-
#260
by
antriksh
on 04 Oct, 2014 03:18
-
India 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.
-
#261
by
sanman
on 11 Oct, 2014 06:36
-
-
#262
by
antriksh
on 15 Oct, 2014 02:29
-
-
#263
by
input~2
on 15 Oct, 2014 20:52
-
As per ISRO chairman, launch is planned in the next 45 days
-
#264
by
hornbill2007
on 16 Oct, 2014 08:43
-
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
-
#265
by
sanman
on 18 Oct, 2014 23:55
-
-
#266
by
antriksh
on 20 Oct, 2014 04:37
-
Crew module dispatched to SriharikotaThe 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.
-
#267
by
sanman
on 24 Oct, 2014 00:38
-
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.htmlThe 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.
-
#268
by
johnxx9
on 28 Oct, 2014 19:07
-
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.
-
#269
by
sanman
on 28 Oct, 2014 23:00
-
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"
-
#270
by
antriksh
on 29 Oct, 2014 05:10
-
-
#271
by
vineethgk
on 29 Oct, 2014 06:22
-
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"
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, 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.
-
#272
by
johnxx9
on 29 Oct, 2014 16:04
-
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"
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, 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
-
#273
by
vineethgk
on 30 Oct, 2014 10:22
-
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?
-
#274
by
ss1_3
on 30 Oct, 2014 18:17
-
This may move to second week of Dec.
SourceThe 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..."
-
#275
by
abhishek
on 31 Oct, 2014 13:14
-
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
-
#276
by
sanman
on 31 Oct, 2014 22:34
-
-
#277
by
vineethgk
on 01 Nov, 2014 02:50
-
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.
-
#278
by
worldtimedate
on 01 Nov, 2014 08:24
-
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
-
#279
by
Stan Black
on 01 Nov, 2014 14:00
-
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.pdfThe SVAB is targeted for realisation within 42 months.
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=99332
