-
#20
by
William Graham
on 18 Feb, 2009 08:39
-
And also GSLV-MKII don't have a good successful rate.
It hasn't been launched yet.
Sorry, I mean GSLV-MK1.
There has only been 5 fights of GSLV Mk-1 and 1 was unsuccessful. During that flight, the vehicle veered away from the trajectory due to a faulty thrust vectoring nozzle in a LSB. Therefore, the mission computer commanded the whole vehicle to self-destruct.
If anything of that sort happened during a manned flight, the mission computer would command mission abort and emergency escape. That's as simple as that. There was no complete failure of the GSLV Mk-1.
It would still have resulted in LOM, if not LOC.
-
#21
by
vkthakur
on 19 Feb, 2009 12:20
-
And also GSLV-MKII don't have a good successful rate.
It hasn't been launched yet.
My understanding is that ISRO does not officially have a GSLV Mk 2 launcher program, unless the man rated GSLV has been designated as Mk 2. Can someone confirm that?
The Indian press often refers to the GSLV D-3 launcher that will test the Cryogenic Upper Stage (CUS) as GSLV Mk 2 but the designation is not official.
-
#22
by
iamlucky13
on 20 Feb, 2009 03:39
-
And also GSLV-MKII don't have a good successful rate.
It hasn't been launched yet.
Sorry, I mean GSLV-MK1.
There has only been 5 fights of GSLV Mk-1 and 1 was unsuccessful. During that flight, the vehicle veered away from the trajectory due to a faulty thrust vectoring nozzle in a LSB. Therefore, the mission computer commanded the whole vehicle to self-destruct.
If anything of that sort happened during a manned flight, the mission computer would command mission abort and emergency escape. That's as simple as that. There was no complete failure of the GSLV Mk-1.
It would still have resulted in LOM, if not LOC.
The important question moving forward is whether or not they were successfully able to identify and address the root cause. According to wikipedia, it was a faulty propellant regulator. That doesn't sound like a showstopper.
Obviously, one of the benefits of deriving a manned launcher from an existing unmanned one is extra opportunity to find problems like this when there's no lives immediately at stake. Hopefully they'll have all the weaknesses ironed out by the time they attempt a manned mission. That failure was on the 4th flight of the GSLV. If they develop a new vehicle from the ground up and have three successful unmanned test flights, well...
-
#23
by
hesidu
on 21 Feb, 2009 06:02
-
If India manages to launch a man into space around 2015(7 years), it will be very impressive. China spent 11 years to put a man into space and cost more than 2$ billion from 1992-2003.
Any way, 2 man and 7 days in orbit ? India's first manned spaceship don't have orbit module. So where the toilet be ?
-
#24
by
hop
on 21 Feb, 2009 08:29
-
If India manages to launch a man into space around 2015(7 years), it will be very impressive. China spent 11 years to put a man into space and cost more than 20$ billion from 1992-2003.
Historically, space projects take longer than initially projected. I may be mistaken, but ISTR the first Chinese flight was a few years later than initial estimates. It wouldn't be a surprise to see the same happen to India.
Any way, 2 man and 7 days in orbit ? India's first manned spaceship don't have orbit module. So where the toilet be ?
It looks a lot roomier than Gemini.
-
#25
by
johnxx9
on 23 Feb, 2009 06:26
-
-
#26
by
johnxx9
on 23 Feb, 2009 15:23
-
-
#27
by
publiusr
on 20 Mar, 2009 17:33
-
I wonder if they have any plans for an HLLV coming down the pike.
-
#28
by
Jim
on 20 Mar, 2009 17:35
-
Not needed
-
#29
by
HMXHMX
on 20 Mar, 2009 17:52
-
If India manages to launch a man into space around 2015(7 years), it will be very impressive. China spent 11 years to put a man into space and cost more than 2$ billion from 1992-2003.
Any way, 2 man and 7 days in orbit ? India's first manned spaceship don't have orbit module. So where the toilet be ?
The same place it was on the 14 day long Gemini mission...
-
#30
by
johnxx9
on 02 May, 2009 11:57
-
-
#31
by
Spacenick
on 02 May, 2009 12:58
-
Does anyone know how much translationcapability the RCS is planned to have? The images aviable at the moment look like it only has forward translation and a bit of attitude control like Mercury. Gemini on the other hand had a RCS sufficient for docking.
I think this will be one of the most important points in the Indian manned space program, if they only have a limited RCS like Mercury the capsule would be quite useless for anything else then free flight. If it had the RCS capabilities of Gemini it could rendezvous with whatever space station might be available even if docking wasn't immediately possible this would open up much hgreater possibilities.
I'd figure they really need a functional RCS to at least partially compete with China, the Shenzhou spacecraft should (as a kind of Soyuz derivate) have a very capable RCS that should easily allow dockingm a manual docking might already be possible now even though they haven't got automated rendezvous equipmen, yet.
-
#32
by
johnxx9
on 02 May, 2009 19:15
-
Does anyone know how much translationcapability the RCS is planned to have? The images aviable at the moment look like it only has forward translation and a bit of attitude control like Mercury. Gemini on the other hand had a RCS sufficient for docking.
I think this will be one of the most important points in the Indian manned space program, if they only have a limited RCS like Mercury the capsule would be quite useless for anything else then free flight. If it had the RCS capabilities of Gemini it could rendezvous with whatever space station might be available even if docking wasn't immediately possible this would open up much hgreater possibilities.
I'd figure they really need a functional RCS to at least partially compete with China, the Shenzhou spacecraft should (as a kind of Soyuz derivate) have a very capable RCS that should easily allow dockingm a manual docking might already be possible now even though they haven't got automated rendezvous equipmen, yet.
Actually, this is only half the spacecraft. As the first few flights will take place on GSLV-Mk 2 the RCS is limited. Th first 4 to 5 manned missions will take place in this form with a 2 member crew. After this all future flights will take place aboard Mk 3. This is when an orbital module will be added. At present see it as a Soyuz without Orbital module. Actually when the orbital module will be added it will have more volume than Soyuz-TMA and somewhere close if not better to that of Shenzhou.
-
#33
by
Spacenick
on 02 May, 2009 20:41
-
Do you know how the thruster will be positioned? In the case of soyuz the translation thrusters a quite near the junction of the decend module and the service module. It also looks like the service module has some kind of venier engines, any idea how those will be used for precision maneuvers?
