@artofnick Thanks! I too hope for the same and all indications are that there is no retreat. If anything, there is a better understanding of the areas which need more attention.
Ultimate metric is cost-per-lb to orbit, and use of SRBs leverages the fact that solid motors are used by India for its IRBMs. Likewise, Morton-Thiokol, which manufactures solid motors for US ICBMs gets a generous contract for making the Space Shuttle SRBs, to keep it in business for making ICBM motors. Similarly, Ariane-V also uses SRBs. Only Russia and China, where the military is an automatic priority for state spending, don't do these things, and use liquid-fueled space rockets
@KarthikSoun I am not disagreeing with that, however there pace of development is slow compared to the West. We should not be catching up all the time, some times we need to invent stuff that are brand new. We follow everything the west does, if they have stealth aircraft we follow suit..they r always catching up and for some reason there where more inventors during the British time like Bose, Raman etc., may b thr is policy flaw in inspiring people.
ISRO has made several inventions and innovations that the west would love to get their hands on. It is mostly in the areas of material science and embedded computing. Don't forget that we have the fastest propelled projectile system in the world, and also the cheapest satellite launch system. Trust me, despite the peanuts our Government gives to our Scientific community, they are still one of the most motivated and innovative brains around in today's Aerospace Industry.
@pogularocky Could you name 3 inventions made by ISRO? I dont think we even have the culture or ethics for innovation, thats why all our greatest scientists and physicists belong in the British era, be it Sir.C.V.Raman, J.C.Bose, Chandrasekhar, Ramanujan all of them where prodigies of the British system. We as Indians discourage and laugh if anyone makes something innovative. Either way our rocket is still very inefficient and weighs twice as much as the same western rocket for the payload.
Ramanujan was a prodigy of the British system? LOL. I would suggest that you pick up a book on his life and achievements and read it. He was oppressed by the British Mathematicians in his day.
Coming to our space and defense industry, I don't understand your obsession with weight. Our rockets are heavier, but yet much cheaper (almost 5 to 6 times) to launch similar payloads, as compared to NASA. At the end of the day, that is what matters. That is exactly why ISRO is on the rise!
@pogularocky Just as ppl laughed at Newton or Darwin's evolution they will try and put him down and thats exactly how it works, it breads competition. Either way we have not produced any greats of that nature since the british left. I dont like the british but we need to follow where they r good, wont u agree?
Weight matters a lot in rockets, if the weight for 4tons to GTO is 630tons weight for 12ton will be astronomical and price is low only becoz of low production costs in India.
@KarthikSoun It is all nice and dandy on paper to have the lightest rockets, but if it costs me 10 times more than a heavier rocket that can launch the same payload, I'd never pay extra for the same end result. That is just idiotic logic. That is why NASA is losing out to ISRO in the commercial launch market.
Coming to Indian innovation, look up the Kanchan Armor Mk2. It is the world's toughest armor panel today. Also, look up "desensitized CL-20" and see how DRDO did what US could not!
@pogularocky Its not an matter of lightest rocket mate as u would know better than me weight in Aeronautical engg effects efficiency. Our rocket is 630tons and puts 4tons to GTO compared to the Space-X rocket which is also cheap and weighs only 330tons and if they hv to lift 40tons they just hv to fit two boosters.
I know about the Kanchan Armour, and KA is not on the Mk2 its on the MK1. Its nothing new and its not from ISRO. CL-20 was only isolated in India for the first time not invented.
What efficiency are you talking about? The only efficiency that matters is $/Kg ratio. How much will it cost me to launch my X Kg satellite. I don't care how much the launch platform weighs or how much fuel it guzzles. It's all about cost efficiency. ISRO can launch payloads up to 5 tonnes (LEO) and 3.5 tonnes (UEO). We need cryogenic systems for payloads beyond 5 tonnes. Can you show me one American launch platform that can handle 6 tonnes payload without cryogenic systems?
@pogularocky What is UEO? u mean GTO? It lifts 10tons to LEO and 4.5tons to GTO... Dude what they are doing is takeing the easy way out by adding massive solid booster. The problem with that idea is that its a dead end, useing a huge booster means your primary engines are all under powered and not evolving, so u compensate by useing large solid fuel boosters. That is a dead end when it comes to the next level, the Space-X rocket with boosters takes up 50,tons to LEO and 20tons to GTO.
