India's return to space fails after first locally built cryogenic engine experiences 'anomaly' India's return to space has failed, after the upper stage of a Thursday launch went awry. The Register tuned into see the launch of GSLV-F10, which soared to an altitude of over 120km after its main booster and four auxiliaries performed admirably, then the second stage did likewise. But around seven minutes into the flight, …
just saying, if you want the thing to light, you need to make sure it'll work with sufficient on the ground testing. it's the kind of thing NASA has done a LOT, after all. Granted, getting LOX + anything to light up takes SOME doing, especially if the engine is designed to be re-started in space.
But i expect it COULD have been tested on the ground, first. Tested ENOUGH TIMES to be signed off as "reliable" at any rate.
Confidence in this new engine is a *bit* lacking.
(and they didn't give any details as to why, either - pumps failed? No arkie sparkie? Not enough accelerant if THAT was used? Or maybe they just do not know???)
Some things you cannot easily test for. They can try igniting the engine in a vacuum on the ground, in similar conditions to space, but there are a lot of forces acting on the engine during flight that they can't easily account for. On top of that, vibrations, resonances and feedback from other parts of the rocket are all elements that you cannot reasonably anticipate. Sometimes, you just have to fly something to see if it works.
true, but if this 2nd stage has never flown before, why risk a perfectly good satellite in the process??
(some bean-counter probably *FELT* it was a good idea, yeah...)
then I'll stand corrected in saying that you ALSO need to do some flight testing before putting payloads on it. But I thought that was obvious and didn't mention it. If I had, I'd be too wordy and accused of being Captain Obvious. No way to win.
But proper ground testing would take most of those other things into consideration you know. Vibrations and resonances can be simulated. The thing is, they never said exactly why the thing did not start. It could be everything from bad wiring to bad controllers to turbo pumps not starting on time, or lighting the fire on the main engine just didn't work.
Apollo's 3rd stage not only had to start, it had to be re-startable. Similarly for the command module. THAT kind of tech is what I'm thinking about here. (and that WOULD be rocket science). By now the patents have run out. I'm sure they can be researched.
(and they SHOULD be able to test for nearly all of that on the ground)
Insufficient testing ? But then as usual, the author has a very poor command of the facts.
This isn't a new engine just put to use - it's been in use for a decade now, and is the first failure of the engine in about 9 years.
India used up all the Russian supplied engines by the early 2010s. It has been using CE-7.5 since 2013, and it hasn't had a failure since its first development flight, until now. The Russians haven't been in the picture since Obama's first term.
This is the older GSLV Mk 2. Most of the development rupees are going into developing the LOX/kerosene engine for the Mk 3 .
LOX plus most things will burn if ignited, yeah. LOX plus SOME things explodes into flame immediately. But most simple chemical mixing won't burn without help.
LOX + Kerosene or LOX + Liquid Hydrogen probably needs to be ignited properly, especially at cryogenic temperatures. BUT... if you pump in hydrazine FIRST, it would act like a primer charge, and then you shift the fuel over to the main one once the fire is properly burning. Other chemicals may work better or be more reliable. Same concept.
I understand that some jet engines require a starting sequence where something "not jet fuel" is used to light them... propane or similar in at least one case. Once lit, you shift the fuel over and it stays lit. That kind of thing. A Rocket could need that sort of thing to light the engines.
LOX plus kero was what I saw. Pour LOX onto kero in bowl, WHOMP! column of flame. I suspect hydrogen would be same, but given the energy density, don't want to be in same room. A pinch of platinum may help. Regardless, starting rocket engines in flight is a known process. Perhaps the engine or plumbing was a Monday job, like the explosion of the big Russian equivalent to Saturn V. N class ? Caused by a loose bolt on plumbing. I hope the Indians get their act together and fix issue. Competition keeps the manglement classes attached to reality. Even Musk may daydream too much.
Terrible place, beggars on the streets at every train station, bank, etc and folk depending on food banks to avoid children starving. And still such a "democracy" choses more incompetent and corrupt officials who do as they please and screw the citizens.
Sorry I can't comment on India, don't know enough about it.
Stop spouting Daily Mail lies. We no longer send India aid money. And aid is rarely purely altruistic anyway. It benefits both donor and recipient. After all if countries remain poor and undeveloped, who are you going to sell to in our wonderful post Brexit utopia? And if we are an utopia, what's the incentive for the brightest and best not to leave the undeveloped country and head to the land of opportunity?
As of last week, India's foreign exchange reserves were, hmm $620 billion . 4th largest behind China, Japan and Switzerland, a long way ahead of UK:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-exchange_reserves
About $220 billion of that is US treasuries. Probably $50-75 billion in BoE treasuries last I checked. In other words, India currently loans the UK more money than all the aid ever sent since independence.
I first got on the internet in the late 90s in school. The British press used to talk about 'aid to India' then. Still faithfully uses it as a rhetorical construct.
How about the British aid to China though ? They desperately need money to graduate from bicycles. Read all about it in the Daily Mail.
The problem is, India outsourced to Vietnam. The affected Indian employees were told that they would receive severance pay only if they trained their Vietnamese replacements. Wise to this coercion that Indian outsourcers' employers routinely use, the affected bailed without complying.
Thus, the rocket failed.
Ah absolute dollar GDP per capita.
You must be that white guy I saw in Bangalore stridently haranguing the barber saying a haircut cost GBP10 in UK and that's what he was going to pay - in converted rupees. And then went and paid for his chicken curry paying the same price he pays at Nandos - converted to Rupees. And the autorickshaw guy the... yup, you got it.
Absolute dollar GDP per capita is a completely useless construct in India. It just makes you look like you have never heard of purchasing power.
The UK absolute and PPP GDPs are percents apart. Indian ones are like 5-10x apart depending on whether you're looking at what the World Bank says or what your actual daily expenses are like for an average visitor or resident.
Oceans are big. I mean, you may think it's a long way to the chemist's...
And yes, they do clear the area of planes and boats, at least for the most likely areas for big pieces to land (for reference, see NOTAMS for SpaceX launches, or the references to the keep out zones the US Coast Guard implemented when Crew-1 splashed down).
For failures of upper stages or reentering vehicles the possible impact zones are much bigger, but the pieces are smaller. Not going to lie, getting hit with a falling upper stage world wreck your day (and all your days thereafter), but you're much more likely to be struck by lightning. You're much more likely to be struck *several times* by lightning.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
