LVM3/GSLV Mark III News, Discussions, Updates and Reports

[Free Karma]

All set to put unmanned crew module into orbit - The Hindu

There is frenetic activity at Sriharikota for the maiden lift-off of India's newest and the biggest launch vehicle in December, which will put an unmanned crew module into orbit.

The mission is a stepping stone to the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) ultimately sending astronauts into space in the module.

The 3.65-tonne module will get de-mated from the topmost cryogenic stage at an altitude of 125 km and return to the earth. At an altitude of 15 km, there will be an "aerial ballet," featuring three huge parachutes which will open up one after the other to slow down the module's descent. The module is expected to splash down in the sea near the Andaman archipelago and will be recovered by the Indian Coast Guard and ISRO personnel. The entire flight from the lift-off to the splash-down will last about 20 minutes. It is a passive, experimental and sub-orbital mission.

ISRO Chairman K. Radhakrishnan said, "Everything is progressing well" for the GSLV-MkIII launch in December. The rocket weighs 630 tonnes and is 42.4 metres tall.

"We are ready. Everything is pucca," said M.C. Dathan, Director, Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC), Thiruvananthapuram, which has built both the GSLV-MKIII and the unmanned crew module. Two gigantic strap-on motors, each of which will use 200 tonnes of solid propellants, have been strapped around the core stage in the second launch pad. The core stage will use 110 tonnes of liquid propellants. Above the core stage is the cryogenic stage. The module will be "encapsulated" with the cryogenic stage on November 26, said Mr. Dathan.

S. Somanath, Project Director, GSLV-MKIII, called it India's "biggest, heaviest and the next generation" launch vehicle.

 

[Compersion]

Sometimes wish that it goes faster ... and there are other (private) suppliers that have launch vehicles within India. Having launch vehicles once every (few) months is not efficient one would imagine and we are having demand and can reduce cost(s) further.

United Launch Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Orbital Sciences Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SpaceX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rockwell International - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin Marietta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alliant Techsystems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Boeing Defense, Space & Security - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lockheed Martin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nissan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ISRO Hopeful of Private Participation Soon - The New Indian Express

BANGALORE: The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is hoping that private industry in the country will participate in a joint venture between public sector companies, private industry and ISRO to produce launch vehicles and communication satellites in the future.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Sometimes wish that it goes faster ... and there are other (private) suppliers that have launch vehicles within India. Having launch vehicles once every (few) months is not efficient one would imagine and we are having demand and can reduce cost(s) further.

United Launc
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_Sciences_Corporation]Orbital Sciences Corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SpaceX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rockwell International - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin Marietta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alliant Techsystems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Boeing Defense, Space & Security - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lockheed Martin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nissan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ISRO Hopeful of Private Participation Soon - The New Indian Express

h Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

This trend has already started in USA. NASA gave two asteroid mining contracts to private companies.
Commercializations of space will open up space exploration and colonization.

 

[warrior monk]

India's GSLV MK-3 is a great achievement which is suffice for our current needs . First we must make as much tests for this vehicle and when we attain maturity then we should work on future modifications.
If successful we would have made one heck of an achievement . Long March 3B chinese launch vehicle uses 4 booster stages while we need only 2 . US made Atlas V Heavy 5HX uses 2 booster vehicles. Our s-200 generates 5,150 kN each higher than any chinese single booster comparable to US boosters that too completely indigenous made . It uses solid fuel better than liquid fuel ones.
2nd stage we will use 2 vikas engine ( L-110) which is a liquid fuel rocket engine produces a thrust of 800kN equal to chinese YF-24 engine ( 780 kN)
3rd stage will use one CE-20 engine thrust of 200 kN which has a excellent thrust to weight ratio better than current Chinese engines .

 

[CrYsIs]

India to Push Next Space Frontier, With Launch of Crew Module in mid-December

SRIHARIKOTA: Just months after achieving the milestone of a successful mission to Mars, India is set to push another frontier in space, by launching a human crew module and then retrieving it from the sea upon re-entry. The crew module will blast off from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre in Sriharikota, on board the GSLV-Mark III, which will be India's heaviest rocket till date.

The crew module will not carry any astronauts on its first test flight, which is scheduled between December 15 and 20. After rising more than a hundred kilometres into space, the crew module would be brought back to Earth, and its reentry trajectory will be studied. The capsule will then be recovered using Indian coast Guard ships from close to the Andaman Nicobar islands. A simulated recovery was carried out recently in the region.

