" but without its service module? Or is this more like the European ARD demonstrator?
the capsule design is final as stated by ISRO.
-
it was covered by insulation that fell off during ascent. we see falling insulation in the video starting 1:49
I am a bit confused here. You meant to say the writing 'LVM3-X' (Hindi, at the top of the core stage) was covered by insulation after it reached launch pad, and 'GSLV MKIII' (English, at the center of the core stage) was photoshopped in the launch images instead?
-
it was covered by insulation that fell off during ascent. we see falling insulation in the video starting 1:49
I am a bit confused here. You meant to say the writing 'LVM3-X' (Hindi, at the top of the core stage) was covered by insulation after it reached launch pad, and 'GSLV MKIII' (English, at the center of the core stage) was photoshopped in the launch images instead?
No 'GSLV MKIII' was covered in insulation and 'एलवीएम3.X'(LVM3.X) was removed or painted over. During launch insulation fell off rocket pretty much made it clear it is all tired of this name changing business and revealed its true identity. ;D
-
it was covered by insulation that fell off during ascent. we see falling insulation in the video starting 1:49
I am a bit confused here. You meant to say the writing 'LVM3-X' (Hindi, at the top of the core stage) was covered by insulation after it reached launch pad, and 'GSLV MKIII' (English, at the center of the core stage) was photoshopped in the launch images instead?
No 'GSLV MKIII' was covered in insulation and 'एलवीएम3.X'(LVM3.X) was removed or painted over. During launch insulation fell off rocket pretty much made it clear it is all tired of this name changing business and revealed its true identity. ;D
Your explanation makes sense, but I'll still need to see better images than we have so far to confirm, in my mind.
- Ed Kyle
-
it was covered by insulation that fell off during ascent. we see falling insulation in the video starting 1:49
I am a bit confused here. You meant to say the writing 'LVM3-X' (Hindi, at the top of the core stage) was covered by insulation after it reached launch pad, and 'GSLV MKIII' (English, at the center of the core stage) was photoshopped in the launch images instead?
No 'GSLV MKIII' was covered in insulation and 'एलवीएम3.X'(LVM3.X) was removed or painted over. During launch insulation fell off rocket pretty much made it clear it is all tired of this name changing business and revealed its true identity. ;D
Got it now. Thanks.. :)
-
Coast guard recovery team in action!
EDIT: Adding higher resolution images as they come.
-
Meanwhile..
Recovered CARE module to become a museum show piece after investigation (http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/GSLV-Module-to-Adorn-Space-Museum/2014/12/19/article2578307.ece)
-
-
Meanwhile..
Recovered CARE module to become a museum show piece after investigation (http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/GSLV-Module-to-Adorn-Space-Museum/2014/12/19/article2578307.ece)
That successful mission was staged in 2007.
mmmmm really not the right way to put it ;)
-
Coast guard recovery team in action!
EDIT: Adding higher resolution images as they come.
good pics, is any video of recovery available?
-
Coast guard recovery team in action!
Interesting. Are the crane-hoist points different from the support points that connect to the risers fpr the parachutes?
-
Here is a post splash down of the capsule in the water.
collected from:
http://spacenews.com/india-tests-gslv-3-rocket-and-crew-capsule-with-suborbital-launch/
-
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/isros-unmanned-crew-module-reaches-chennai/article6713050.ece
Three days after it was recovered from sea, ISRO’s unmanned crew module was today brought to Kamarajar Port at Ennore near here on board a Coast Guard ship.
Coast Guard ship ICGS Samudra Paheredar brought the three-tonne weighing crew module to the port and it was later shipped to Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota, some 100 km from here, Coast Guard sources said.
ISRO had earlier said that after being brought to Sriharikota, the module would be taken to Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre at Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala for further study.
-
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/isro-to-study-data-in-crew-module-s-black-box-637815
"The crew module has around 200 sensors to record various aspects of the flight. Our team at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvanthapuram will study the data," S.Somanath, project director, GSLV-Mark III told IANS.
He said the crew module has a static recorder that records the various aspects - thermal, acoustics, velocity, electronics performance and others - that the module experienced in its descent.
"The module will be transported to Sriharikota (where the rocket port is located in Andhra Pradesh). At Sriharikota, the module's on-board fuel tanks would be cleaned and then sent to VSSC where the data would be studied," Somanath said.
According to him, as per the initial inspection made by a team of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) officials, everything relating to the crew module seems to be normal.
Though it is called as a crew module, the 3.7 tonne module does not have a door/latch as it involves a complex technology.
The main objective was to study the re-entry characteristics of the crew module- called Crew Module Atmospheric Re-entry Experiment - and its aero braking and validation of its end-to-end parachute system.
-
-
When are they going to release S200 booster separation video? I'd love to see that video of 6 solid motors on S200 booster pushing it away from L110 core stage :)
-
ISRO crew module reaches Sriharikota:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Isro-crew-module-reaches-Sriharikota/articleshow/45597784.cms
" We will be carrying out further tests at Sriharikota for the next six days and it will be then shifted to Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre in Thumba, Thiruvananthapuram later this week," said senior ISRO sources.
