What's new

India developing Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle with 16.3 ton to GTO

PSLV can launch up to 3.8 tons into LEO. You should double check your sources before posting such BS. As for your claim no one is taking PSLV seriously, how many commercial sats has india launched in the last year compared to how many china has launched in the last year?

It's funny how some Chinese media tout ISRO's launch of 104 sats in one go as "limited capability" but they are unable to do the same.
You see any eutelsat or 4 tonners launching from India? China actually sells the whole package, satellite and launching due to embargo from the US we cannot launch any satellites with US components. Check Chinese launch history in the 90s....we were launching iridium sats at 4 tonnes+ each.

The only commercial sats you get are startups looking for a subsidized launch...for picosats, nanosats. I told you, India should launch 1000 bolt size satellites, then it will be a space supa powa.
 
.
70% success rate is absolutely horrendous when it comes to launch vehicle reliability

take a look at others

Delta - 95% success rate
long march series - 95.5%
space x - 94%
Ariane 5 - 95.7%
proton(which has had issues recently due to quality control) - 88.6%
?????? Seriously???
You are comparing a Launch vehicle that has only 11 launches so far vs ariane 5 that has 90+ launches??? (Which is the right example btrw)., which is a single type of launch vehicle

IT IS very hilarious you are comparing this Space X, detla, long march , proton which are a Family of LVs over different types and combining their success rates to telling they are better....lol

Thanks for the Laughs

You see any eutelsat or 4 tonners launching from India? China actually sells the whole package, satellite and launching due to embargo from the US we cannot launch any satellites with US components. Check Chinese launch history in the 90s....we were launching iridium sats at 4 tonnes+ each.

The only commercial sats you get are startups looking for a subsidized launch...for picosats, nanosats. I told you, India should launch 1000 bolt size satellites, then it will be a space supa powa.
Again, stop making a Joke of yourself!....you don't know the meaning of Subsidized and can't you even support your claim !!... It is Just SAD!!!
 
.
?????? Seriously???
You are comparing a Launch vehicle that has only 11 launches so far vs ariane 5 that has 90+ launches??? (Which is the right example btrw)., which is a single type of launch vehicle

IT IS very hilarious you are comparing this Space X, detla, long march , proton which are a Family of LVs over different types and combining their success rates to telling they are better....lol

Thanks for the Laughs

first of all,
"combining their success rates to telling they are better"

i combined them to make india look better, most single variants of rockets used for a good amount of time have 99%+

and

oh you want laughs?

you want a single specific vehicle?

you want similar number of launches?

long march 3c - 15 launches, 100%

long march 2f - 13 launches, 100%

ariane 5 ES - 6 launches, 100%

delta IV M+(4,2) - 13 launches, 100%

space x falcon 9 - 15 launches, 100% (one was destroyed on ground and didn't count as a flight, if you count it, then 93.75%)

still laughing ?

funny part is, i didn't even post to make fun of india or anything, i even tell people it's a great start and could be a basis for a manned rocket(which need way higher reliability), i was merely telling people, 70%ish is terrible and nobody should be happy with that, dont post like its some kind of an achievement to hit 70% unless you WANT india to be like north korea, i'm sure with more future launches, quality will improve and the launch rate will eventually come to 90%+
 
.
You see any eutelsat or 4 tonners launching from India? China actually sells the whole package, satellite and launching due to embargo from the US we cannot launch any satellites with US components. Check Chinese launch history in the 90s....we were launching iridium sats at 4 tonnes+ each.

It does not matter if a payload is 4 ton or 1kg the amount of work needed to get it into orbit is the same.

GSLV MK-3 is just starting out as a viable launcher, wait for a couple of years and chances are there will be a good number of commercial payloads being launched as most GTO payloads are in the 4-7 ton range which MK-3 covers very well and cheaply.
 
.
first of all,
"combining their success rates to telling they are better"

i combined them to make india look better, most single variants of rockets used for a good amount of time have 99%+

and

oh you want laughs?

you want a single specific vehicle?

you want similar number of launches?

long march 3c - 15 launches, 100%

long march 2f - 13 launches, 100%

ariane 5 ES - 6 launches, 100%

delta IV M+(4,2) - 13 launches, 100%

space x falcon 9 - 15 launches, 100% (one was destroyed on ground and didn't count as a flight, if you count it, then 93.75%)

still laughing ?

funny part is, i didn't even post to make fun of india or anything, i even tell people it's a great start and could be a basis for a manned rocket(which need way higher reliability), i was merely telling people, 70%ish is terrible and nobody should be happy with that, dont post like its some kind of an achievement to hit 70% unless you WANT india to be like north korea, i'm sure with more future launches, quality will improve and the launch rate will eventually come to 90%+
Yes Still laughing!!! only when i point out you can't compared as the no. of launches are difference , only then you realized your stupidity and did some finer research and posted it !