India to Push Next Space Frontier, With Launch of Crew Module in mid-December

 

[kurup]

Indian Crew Module

 

[shiphone]

India's GSLV MK-3 is a great achievement which is suffice for our current needs . First we must make as much tests for this vehicle and when we attain maturity then we should work on future modifications.
If successful we would have made one heck of an achievement . Long March 3B chinese launch vehicle uses 4 booster stages while we need only 2 . US made Atlas V Heavy 5HX uses 2 booster vehicles. Our s-200 generates 5,150 kN each higher than any chinese single booster comparable to US boosters that too completely indigenous made . It uses solid fuel better than liquid fuel ones.
2nd stage we will use 2 vikas engine ( L-110) which is a liquid fuel rocket engine produces a thrust of 800kN equal to chinese YF-24 engine ( 780 kN)
3rd stage will use one CE-20 engine thrust of 200 kN which has a excellent thrust to weight ratio better than current Chinese engines .

god...

LongMarch 3B/E weight: 458.97 tons
LM-3C: 345 tons---LOL...this is a so called more advanced "two booster " LV...
GSLV MK.3 weight: 630 tons

LM-3B/E Payload to GTO: 5.5 ton
LM-3C: 3.8 tons
GSLV Mk.3 : 4 ton

LM-3B/E first flight: 14 February 1996
LM-3C: 25 Feb 2008
GSLV MK.3: ??? (this Dec launch is a sub-orbital one without 2nd stage engine)

LM-3B and B/E Launch Missions: 24
LM-3C: 11
GSLV MK.3: 0
---------------------------------------
BTW, L-110 is the First Stage engine...

2nd stage we will use 2 vikas engine ( L-110) which is a liquid fuel rocket engine

and GSLV Mk.3 is a 2.5 stage LV...and LM-3BE is a 3.5 stage LV,it would be funny to compare the so called 1st stage here...if you want know the China similar configuration LV(also 2.5 stage), it will be:

LM-5---a 830 tons Heavy LV with a GTO payload of 13-14 tons. the maiden flight is scheduled in 2016.

 

[karn]

Err the lesser number of stages the better . Adding stages for the same payload adds complexity and cost .
Weight comparison is meaningless GSLV 3s high weight comes from the solid boosters .. that have high thrust .. Its a design decision .

 

[Kshatriya87]

ISRO to launch GSLV Mark III between Dec 15 and 20 | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

Inching towards its human space programme, India would test a crew module recovery experiment even as it would study the vehicular performance of its latest Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV - Mark III) from Satish Dhawan Space Centre here between December 15 and 20. "ISRO would launch its heaviest rocket GSLV-Mark III (LVM 3 X mission) sometime between December 15 and 20. The rocket would also carry a crew module to test its re-entry characteristics," MYS Prasad, Director, Satish Dhawan Space Centre, told reporters here.

The launch intends to test the atmospheric characteristics and stability of the updated rocket on its way up and would study the crew module on its re-entry into the atmosphere. While the rocket would cost Rs 140 crore, the crew module would cost Rs 15 crore, he said.

Elaborating on the updated GSLV Mark III, S Somanath, Project Director, GSLV Mark III, said, "The rocket can carry upto four tonne payload. This is the heaviest rocket India has ever launched. It is 630 tonne at lift off. We would test only the first two stages and not the cryogenic stage." "The cryogenic engine is under development and it will take more two years to be ready," said Prasad.

Since Indian government has not officially approved sending humans into space so far, Prasad said the crew module would not carry any living being and it is only for study purposes. Explaining the process, Project Director of Crew Module, S Unnikrishnan Nair, said after getting separated from the rocket around 126 km, it would be stabilised by thrusters designed on board. "The three tonne weighing crew module would use four set of parachutes to safely land on the surface of the sea at 7 metre per second. It will land some 180 km from Indira Point of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. From the lift off to the crew module splashing into the sea, it will take around 20 minutes," he said. The cup cake-shaped crew module is 2.5 metre tall and 3.5 metre in diameter, he said.

The capsule, tentatively designed to carry three astronauts, would be recovered by Indian Coast Guard ships. A practice of the recovery was done on October 31 with Coast Guard ship ICGS Samudra Paheredar, he added.

