TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Successful maiden flight of ISRO's Geo synchronous rocket

Discussion in 'SpaceX' started by mkjayakumar, Jun 5, 2017.

  1. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    I am surprised there was hardly any coverage in the US media, as signified by no mention in this forum either. I missed it too and happened to stumble on it on a BBC site.

    GSLV MK III nicknamed 'Monster rocket' is a massive 3 stage rocket that can lift up to 4 tons of payload to Geo synchronous orbit. Apparently ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) has been working on this one for the past 10 years primary building an upper stage Cryogenic engine. Initially ISRO was planning on buying Russian made Cryogenic engines but later had to develop indigenously due to sanctions from US after the nuclear tests in the early 90s.

    I think this is a great achievement, from any space organization but especially coming from a cash strapped one.

    India launches 'monster' rocket - BBC News



    (very amateur and frustrating video coverage, where on key moments during the flight instead of showing action up in the sky they show the folks on the ground applauding)
     
    • Informative x 1
  2. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    IMG_9392.PNG
     
    • Informative x 2
  3. LargeHamCollider

    LargeHamCollider Battery cells != scalable

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2015
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    United States
    Where did you find that graphic? I was looking for GSLV prices a couple months ago. Also it's the maiden flight of a new variant so that means less press.
     
  4. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    Here:
     
    • Like x 1
  5. ICUDoc

    ICUDoc Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    Messages:
    528
    Location:
    Sydney NSW
    wow, monster rocket is right!
     
  6. RDoc

    RDoc S85D

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,706
    Location:
    Boston North Shore
    Interesting chart. SpaceX Falcon 9 currently will launch 5.5 T to GTO for $62M with reuse, and 8 T fully expendable, although currently the price seems to be the same for either. It will be interesting to see if lower cost competition pushes them to lower their prices for "flight proven" first stages.

    There was at least some coverage of the launch. I saw it in my normal reading, although I can't remember exactly where.
     
  7. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    Performance of F9 is impressive. Looks lot more smaller and only 2 stages but still delivers 8T to GTO.

    Now FH will probably look like the Indian rocket but can deliver an impressive 26T to GTO.

    So the price per KG for SpaceX seems less than Indian GSLV 3 even without reuse
     
  8. bxr140

    bxr140 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    Messages:
    919
    Location:
    Bay Area
    Unfortunately when it comes to rockets, if its not SpaceX news, its not news. (More or less)
    More launchers are a good thing. Congrats to India.
     
  9. RDoc

    RDoc S85D

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,706
    Location:
    Boston North Shore
    I find it very interesting that the GSLV uses a Hydrogen/Oxygen upper stage. That's a very tough technology, as I understand it, and should give them a real advantage.
     
  10. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    Another infographic comparing GSLV 3 and Falcon 9. The efficiency and performance of F9 is impressive. The video states that the price above 5.5T for SpaceX is higher as much as 135M, for the recent CRV mission.
    Untitled.png


     
    • Informative x 1
  11. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    Untitled.png
     
    • Informative x 1
  12. jkn

    jkn Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    201
    Location:
    EU
    Rockets using solid fuel are much heavier for same payload than liquid rockets. Solid fuel is good for a missile, because it can be launched immediately from long term storage. I don't believe solid fuel has future in space launches. Refueling is too difficult compared to SpaceX.

    Hydrogen is not used much because it requires large (=heavy) fuel tank. New materials might change this.
     
    • Like x 1
  13. Grendal

    Grendal Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    3,050
    Location:
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    It's my understanding that the big cost savings for ISRO is because the program is subsidized by the Indian government. So I'm not sure how that will pan out as a successful strategy in the long term for pricing.

    Good luck to them though. The more players in the launch game the better.
     
  14. mkjayakumar

    mkjayakumar Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,511
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    Correct, and and labor in general is less expensive.
     
  15. bxr140

    bxr140 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    Messages:
    919
    Location:
    Bay Area
    I mean, it's not exactly a prophetic vision. o_O

    Solid fuel has its place, and yes, it is not the fuel of the future. Decades ago even GEO spacecraft had solid apogee engines, but time has moved on. (They do make for great stories regaled by the old dawgs, but I digress...)

    Big picture, if you throw out the spacex formula (which I fully believe is the winning formula, btw) and the near infinite motivation and singular direction from a genius billionaire, the cost and complexity savings of solid fuel are quite compelling. Not to mention the flexibility in capacity when used as supplemental staging (Atlas 5, Ariane 6).

    ISRO made the right choice for the maturity of their rocket program, IMHO.
     

Share This Page