Yep, UEO and GTO are the same. Also, Space-X uses a hybrid cryogenic stage. It is not comparable to PSLV. Once we get through the GSLV threshold, we can start our comparisons to Space-X. Until then, let us do an apple-to-apple comparison here :)
Let me make this very clear. No American non-cryogenic launch platform can put any extra payload in LEO or UEO than our PSLV platform already can. So, I do not understand your point here.
@pogularocky UEO is not any orbital term i aware of. Also we cant get over the GSLV threshold if we just strap on huge boosters to hide the fact that our primary engines have very less power to weight ratio. The west only uses boosters to send payloads upwards of 20,000kgs. We r useing the worlds largest boosters to just lift 4,000kgs? Just to hide the short comings of primary engine. I am not bashing ISRO but Gov PSU type organizations r bad for innovation, they should overhaul the structure.
By the way, I carefully worded my CL-20 claim. Read that again. I said "Desensitized CL-20" which is what DRDO did. They re-engineered CL-20 in such a way that it is desensitized to handling, while retaining its 60xRDX rating in explosions. The Americans tried and failed in desensitizing it for mass-weaponization, even though they had a very good head-start with the material.
The only reason why we are playing catch up today in many fields is because we are still poor and we lack the money to fund all the needed scientific projects at once. Compare the money ISRO gets from GoI annually, to what NASA gets. It is infuriating, to say the least, on how scientific institutions get treated in India.
@pogularocky I agree on what you say about resources and money but innovation is also stuck in limbo if we give job garuntees to scientists and we hire book worm type guys for scientists who lack creativity, while the best of our brains go abroad to US or Europe and work for them. We need a structural overhaul becoz our public ventures are stuck in the Socialist era of reward and no punishment. We r just holding on to bad scientists.
hindi countdown would have been better =)
kalkibhagwan 2 months ago
@SheikhRajaBinDas Best of luck over there. I just hope your politicians have the foresight to continue to fund more science programs.
artofnick 2 months ago
@artofnick Thanks! I too hope for the same and all indications are that there is no retreat. If anything, there is a better understanding of the areas which need more attention.
SheikhRajaBinDas 2 months ago
Damn! That exhaust flame is "Cold White" which means the temperatures might be around 10,000K to 15,000K. Holy Shit!
pogularocky 3 months ago
This is ultimate
Super9w 5 months ago
This look's water is coming out
Super9w 5 months ago
@KarthikSoun,
Ultimate metric is cost-per-lb to orbit, and use of SRBs leverages the fact that solid motors are used by India for its IRBMs. Likewise, Morton-Thiokol, which manufactures solid motors for US ICBMs gets a generous contract for making the Space Shuttle SRBs, to keep it in business for making ICBM motors. Similarly, Ariane-V also uses SRBs. Only Russia and China, where the military is an automatic priority for state spending, don't do these things, and use liquid-fueled space rockets
manofsan 5 months ago
@KarthikSoun I am not disagreeing with that, however there pace of development is slow compared to the West. We should not be catching up all the time, some times we need to invent stuff that are brand new. We follow everything the west does, if they have stealth aircraft we follow suit..they r always catching up and for some reason there where more inventors during the British time like Bose, Raman etc., may b thr is policy flaw in inspiring people.
KarthikSoun 5 months ago
@KarthikSoun
ISRO has made several inventions and innovations that the west would love to get their hands on. It is mostly in the areas of material science and embedded computing. Don't forget that we have the fastest propelled projectile system in the world, and also the cheapest satellite launch system. Trust me, despite the peanuts our Government gives to our Scientific community, they are still one of the most motivated and innovative brains around in today's Aerospace Industry.
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky Could you name 3 inventions made by ISRO? I dont think we even have the culture or ethics for innovation, thats why all our greatest scientists and physicists belong in the British era, be it Sir.C.V.Raman, J.C.Bose, Chandrasekhar, Ramanujan all of them where prodigies of the British system. We as Indians discourage and laugh if anyone makes something innovative. Either way our rocket is still very inefficient and weighs twice as much as the same western rocket for the payload.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun
Ramanujan was a prodigy of the British system? LOL. I would suggest that you pick up a book on his life and achievements and read it. He was oppressed by the British Mathematicians in his day.
Coming to our space and defense industry, I don't understand your obsession with weight. Our rockets are heavier, but yet much cheaper (almost 5 to 6 times) to launch similar payloads, as compared to NASA. At the end of the day, that is what matters. That is exactly why ISRO is on the rise!