 

[shiphone]

Err the lesser number of stages the better . Adding stages for the same payload adds complexity and cost .

oh...PSLV is a 4 stage(2 liquid ,2 solid) LV. ,the contemporary LM-2 serial is doing the same job(ejecting object to SSO ,same class payload) with two stages(2 liquid) only ...

once again , I would repeat the word "contemporary "... the first model of LM-3 serial -- LM-3's maiden flight took place in 1984 ,then we had the LM-3A... LM-3B...LM-3B/E and LM-3C.
if you want to use the GSLV MkIII( maiden flight in 201X) to compare the 3 decades old LM-3 serial , talking about the so called "better" things would be very funny... but as you can see, the three important Performance:

absolute payload capacity (GTO :4 ton vs 5.5 ton) ,
efficiency ( 4/630 vs 5.5/460 or 3.8/345) ,
reliability (0/0 vs 68/73 launch--2 failure plus 3 partly failure)

none of them you can say something like 'Better' here... actually the the "contemporary " for LM-3 serial is the GSLV Mk1/2-- also a 3.5 stage LV with a GTO payload 2.5 ton by the Lift-off weight 402 tons, which is far behind, even not mention the reliability here...

LM-5 is the new/next Gen LV...the LM-5 could say the contemporary to GSLV MK3 here...it would take off for the first time in late 2015 or 2016. also 2.5 stage design including 4 LOX/kerosene boosters and LOX/LH2 engines first stage + LOX/LH2 engines 2nd stage...14 ton GTO payload/ 830 ton Mass

Weight comparison is meaningless GSLV 3s high weight comes from the solid boosters .. that have high thrust .. Its a design decision .

the lift-off weight is important .
1. most weight of the Rocket is the Fuel which is costly...more weight means more cost..
2. the Payload/ Mass ratio stands for the efficiency and the excellence of the overall design.

the solid booster tech is well related to the ICBM projects...Indian focus on Solid Ballistic Missiles program brought more technological achievements into Lauch Vehicle program...but the solid propellant rocket is not very efficient (Specific impulse is much lower than the liquid rocket engines). high thrust with higher weight can't increase the Payload . the best hope for GSLV Mk.3 is the CE-20 under development. an efficient , well designed LOX/LH2 cryogenic engine upper stage could increase the GTO payload. if it succeed, we might see the more than the 4 ton GTO payload claimed by the ISRO initially....

design decision reflexes the ability ,custom, the tech mastered, the industury base...nothing amazing...

 

[CrYsIs]

the solid booster tech is well related to the ICBM projects...Indian focus on Solid Ballistic Missiles program brought more technological achievements into Lauch Vehicle program...but the solid propellant rocket is not very efficient (Specific impulse is much lower than the liquid rocket engines). high thrust with higher weight can't increase the Payload . the best hope for GSLV Mk.3 is the CE-20 under development. an efficient , well designed LOX/LH2 cryogenic engine upper stage could increase the GTO payload. if it succeed, we might see the more than the 4 ton GTO payload claimed by the ISRO initially....

design decision reflexes the ability ,custom, the tech mastered, the industury base...nothing amazing...

The purpose of Solid boosters is to provide a cheaper way of generating high thrust which is required during the lift off phase.A liquid engine of similar thrust would be very expensive.


This rocket would become a game changer not just in India but in international market when it's core N2O4 / UDMH engine will replaced by RP1/LOX engine which is under development.After that it will be able to lift 6 tonnes to GTO

clustering two of these engines would further enhance it's capability of lifting 8 tonnes to GTO and would be at par with Atlas V but much cheaper.

 

[Compersion]

we ought to be testing and sending more launch vehicles up more often ... at this moment it seems to "one at a time". we need to expand and get more private industry involved especially in developing and launching themselves. it will help industry and make in india since that would trickle down to manufacturing and investment and create jobs especially in human resources concentration. things are being miniaturized and also more capable that requires human ingenious thoughts. our PSLV is a beauty and can be give to private players now and let them play with it. we also need to focus on 10 ton + GTO. isro needs to be more r&d and not factory.

 

[kurup]

Cross-posting from another forum ............... a nice CGI .

 

[CrYsIs]

we ought to be testing and sending more launch vehicles up more often ... at this moment it seems to "one at a time". we need to expand and get more private industry involved especially in developing and launching themselves. it will help industry and make in india since that would trickle down to manufacturing and investment and create jobs especially in human resources concentration. things are being miniaturized and also more capable that requires human ingenious thoughts. our PSLV is a beauty and can be give to private players now and let them play with it. we also need to focus on 10 ton + GTO. isro needs to be more r&d and not factory.

