My suggestion is that in parallel to gaganyan endeavour we should make more agile spacecraft within 4ton category and augmentation of lpsc should be first focus that is only hinderence in continuation of both gaganyan and other projects. If capacity building of lpsc is done appropriately we could still achieve a lot despite of not having a heavy launcherRight now timeline for first engine test sce-200of 2027-28 if no further delays due to ukrain crisis or schedule of gaganyan. My openion is that we are stuck with gslv mk3 for atleast a decade and a lot of people agree with me in my circle
And by the way PSLV c53 will probably slip to April due to non availability of oceansat-3 quoted by unconfirmed sourceIt's a tech demonstrater just like X-37B
what about SSLV then??And by the way PSLV c53 will probably slip to April due to non availability of oceansat-3 quoted by unconfirmed source
Don't know both of spacecraft will belaunch on different launchpad PSLV on SLP and sslv FLP so there should be no problem of delay in sslv due to non availability launch padwhat about SSLV then??
Again 3rd LP has nothing to do with Gaganyaan. When former ISRO chairman AS Kiran Kumar was asked about 3rd LP, He said as of now the existing 2 launch pads are enough.
This is last news report on third launch pad. I usually follow one project and all related news articles on though restrain myself from quoting news articles since many of them are baised or motivated reather believe on official document moreAgain 3rd LP has nothing to do with Gaganyaan. When former ISRO chairman AS Kiran Kumar was asked about 3rd LP, He said as of now the existing 2 launch pads are enough.
Years. SpaceX got all the engines drawing from NASA as NASA invested $500 milliun in Spacex as a replacement for Soyuz. Manufacturing tools can ease the manufacturing as complicated parts can be built in minimum pieces but the design phase requires hell lot of thermodynamic studies.how much time does it take to design such engines ??
considering there are now modern tech (computer sims,3d modelling...................)
There are two versions of HLV design which ISRO has planned for now. One is recoverable and other is not.The first one is just an experiment I hope. Recovering the 3rd Stage but ditching the 1st and 2nd stage is pretty dumb lol..
SC120 is based on ISRO's own design?20T methalox engine tested. 20T means 200KN. Equivalent to CE-20 engine
SC120 is the stage & yes it's ISRO's own designSC120 is based on ISRO's own design?
SCE-200 is based on RD-810, but it will be far better than RD-810.is sce 200 upgraded variant or is same design purchased from Ukrainians ??
considering that there might be some progress in the field of rocket propulsion.
chamber pressure of rd 810 is around 18 mpa (150 bar) and chamber pressure of raptor is 300 barSCE-200 is based on RD-810, but it will be far better than RD-810.
How will it be better? More thrust or higher Isp or both?SCE-200 is based on RD-810, but it will be far better than RD-810.
1. 18 MPA = 180 Barchamber pressure of rd 810 is around 18 mpa (150 bar) and chamber pressure of raptor is 300 bar
hmm, sce 200 might have higher chamber pressure
My notes in English.