PSLV-C20 launches 7 satellites

[MST]

Not even close. Atmospheric re-entry of warheads is the main issue concerning MIRVed ICBMs.

Sir your statement is not entirely correct. Here is an except from a book that shows how multiple satellite launches and MIRV are related. You can read the full text and the book here

Infact launching SLV with multiple payload seems to be the first step towards achieving MIRV.


Part of your statement is correct rearding Re-entry of ICBM payload. But the technolgoy for the same is already tested with the Agni V.

 

[MST]

Its a preposterous and an outrageous proposition. It can even be called stupid! Even the superpowers in their heyday did not put weapons in space (except for a Almaz satellite carrying a cannon and handguns carried by Soviet/Russian cosmonauts as part of their standard equipment.) Weaponization of space is out of bounds! Two treaties prevent militarization of space.

So No. No weapons of any kind in Space.

Militarization of space is a reality with US and China both Demonstrating/Testing ASAT capabilities and many others in pipeline including India. This will only increase. As of today not having weapons in space is just semantics. I won't be surprised if someone in near future puts a Anti- ASAT capability up in spcae in the name of protecting their space assets.

 

[arp2041]

Looks like you are right. Foreign Satellites are not counted. So this is counted as 2 missions. This is so confusing. Even Indian can get it wrong.

Dear Prof. Nan Yang,

Good To See you Sir

First, I hope you understand that PSLV was atleast an Indian rocket so counted as 1 mission.

Second, SARAL is as much an Indian satellite as it is French (since it is made by a JV b/w the two). SARAL is an ISRO built satellite with Payloads ARGOS & ALTIKA supplied by the France (thus the name Satellite with ARgos & ALtika - SARAL). Just like Chandrayaan was an Indian satellite/orbiter with NASA supplied Payloads. Thus, ISRO is counting it as TWO MISSIONS.

Thank You.

 

[Screambowl]

 

[suren]

Is there any separate thread for GSLV?

 

[illusion8]

Militarization of space is a reality with US and China both Demonstrating/Testing ASAT capabilities and many others in pipeline including India. This will only increase. As of today not having weapons in space is just semantics. I won't be surprised if someone in near future puts a Anti- ASAT capability up in spcae in the name of protecting their space assets.

There are possible plans to store nukes in space - I don't know how feasible is that, but there's thinking on those lines.

Some countries may deploy nukes in space on pretext of countering asteroid threat - Deputy PM Rogozin | Russia Beyond The Headlines

 

[gubbi]

Militarization of space is a reality with US and China both Demonstrating/Testing ASAT capabilities and many others in pipeline including India. This will only increase. As of today not having weapons in space is just semantics. I won't be surprised if someone in near future puts a Anti- ASAT capability up in spcae in the name of protecting their space assets.

Testing/demonstrating ASAT tech is one thing, stationing weapons in space is another! You seem to be getting the two mixed up. There is no way countries are going to station weapons in space without opening the proverbial "can of worms". It is NOT "just semantics". If such a thing ever happens, there would be a mad rush by various countries to do so, thereby endangering the very purpose of exploration of space.
As for putting up ASAT capabilities in space, The Soviet Union once tried to station a satellite capable of firing CO2 based lasers at enemy satellites. Fortunately at the last minute, Gorbachev issued explicit orders NOT to test the weapon. Also, due to technical error, the satellite could not make it to orbit and burned up in the atmosphere.
So again, NO. "Just semantics" not withstanding, there will be no weaponization of space. All this talk of stationing nuclear weapons as a defense against asteroids is simply malarkey.

 

[gubbi]

Sir your statement is not entirely correct. Here is an except from a book that shows how multiple satellite launches and MIRV are related.

Infact launching SLV with multiple payload seems to be the first step towards achieving MIRV.

You are trying to compare oranges with apples here. If you mean to say that ability to deliver payload by ICBMs and Space launch vehicles is the same, then I am sorry it is NOT entirely true. You might as well compare the ability to cram thousands upon of thousands of pounds in train cars or trucks! Like I said previously, the reentry of warheads is the most important piece of technology that is critical to a MIRVed ICMB's success. Also, each warhead has to have as small a CEP as possible.
It wouldnt matter if the satellite is placed a few meters or even a kilometer from its intended orbit. That misplacement can always be compensated by increasing or decreasing the satellites' orbiting speed.