PSLV has no future,it's basically an outdated hypergolic rocket which runs on dangerous hydrazine.Most space fairing countries have already decomissioned their hydrazine based rockets.We need an environmental friendly rocket which is the future variant of GSLV 3 and ULV series of rockets.

The GSLV 2 is basically a PSLV with a cryogenic engine with liquid strap ons.Because of it's flaw of carrying dead core stage,means it too does not have a bright future.


We should focus on ULV and RLV.

 

[shiphone]

solid propellant rocket is cheap , easier to manufature ,and powerful --that's right...but the efficiency is one of the weakness , as I said

design decision reflexes the ability ,custom, the tech mastered, the industury base...nothing amazing...

India has limited technological reserve on liquid rocket engine... at this stage, India still has no choice but to choose the Solid boosters because there is no other Proper liquid engine available except the TOTed vikas/viking engine.

this remind me another example --GSLV Mk1/2. which use four L40H Vikas 2(Burn time 160 s,Specific impulse 262 sec) as the booster and a S125/139 solid propellant as the 1st stage...the S125/139 (Burn time 100/109 s, Specific impulse 166 sec) ... the first stage would flameout 51-60 seconds earlier than the Boosters, which means the LV has to keep flying with the finished 1st stage without separation (dead weight at that time) when the Boosters are still burning. this is another reason why such 402 tons LV could only eject a 2.5 ton payload to GTO although Indian Satish Dhawan Space Centre locates at Lower latitudes with the better use of earth rotation.

L110 engine is the Indian breakthrough/achievement on multi-engine clustering tech...with this old but efficient tech approach, a more powerful stage would be made with less thrust small engines...this is a milestone...BTW ,I would correct a little more about the #64 post...

2nd stage we will use 2 vikas engine ( L-110) which is a liquid fuel rocket engine produces a thrust of 800kN equal to chinese YF-24 engine ( 780 kN)

as I have pointed out , L110 is the 1st stage not the sencond . but the LM-3B/E's first stage is the Four clustering YF21C engines- L186 with a thrust of 2961.6 KN...
---------------------------------------

I know Indian are enjoying talking about the Bright future , future tense is the Featured Indian English, but I have to say "furture is uncertain" everything(good or bad ,success or failure) would/could happen... the result of any Grand Plan depends on the hardworking including project management, funds, and TIME, a little luck as well maybe...when it has happened , then you could claim the REAL ability. I just could list the heaviest GTO payload of 5370 kg Eutelsat W3C by LM-3B/E on 07.10.2011., and 2168 kg Insat 4CR by GSLV Mk1 on 02.09.2007 (partly failure) so far ...

normally I have no reply to these a little bit empty talking...the CE-20 is in sight , and we thought its ability is more important for GSLV Mk.3 program than anything far away...when the CE-20 is ready, the I-3K bus satellite could be launched within India, even the light weight version of I-4K bus Sats.

 

[Compersion]

PSLV has no future,it's basically an outdated hypergolic rocket which runs on dangerous hydrazine.Most space fairing countries have already decomissioned their hydrazine based rockets.We need an environmental friendly rocket which is the future variant of GSLV 3 and ULV series of rockets.

The GSLV 2 is basically a PSLV with a cryogenic engine with liquid strap ons.Because of it's flaw of carrying dead core stage,means it too does not have a bright future.


We should focus on ULV and RLV.

Thanks for response also good information. Hence more reason for ISRO to shift the PSLV to private industry with a main contractor like a L&T, Mahindra, Tata taking it by its balls and improving and learning from it. The PSLV works and has had a consistent set of launches. it also has a lot of industry base and logistics already developed instead of foregoing that we ought to allow private industry to learn and develop it further. I agree with you and also we need to focus on re-entry vehicles and also re-using satellites (for example refueling them, returning them to earth).