Still

Why you didn't add SpaceX Falcon 1 - 40% success rate ,

or What about
PSLV - 94.5%
GSLV Mk3- 100%

India is working on improving the GSLV Mk2 and the last 4 were successful is Testament to THAT and THAT is why we are Happy!!! and look forwards to more successful launches!!

Thanks for the Laughs!!!
 
.
It does not matter if a payload is 4 ton or 1kg the amount of work needed to get it into orbit is the same.

GSLV MK-3 is just starting out as a viable launcher, wait for a couple of years and chances are there will be a good number of commercial payloads being launched as most GTO payloads are in the 4-7 ton range which MK-3 covers very well and cheaply.
4 tonnes is never viable for any modern payload. You are comparing launching 1kg to 4 tonnes, gr8 and concluding it as similar amount of work? Gr8
 
Last edited:
.
Yah, PSLV can only launch 1.5 tonnes. :partay: except for picosats and nanosats from universities and startup, nobody is taking it seriously.

Well sorry to burst your bubble.

DMC3-satellites-ready-to-test-at-launch-site.JPG
 
.
Ok ignorent troll.
It's doing what it's designed for and it's making us some money.
Their is no complexity in launching multiple satellites?:D
This shows level of your knowledge.
All the satellite have to be perfectly timed and ejected at the right velocity, inclination direction...so that they do not collide with each other now this requires some serious maths.
Do post source for all other butthurt bs that you just posted.
I am telling you there is no difference in launching 100 bolt sized satellites and 20 1 kg satellites. The complexity is the same.
 
.
And that is why your people say that your satellites are substandard and blame that they do not get American technologies.
Dude, you need to improve on your grammar. Your satellite technology is a generation behind Chinese technology, so I wouldn't comment on our satellites being substandard, since the same Chinese components like solar cells and batteries find their way into Indian satellites. LOL.

As I said, chinese has only one answer to all Indian space achievements and that is that they have heavy lift vehicle (Which often falls and kept secrete). If we say that we launch mars mission, you say you have heavy lift capability, If we say that we launch a mini hubble sort of satellite for universe exploration, you say you have heavy lift vehicle, We say we have tested scram jet engine than you say that you have heavy lift vehicle, We say that we launched 104 satellite, you say that you have heavy lift vehicle.

And tell me from which countries did you earned 100s of crores of Dollars. I am eager to know. You make all tall claims of your success but nobody comes to you for any launch because your rockets falls any time. They come to us because their satellites are put exactly on the location. You guys are big mouth and hype your success many more time than what it is. You do not have anything to showcase except the heavy lift rocket made by Russian scientist on job at your space agency.
Mini hubble, gosh, it's just an x-ray satellite, please wake up. China just launched one which is the most advanced X-RAY satellite, so? It's just a science satellite, no one gives a hoot about it. Again, going to Mars does not require heaver launchers, it requires precise navigation and control, that's why ISRO needed NASA, understand? China has got a more advanced scramjet program than India genius. Please read on it before thinking India is so advanced. Can you tell me what technology India is currently ahead of China? Name one technology China is behind India, then we can slowly discuss. I am talking only about space technology....please keep to the topic, don't derail.


What is the source??? Comment of chinese on PDF?
:partay:. Ignorance is bliss.
 
.
I am telling you there is no difference in launching 100 bolt sized satellites and 20 1 kg satellites. The complexity is the same.
I don't get what you meant there. all the satellite launched, ie 104 of them were cubesats (5kg).
There is nothing called bolt sized satellite.
All satellite below 10kg are classified as nano. Don't Make things up.
 
. . .
This is how current GSLV will beocme a 5 ton + vehicle with same launch vehicle.

650 KG weight of Cryogenic engine shall be reduced.
150 KG shall be slashed down from electronics.
2 ton more cryo fuel shall be added to Cryogenic engine.
Specific impulse of Cryo motor to be improved.

Yea, India is ahead of US in Mars exploration since they succeeded the first attempt, we failed our first try back in the 1960s.

ohhhhh You failed in 1960? Wow, you must have read this in reeducation camp school in china.
 
.
What is the benefit of having a 20 ton launcher with back to back failure. ISRO is better off with 5 ton GTO with back to pack success.
 
.
This is how current GSLV will beocme a 5 ton + vehicle with same launch vehicle.

650 KG weight of Cryogenic engine shall be reduced.
150 KG shall be slashed down from electronics.
2 ton more cryo fuel shall be added to Cryogenic engine.
Specific impulse of Cryo motor to be improved.



ohhhhh You failed in 1960? Wow, you must have read this in reeducation camp school in china.

We as USA failed in the 60s. As an American, I use the word we to describe our success and failures.

Just because
I speak the truth about India does not make me a Pakistani or Chinese.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom