what about you Mr SENIOR MEMBER
Launch failures common: Experts
- Thread starter Justin Joseph
- Start date
what about you Mr SENIOR MEMBER
CHTYA_nandan
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 29
- Reaction score
- 0
You should have continued your schooling after Jr. KG.
Or if its again your "typo" then you must be thinking about TSTO (two stage to orbit).
As far as India is concerned, we are not behind the chinese. One more prick in your bloated chest. have a look.
Indian Avatar RLV TSTO
BJlaowai
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 363
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
woow.. is that true? any link?
Lol, this is so sad. I recall that this thread pertains to satellite rockets. What can two stage denote other than Two Stage To Orbit? Two Stage then Faliure?
As per requested: The 14-ton payload GTO rocket, which has the world's second largest carrying capacity factor (0.0146) of any rocket, after Boeing's Delta IV Heavy, will be launching in 2014. The Chinese have exceeded the Russians in space rockets while India is struggling (failing) with a 2-ton. Clearly, India, which has yet to catch up with Russia, is not behind China.
Long March 5 Will Have World's Second Largest Carrying Capacity
New carrier rocket series to be built
Last edited:
Harop
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Clearly China has to learn how to knock off weight from its sats, India is achieving all that she wants with sats within GSLV's payload. Maybe the Chinese need some help with fabricating lighter sats, and reducing the energy draining electronics on them.
On a more serious note
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_March_%28rocket_family)
&
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_heavy_lift_launch_systems
Currently active most powerful rocket in the LM family is LM 3B. It can place 5100-5500 kg sats into GTO. There is not a single operational Chinese rocket amongst the heavy lift launch systems.
Last edited:
WAQAS119
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
- Messages
- 5,426
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
So you are saying that Russia is allowing China to copy its satellites, despite the Compass being its largest regional competitor? Very true!
Tell me if the Indian military has ANYTHING indigenous that's better than what the Chinese have. Anything... rockets, planes, tanks, you name it.
Clearly, India has to learn how to make GNSS satellites first in order to make them lighter. Oh wait, I think India's satellites only cover India... Maybe they can make their home-grown GNSS sats lighter -- by folding one from paper and blow it into space with their big mouths (directed to the person who prompted this remark, not to the Indian population).
Last edited:
mrwarrior006
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,037
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
hmmmmmm
indian army as a whole
and dont worry whether we make with paper or metal or we will launch with our mouth or rocket its none of ur problem mate
Harop
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Last edited by a moderator:
faithfulguy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,651
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Every countries has trouble when their space program is at its infancy. US and Russia in the 50-60s. Europe in 70s. China and Japan in 80s and 90s. Indian now and the next decades. But eventually, India will achieve what these other countries have achieve. This shows India is progressing. Trying in half of the battle.
Harop mate:
"To clearify things for the Indians on this thread, the CZ-3C is a 3.8 ton GTO payload rocket. The Chinese launched their first satellite rocket in 1970 [successfully] while their 2-ton GTO rockets lifted in the 1980s [successfully]." Both the Soviet Union and the United States have a lower success rate than China (89%
. LOL, I'm not implying that India has a 100% fail rate or anything.
How uninformed are you?
First, the LM 3B cannot carry 5100-5500 kg... The LM 3B has a 5100 GTO payload while the LM-3B/E, which launched 3 years ago can lift 5500kg into GT orbit.
Second, I mentioned 2014... You're stuffing words in my mouth.
In any case, the United States is the only country in the world with operational heavy lifters. Europe is not a country. The Chinese 14-ton will launch a decade before the Russian 9-ton, which is still being designed. Heck, the Russians have yet to restore 24 satellites in 34 years. By the way, unlike the Indians, when the Chinese announce a launch date, they launch it on that day. (not making any references to Tejas)
Clearly, Indian rockets, which has yet to catch up with Russia, is not behind China's.
"To clearify things for the Indians on this thread, the CZ-3C is a 3.8 ton GTO payload rocket. The Chinese launched their first satellite rocket in 1970 [successfully] while their 2-ton GTO rockets lifted in the 1980s [successfully]." Both the Soviet Union and the United States have a lower success rate than China (89%
. LOL, I'm not implying that India has a 100% fail rate or anything.How uninformed are you?
First, the LM 3B cannot carry 5100-5500 kg... The LM 3B has a 5100 GTO payload while the LM-3B/E, which launched 3 years ago can lift 5500kg into GT orbit.
Second, I mentioned 2014... You're stuffing words in my mouth.
In any case, the United States is the only country in the world with operational heavy lifters. Europe is not a country. The Chinese 14-ton will launch a decade before the Russian 9-ton, which is still being designed. Heck, the Russians have yet to restore 24 satellites in 34 years. By the way, unlike the Indians, when the Chinese announce a launch date, they launch it on that day. (not making any references to Tejas)
Clearly, Indian rockets, which has yet to catch up with Russia, is not behind China's.
Last edited:
DESERT FIGHTER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 46,973
- Reaction score
- 95
- Country
- Location
Was talking about Ms.Gandi.
Lots of dead wariors i guess
lol if we had denied thousands of soldiers then why wasnt there protests?why didnt the thousands of familys ask for the bodies?
retard dont go on some weak fags statements see the fukin reality.
Also who the f..k are u?Dont talk to me like im ur father.And go STFU.Faggot
Who was supplying mig 21s?where were bengladeshi?We they sitting at there homes while a illequiped and supply starved soldiers were gifting ghosts?F 86 was never manufactured by pakistan u dumb twit.
How many F104s were we having?U twerp thts why u lost air battles.
Control ur fuking tongue u b....d we have people from FATA on this forum also u fukwit.
How many oridance factories did u have?industries?wat about ur army?
U dumb twit do u know who was commanding it ? faggot do u even know the whole population of pakistan and number of soldiers we had at the time?U bas...ds...still ur worthless women failed?
Also 71 was not a fight FACE ON FACE it was indians,Bengladeshis supported by russia...dumbo see the history.
Note+Other people no offence continue ur discussion...this retard need some reality check
nakodo
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2010
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 0
Learning from failure
http://www.hindu.com/2010/04/17/stories/2010041754901200.htm
It is almost a rite of passage that an Indian launch vehicle runs into trouble in its first flight. The country's very first attempt to launch a satellite failed in August 1979 when the SLV-3 rocket went out of control and ended up in the Bay of Bengal. A year later, those problems were sorted out and the rocket put a 35-kg Rohini satellite into orbit. The Indian Space Research Organisation had to cope with two successive failures with the Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle (ASLV) before its third flight in 1992 went smoothly. In 1993, a series of technical shortcomings coalesced and the first flight of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) ended in failure. Those issues were swiftly resolved and the PSLV has become known for its ability to carry out a wide range of missions with rugged reliability. The first launch of the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) nine years ago, using a Russian-made cryogenic upper stage, was, to some extent, the exception. Although the GSAT-1 satellite was put into orbit, a small under-performance of the cryogenic stage meant that it was not the planned orbit. Attempts to move the satellite using its own thrusters were not successful and the satellite was ultimately abandoned.
Despite such a history, the failure of Thursday's GSLV launch with the country's first indigenous cryogenic engine and stage came as a bolt from the blue. The engine and later the full stage have gone through extensive testing on the ground in the course of their development. Moreover, the actual engine that flew on the GSLV was test-fired on the ground for 200 seconds. Exhaustive reviews by experts of the cryogenic stage and the rocket were completed before the GSLV was cleared for launch. After the unsuccessful flight, the ISRO chairman, K. Radhakrishnan, initially suggested that two small cryogenic steering engines, which swivel to maintain the rocket's orientation, might have malfunctioned. Later, however, he indicated that the main cryogenic engine itself might not have ignited. In such a complex system as the cryogenic stage, even a small defect that escapes attention is sufficient to doom the flight. But the space agency would be unwise to confine its analysis to problems encountered with the indigenous cryogenic stage. This is an opportunity for a thorough examination of the entire GSLV rocket and its past five flights. There have, for instance, been problems with the Vikas liquid-propellant engine in previous flights. The procedures for the manufacture, assembly, and pre-flight testing of all liquid propellant engines and stages need particular attention. A comprehensive review would best ensure the future reliability of the GSLV.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/04/17/stories/2010041754901200.htm
It is almost a rite of passage that an Indian launch vehicle runs into trouble in its first flight. The country's very first attempt to launch a satellite failed in August 1979 when the SLV-3 rocket went out of control and ended up in the Bay of Bengal. A year later, those problems were sorted out and the rocket put a 35-kg Rohini satellite into orbit. The Indian Space Research Organisation had to cope with two successive failures with the Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle (ASLV) before its third flight in 1992 went smoothly. In 1993, a series of technical shortcomings coalesced and the first flight of the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) ended in failure. Those issues were swiftly resolved and the PSLV has become known for its ability to carry out a wide range of missions with rugged reliability. The first launch of the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) nine years ago, using a Russian-made cryogenic upper stage, was, to some extent, the exception. Although the GSAT-1 satellite was put into orbit, a small under-performance of the cryogenic stage meant that it was not the planned orbit. Attempts to move the satellite using its own thrusters were not successful and the satellite was ultimately abandoned.
Despite such a history, the failure of Thursday's GSLV launch with the country's first indigenous cryogenic engine and stage came as a bolt from the blue. The engine and later the full stage have gone through extensive testing on the ground in the course of their development. Moreover, the actual engine that flew on the GSLV was test-fired on the ground for 200 seconds. Exhaustive reviews by experts of the cryogenic stage and the rocket were completed before the GSLV was cleared for launch. After the unsuccessful flight, the ISRO chairman, K. Radhakrishnan, initially suggested that two small cryogenic steering engines, which swivel to maintain the rocket's orientation, might have malfunctioned. Later, however, he indicated that the main cryogenic engine itself might not have ignited. In such a complex system as the cryogenic stage, even a small defect that escapes attention is sufficient to doom the flight. But the space agency would be unwise to confine its analysis to problems encountered with the indigenous cryogenic stage. This is an opportunity for a thorough examination of the entire GSLV rocket and its past five flights. There have, for instance, been problems with the Vikas liquid-propellant engine in previous flights. The procedures for the manufacture, assembly, and pre-flight testing of all liquid propellant engines and stages need particular attention. A comprehensive review would best ensure the future reliability of the GSLV.
White Dove
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 0
While deleting other post mods go blind on some ppl ....such hypocrites 
Similar threads