 

[CrYsIs]

solid propellant rocket is cheap , easier to manufature ,and powerful --that's right...but the efficiency is one of the weakness , as I said

India has limited technological reserve on liquid rocket engine... at this stage, India still has no choice but to choose the Solid boosters because there is no other Proper liquid engine available except the TOTed vikas/viking engine.

this remind me another example --GSLV Mk1/2. which use four L40H Vikas 2(Burn time 160 s,Specific impulse 262 sec) as the booster and a S125/139 solid propellant as the 1st stage...the S125/139 (Burn time 100/109 s, Specific impulse 166 sec) ... the first stage would flameout 51-60 seconds earlier than the Boosters, which means the LV has to keep flying with the finished 1st stage without separation (dead weight at that time) when the Boosters are still burning. this is another reason why such 402 tons LV could only eject a 2.5 ton payload to GTO although Indian Satish Dhawan Space Centre locates at Lower latitudes with the better use of earth rotation.

L110 engine is the Indian breakthrough/achievement on multi-engine clustering tech...with this old but efficient tech approach, a more powerful stage would be made with less thrust small engines...this is a milestone...BTW ,I would correct a little more about the #64 post...

as I have pointed out , L110 is the 1st stage not the sencond . but the LM-3B/E's first stage is the Four clustering YF21C engines- L186 with a thrust of 2961.6 KN...

I know this was not really addressed to me but i would love to answer.India uses solid motors not out of compulsion but to save money,Solid rockets make an excellent strap ons and booster stage rockets and there is no reason to abandon it.Even the new SLS of NASA uses solid boosters.It is a matter of being economical and to reach space cheaply.

There was a plan for building an RP1/LOX engine back in the 80's but the government shot down the proposal and instead went for development of powerful Solid rockets and N2O4 / UDMH based liquid engine because they had military application in mind.

As i said earlier on that GSLV 2 is basically a PSLV with cryogenic engine.The purpose of GSLV was to build a cheap rocket for the cryogenic engine acquired from Russia.Now that India has mastered the difficult staged combustion which is the current pinnacle of space launching technology,India can build anything it wants.It's a matter of finances and not technological ability.

Infact India is currently developing a 2000 KN RP1/LOX engine which will be tested 3-4 years from now ,after it's completion we will go for a 4000 KN engine.After the completion of GSLV 3 development program in 2019, the space agency will go for developing a heavy launcher which will carry 12 tonnes to GTO.

 

[karn]

oh...PSLV is a 4 stage(2 liquid ,2 solid) LV. ,the contemporary LM-2 serial is doing the same job(ejecting object to SSO ,same class payload) with two stages(2 liquid) only ...

once again , I would repeat the word "contemporary "... the first model of LM-3 serial -- LM-3's maiden flight took place in 1984 ,then we had the LM-3A... LM-3B...LM-3B/E and LM-3C.
if you want to use the GSLV MkIII( maiden flight in 201X) to compare the 3 decades old LM-3 serial , talking about the so called "better" things would be very funny... but as you can see, the three important Performance:

absolute payload capacity (GTO :4 ton vs 5.5 ton) ,
efficiency ( 4/630 vs 5.5/460 or 3.8/345) ,
reliability (0/0 vs 68/73 launch--2 failure plus 3 partly failure)

none of them you can say something like 'Better' here... actually the the "contemporary " for LM-3 serial is the GSLV Mk1/2-- also a 3.5 stage LV with a GTO payload 2.5 ton by the Lift-off weight 402 tons, which is far behind, even not mention the reliability here...

LM-5 is the new/next Gen LV...the LM-5 could say the contemporary to GSLV MK3 here...it would take off for the first time in late 2015 or 2016. also 2.5 stage design including 4 LOX/kerosene boosters and LOX/LH2 engines first stage + LOX/LH2 engines 2nd stage...14 ton GTO payload/ 830 ton Mass



the lift-off weight is important .
1. most weight of the Rocket is the Fuel which is costly...more weight means more cost..
2. the Payload/ Mass ratio stands for the efficiency and the excellence of the overall design.

the solid booster tech is well related to the ICBM projects...Indian focus on Solid Ballistic Missiles program brought more technological achievements into Lauch Vehicle program...but the solid propellant rocket is not very efficient (Specific impulse is much lower than the liquid rocket engines). high thrust with higher weight can't increase the Payload . the best hope for GSLV Mk.3 is the CE-20 under development. an efficient , well designed LOX/LH2 cryogenic engine upper stage could increase the GTO payload. if it succeed, we might see the more than the 4 ton GTO payload claimed by the ISRO initially....

design decision reflexes the ability ,custom, the tech mastered, the industury base...nothing amazing...