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky Just as ppl laughed at Newton or Darwin's evolution they will try and put him down and thats exactly how it works, it breads competition. Either way we have not produced any greats of that nature since the british left. I dont like the british but we need to follow where they r good, wont u agree?
Weight matters a lot in rockets, if the weight for 4tons to GTO is 630tons weight for 12ton will be astronomical and price is low only becoz of low production costs in India.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun It is all nice and dandy on paper to have the lightest rockets, but if it costs me 10 times more than a heavier rocket that can launch the same payload, I'd never pay extra for the same end result. That is just idiotic logic. That is why NASA is losing out to ISRO in the commercial launch market.
Coming to Indian innovation, look up the Kanchan Armor Mk2. It is the world's toughest armor panel today. Also, look up "desensitized CL-20" and see how DRDO did what US could not!
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky Its not an matter of lightest rocket mate as u would know better than me weight in Aeronautical engg effects efficiency. Our rocket is 630tons and puts 4tons to GTO compared to the Space-X rocket which is also cheap and weighs only 330tons and if they hv to lift 40tons they just hv to fit two boosters.
I know about the Kanchan Armour, and KA is not on the Mk2 its on the MK1. Its nothing new and its not from ISRO. CL-20 was only isolated in India for the first time not invented.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun
What efficiency are you talking about? The only efficiency that matters is $/Kg ratio. How much will it cost me to launch my X Kg satellite. I don't care how much the launch platform weighs or how much fuel it guzzles. It's all about cost efficiency. ISRO can launch payloads up to 5 tonnes (LEO) and 3.5 tonnes (UEO). We need cryogenic systems for payloads beyond 5 tonnes. Can you show me one American launch platform that can handle 6 tonnes payload without cryogenic systems?
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky What is UEO? u mean GTO? It lifts 10tons to LEO and 4.5tons to GTO... Dude what they are doing is takeing the easy way out by adding massive solid booster. The problem with that idea is that its a dead end, useing a huge booster means your primary engines are all under powered and not evolving, so u compensate by useing large solid fuel boosters. That is a dead end when it comes to the next level, the Space-X rocket with boosters takes up 50,tons to LEO and 20tons to GTO.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun
Yep, UEO and GTO are the same. Also, Space-X uses a hybrid cryogenic stage. It is not comparable to PSLV. Once we get through the GSLV threshold, we can start our comparisons to Space-X. Until then, let us do an apple-to-apple comparison here :)
Let me make this very clear. No American non-cryogenic launch platform can put any extra payload in LEO or UEO than our PSLV platform already can. So, I do not understand your point here.
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky UEO is not any orbital term i aware of. Also we cant get over the GSLV threshold if we just strap on huge boosters to hide the fact that our primary engines have very less power to weight ratio. The west only uses boosters to send payloads upwards of 20,000kgs. We r useing the worlds largest boosters to just lift 4,000kgs? Just to hide the short comings of primary engine. I am not bashing ISRO but Gov PSU type organizations r bad for innovation, they should overhaul the structure.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun
By the way, I carefully worded my CL-20 claim. Read that again. I said "Desensitized CL-20" which is what DRDO did. They re-engineered CL-20 in such a way that it is desensitized to handling, while retaining its 60xRDX rating in explosions. The Americans tried and failed in desensitizing it for mass-weaponization, even though they had a very good head-start with the material.
pogularocky 3 months ago
@KarthikSoun
The only reason why we are playing catch up today in many fields is because we are still poor and we lack the money to fund all the needed scientific projects at once. Compare the money ISRO gets from GoI annually, to what NASA gets. It is infuriating, to say the least, on how scientific institutions get treated in India.
pogularocky 3 months ago
@pogularocky I agree on what you say about resources and money but innovation is also stuck in limbo if we give job garuntees to scientists and we hire book worm type guys for scientists who lack creativity, while the best of our brains go abroad to US or Europe and work for them. We need a structural overhaul becoz our public ventures are stuck in the Socialist era of reward and no punishment. We r just holding on to bad scientists.
KarthikSoun 3 months ago
Comment removed
SheikhRajaBinDas 5 months ago
Good Luck, ISRO.
Pintu281979 5 months ago
good luck ISRO, i will pray for your success
NitinRai21 5 months ago
boo yah ...gg ISRO
TheBonnerking 5 months ago