-
When are they going to release S200 booster separation video? I'd love to see that vide of 6 solid motors S200 booster pushing it away from L110 core stage :)
I too wish they release it soon. Maybe they should seriously consider installing an on-board camera system to record rocket flights once in a while atleast (and release them to the public). It might appear childish, but watching the onboard video stream from the Chinese Shenzhou launches where we can see the rocket riding all the way till orbit sure gave me goosebumps. ISRO has an inertia when it comes to such PR efforts, though I do sense a gradual change for the better now.
-
L110 stage engine nozzles will be covered initially.
Not sure if this was answered earlier, but I wonder why the nozzles of L-110 engines were covered initially during launch. Was it to protect it from debris from the S-200s burning nearby till the time L-110 ignites?
-
I too wish they release it soon. Maybe they should seriously consider installing an on-board camera system to record rocket flights once in a while atleast (and release them to the public). It might appear childish, but watching the onboard video stream from the Chinese Shenzhou launches where we can see the rocket riding all the way till orbit sure gave me goosebumps. ISRO has an inertia when it comes to such PR efforts, though I do sense a gradual change for the better now.
Actually they do put on board cameras on the rocket but never release the video for reasons best known to them.
They haven't even released the animated video of mission.
Note:-Pic source- The New Indian Express
-
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/isro-to-study-data-in-crew-module-s-black-box-637815
"The crew module has around 200 sensors to record various aspects of the flight. Our team at the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvanthapuram will study the data," S.Somanath, project director, GSLV-Mark III told IANS.
He said the crew module has a static recorder that records the various aspects - thermal, acoustics, velocity, electronics performance and others - that the module experienced in its descent.
"The module will be transported to Sriharikota (where the rocket port is located in Andhra Pradesh). At Sriharikota, the module's on-board fuel tanks would be cleaned and then sent to VSSC where the data would be studied," Somanath said.
According to him, as per the initial inspection made by a team of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) officials, everything relating to the crew module seems to be normal.
Though it is called as a crew module, the 3.7 tonne module does not have a door/latch as it involves a complex technology.
The main objective was to study the re-entry characteristics of the crew module- called Crew Module Atmospheric Re-entry Experiment - and its aero braking and validation of its end-to-end parachute system.
One of the News Papers it is mentioned that there were few under performances by GSLV MK III during the test flight. Please find below the same. . 1) INTERRUPTION IN FUNCTIONING OF S200 AND L110 MOTORS 2) SEPARATION OF BOOSTERS DELAYED BY 4.5 SECONDS THAN EXPECTED 3) L110 PERFORMANCE DELAYED BY 5 SECONDS IN SECOND STAGE 4) L110 SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 15 SECONDS EARLIER THAN SCHEDULED TIME 5) C-25 DUMMY CRYO SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 8 SECONDS AFTER THE ACTUAL TIME 6) MALFUNCTION IN BECON SIGNAL OF CREW MODULE . SUMITH please confirm the same from ISRO officials and check what caused these deviations. Also it was obvious during flight as vehicle was not following exact path that is should have been. Could these discrepancies be the reason for deviation?
-
One of the News Papers it is mentioned that there were few under performances by GSLV MK III during the test flight. Please find below the same. . 1) INTERRUPTION IN FUNCTIONING OF S200 AND L110 MOTORS 2) SEPARATION OF BOOSTERS DELAYED BY 4.5 SECONDS THAN EXPECTED 3) L110 PERFORMANCE DELAYED BY 5 SECONDS IN SECOND STAGE 4) L110 SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 15 SECONDS EARLIER THAN SCHEDULED TIME 5) C-25 DUMMY CRYO SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 8 SECONDS AFTER THE ACTUAL TIME 6) MALFUNCTION IN BECON SIGNAL OF CREW MODULE . Also it was obvious during flight as vehicle was not following exact path that is should have been. Could these discrepancies be the reason for deviation?
-
^ link please
-
Has anyone run across any high resolution photos of the launch? I've only seen the three low-resolution images on ISRO's page, which I find surprising.
- Ed Kyle
-
Actually they do put on board cameras on the rocket but never release the video for reasons best known to them.
We understand each country and even companies has a comfort level with information.
May I suggest however that someone could put some highlights into a video and place it on utube. The world has much interest in India. ;)
-
^Looks like, the booster seperation video was not shown on any of the big screens in the control room OR the TV cameraman was instructed to avoid the screen showing the seperation video.
-
One of the News Papers it is mentioned that there were few under performances by GSLV MK III during the test flight. Please find below the same. .