You are right on the PSLV and that is why its replacement will be 2 stages + srbs .
Concept

The reduced number of stages was a very conscious design decision .
GSLV Mark III faces its first experimental flight - The Hindu

Reducing the total number of propulsion modules that make up the GSLV Mark III was seen as crucial to increasing the rocket's reliability and reducing launch costs, according to ISRO experts this correspondent spoke to. The GSLV Mark III has just four propulsion modules while its predecessor, the GSLV, has seven.

LM 3 that was launched on 1984 had a payload of 5000kg to LEO with 1500kg to GTO. The LM 3B with 5100kg to GTO was first launched in 1996 .. But what's a decade between friends . If you want a put down mention the LM 2E first lanched in 1990 (9500kg to LEO 3500KG GTO)
Yes the 4 tonne to GTO figure for GSLV 3 is a tentative figure we will probably see that figure go up in later iterations , a 5 tonne figure was also claimed .

Lift of weight is important if it pertains to things not related to fuel . Solid boosters are heavy but also have high thrust but are cheap hence they are chosen . If everyone went by "efficiency" we would all be using LH2/LOX for every stage . Like the Delta family .

 

[karn]

I know this was not really addressed to me but i would love to answer.India uses solid motors not out of compulsion but to save money,Solid rockets make an excellent strap ons and booster stage rockets and there is no reason to abandon it.Even the new SLS of NASA uses solid boosters.It is a matter of being economical and to reach space cheaply.

There was a plan for building an RP1/LOX engine back in the 80's but the government shot down the proposal and instead went for development of powerful Solid rockets and N2O4 / UDMH based liquid engine because they had military application in mind.

As i said earlier on that GSLV 2 is basically a PSLV with cryogenic engine.The purpose of GSLV was to build a cheap rocket for the cryogenic engine acquired from Russia.Now that India has mastered the difficult staged combustion which is the current pinnacle of space launching technology,India can build anything it wants.It's a matter of finances and not technological ability.

Infact India is currently developing a 2000 KN RP1/LOX engine which will be tested 3-4 years from now ,after it's completion we will go for a 4000 KN engine.After the completion of GSLV 3 development program in 2019, the space agency will go for developing a heavy launcher which will carry 12 tonnes to GTO.

India did not have the capability for building closed cycle cryogenic engines in the 80s despite the complaints today the project would have turned out to be a white elephant .
There is very little chance of India building a 4000KN engine . The ultimate future project involves strapping 3 propulsion modules each with a single 2000KN (SCE-160)engine together for the 1st stage with a single engine as the 2nd stage topped by a 600KN LOX/H2 engine for the final stage very similar to the Angara concept.
Anything beyond this involves making the propulsion modules reusable (having them glide back down) and the final stage being an analogue of the space shuttle (which instead of landing like a plane will parachute back down). But all this is in the distant future . If ISRO manages to ground test the SCE-160 by 2017 I will be overjoyed .
FYI China tested their RP1/LOX (semicryogenic) engine in 2007 .

 

[CrYsIs]

India did not have the capability for building closed cycle cryogenic engines in the 80s despite the complaints today the project would have turned out to be a white elephant .
There is very little chance of India building a 4000KN engine . The ultimate future project involves strapping 3 propulsion modules each with a single 2000KN (SCE-160)engine together for the 1st stage with a single engine as the 2nd stage topped by a 600KN LOX/H2 engine for the final stage very similar to the Angara concept.
Anything beyond this involves making the propulsion modules reusable (having them glide back down) and the final stage being an analogue of the space shuttle (which instead of landing like a plane will parachute back down). But all this is in the distant future . If ISRO manages to ground test the SCE-160 by 2017 I will be overjoyed .
FYI China tested their RP1/LOX (semicryogenic) engine in 2007 .

India already had began research activities on Semi cryogenic engine in the 70's with a model engine testing.But instead of going for Semi cryogenic,the then ISRO leadership went for Vikas and Solid motor boosters based launch vehicles. So after spending 3.48 crores and building a model engine,the whole project was shelved untill the early 2000's.


According to Dr. Vasant Gowariker,Secretary,Department of Science and Technology there was plans for building a 75 tonnes semi cryogenic engine and India could have easily achieved that but the ISRO leadership succumbed under the pressue of the Vikas team and cancelled the Semi cryogenic project.

You can read the entire story here --->Delayed launch