1) INTERRUPTION IN FUNCTIONING OF S200 AND L110 MOTORS
2) SEPARATION OF BOOSTERS DELAYED BY 4.5 SECONDS THAN EXPECTED
3) L110 PERFORMANCE DELAYED BY 5 SECONDS IN SECOND STAGE
4) L110 SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 15 SECONDS EARLIER THAN SCHEDULED TIME
5) C-25 DUMMY CRYO SEPARATION TOOK PLACE 8 SECONDS AFTER THE ACTUAL TIME
6) MALFUNCTION IN BECON SIGNAL OF CREW MODULE .
Also it was obvious during flight as vehicle was not following exact path that is should have been. Could these discrepancies be the reason for deviation?
This (http://epaper.andhrajyothy.com/PUBLICATIONS/AJ/SEEMANDHRA/2014/12/19/ArticleHtmls/19122014004009.shtml) is the article in question (in Telugu). I guess the article is comparing the flight profile mentioned in brochure versus the actual profile. Does the article mention why there was a discrepancy in actual vs brochure flight profile? (My knowledge of Telugu is very limited, so couldn't find out if the article mentioned why there was discrepancy)
If we compare actual flight profile vs brochure flight profile (attached images) - we can see that actual L110 ignition was "postponed" by 5 seconds (T+120s) compared to what's mentioned in brochure (T+114.71s). Hence all the subsequent events like S200 separation, payload fairing separation, L110 shutoff, L110 separation, and CARE separation happen 5 seconds later compared to the ones in brochure. Basically, S200 boosters burned 5 seconds longer than what's mentioned in brochure.
I don't know whether or not it was intentional. I am guessing they might have thought S200 boosters have sufficient juice till T+120s and modified flight profile before launch ;D Remember them saying that they were working on getting the launcher ready till a week before launch. This is just a guess ;D
Looking at the predicted and actual time-vs-velocity and time-vs-altitude plots, we can see that they fairly match (barring some under-performance by S200 just before L110 kicked in).
-
Has anyone run across any high resolution photos of the launch? I've only seen the three low-resolution images on ISRO's page, which I find surprising.
- Ed Kyle
I checked Press Trust of India's site ptinews.com and searched archive for 'GSLV'. Thumbnail preview along with original image info(xmp,exif data) of launch photos were there, and from data it seems they are of higher resolution. But..... it looks like general public can't access those. By the way if you look at hires pre launch images on twitter you can see 'L' of 'GSLV' slightly exposed.
-
Don't be surprised :) I've been hunting hi-res's of past PSLV and GSLV launches...guess how many I have.
TWO.
-
We understand each country and even companies has a comfort level with information.
May I suggest however that someone could put some highlights into a video and place it on utube. The world has much interest in India. ;)
There is nothing to hide as the rocket is neither carrying any kind of revolutionary technology or a classified payload.They simply just don't bother to release the video to the public.
A request has been sent to ISRO top officials for their permission to release the video,lets see what happens.
-
I simply don't understand why ISRO is so reluctant to release video and high resolution launch images. Why not share the proud achievement even more effectively? Or is ISRO simply a govt organization that is a little too safe in its funding/importance? (Rather like ESAs Rosetta media policy)
-
I simply don't understand why ISRO is so reluctant to release video and high resolution launch images. Why not share the proud achievement even more effectively? Or is ISRO simply a govt organization that is a little too safe in its funding/importance? (Rather like ESAs Rosetta media policy)
They will probably release the video after the completion crew module analysis.
-
http://www.frontline.in/science-and-technology/giant-leap-for-isro/article6756649.ece
-
CARE crew module recovery video (00:20:50 mark):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnB5Saz2HL4&t=1250
Source (https://www.reddit.com/r/ISRO/comments/53kh4u/only_available_footage_of_care_module_recovery/)
Attaching the snippet extracted from video.
-
CARE crew module will be displayed in "World Space Week" exhibition at Kochi, Kerala from Oct 4 to 10:
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/GSLV-mk-111s-crew-module-now-up-for-public-viewing/2016/10/03/article3634965.ece
The cup cake-shaped module was taken to a height of 126 kms and released. It landed in the Bay of Bengal from where it was recovered by the Coast Guard. After being subjected to a gamut of studies, the module was put on display at the space museum of the VSSC in Thumba.
This, however, is the first time that the module, which was developed by VSSC is being taken out of the facility for public display. The space expo will be held at Ernakulathappan grounds (next to Durbar Hall), Kochi, from October 4 to 10. It will showcase various missions of ISRO, societal applications of the Indian space programme. Former ISRO chairman K Radhakrishnan will inaugurate the expo.
-
CARE crew module at public display:
(http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dynamic/03034/ISROTKKATH_3034213f.jpg)
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Kochi/isro-to-set-up-abdul-kalam-knowledge-centre-in-city/article9186384.ece
-
Paid a visit to the ISRO's Space Expo at Kochi that began yesterday. Together with the usual mockups of satellites and engines, they had the real CARE module and a mockup of the scramjet engine. Got a few snaps of the capsule. ( Sorry for the poor quality of the pics. The lighting was less than optimal, and all I had was my phone camera. :( Still, here we go ! )
Note: The red hue of the capsule is due to the lighting. Its more of an orange color though.