 

[MST]

You are trying to compare oranges with apples here. If you mean to say that ability to deliver payload by ICBMs and Space launch vehicles is the same, then I am sorry it is NOT entirely true. You might as well compare the ability to cram thousands upon of thousands of pounds in train cars or trucks! Like I said previously, the reentry of warheads is the most important piece of technology that is critical to a MIRVed ICMB's success. Also, each warhead has to have as small a CEP as possible.
It wouldnt matter if the satellite is placed a few meters or even a kilometer from its intended orbit. That misplacement can always be compensated by increasing or decreasing the satellites' orbiting speed.

I didn't say that. I am only taking about release of payload. Please read my post again.

As I already mentioned before I am not arguing the importance of Re entry in MIRV. But it is one aspect of MIRV along with Release of independent payloads. This part is not very different from release of Multiple payloads on a SLV. Please go through the text/image in my previous post to see how for example in case of China MIRV is preceded by Release of multiple payloads by its SLV. This is the first step that needs to be crossed before you can even start thinking about Re-entry.

Few questions so that i can understand your point better.
Are you saying that successful release of payloads in the right orbit is no achievement at all and has no relevance to MIRV?
Also are you saying that India has still has to learn about re-entry of payload w.r.t. an ICBM. I thought we did test Agni V. Are you saying that we haven't tested re entry of payload in that test? Also Can you tell me how is terminal guidance and re entry of one ICBM payload different from that of lets say 5 payloads?

 

[MST]

Testing/demonstrating ASAT tech is one thing, stationing weapons in space is another! You seem to be getting the two mixed up. There is no way countries are going to station weapons in space without opening the proverbial "can of worms". It is NOT "just semantics". If such a thing ever happens, there would be a mad rush by various countries to do so, thereby endangering the very purpose of exploration of space.
As for putting up ASAT capabilities in space, The Soviet Union once tried to station a satellite capable of firing CO2 based lasers at enemy satellites. Fortunately at the last minute, Gorbachev issued explicit orders NOT to test the weapon. Also, due to technical error, the satellite could not make it to orbit and burned up in the atmosphere.
So again, NO. "Just semantics" not withstanding, there will be no weaponization of space. All this talk of stationing nuclear weapons as a defense against asteroids is simply malarkey.

The very existence of the capability (through tests) will lead nations to take preventive action. Look at statements coming from DRDO after Chinese tests "We have all the elements of ASAT in place". Isn't this how a race starts? Also Unless there is War no one is going to use the ASAT in real scenario.

The reason China tested ASAT was because space technology is heavily skewed in USAs favor. Its only natural that US will take preventive action. Reminds me of the nuclear race that started between Nazi Germany and US in the 30s and 40s (No I was not there I had only read it up sometime back )

Regarding your points about endangering space exploration etc. these are noble thoughts and I appreciate them. But reality is that we are taking here about a Specie that is ready to nuke the **** of each other within minutes with the press of few buttons. Militarization of space is hardly a deal. We are just not seeing a full fledged race because of technological limitations thats all. Once the hurdle is crossed there is no stopping it. Again just like nukes.

 

[arp2041]

@gubbi, what @MST is saying can't be ignored.

It is of no surprise whatsoever that there is a very thin separation b/w Space Research & Defence Research.

Germany tested V-2 rockets for the purpose of utilizing it in the WW-2 but instead US utilized the building blocks of this very same technology to build it's own Apollo rockets.

US had put ISRO under the sanctions for the very same reason that space related tech. are of Dual Purpose.

I would not be surprised if our IGMDP programme would have benefited from space research conducted by the ISRO. As it is well known that first came the SLV & ASLV than came the Prithvi, Agni, Akash & other missiles.

The only problem is that though we have all the technology but we have to integrate them all together to form a successful MIRVed A-6.

We have tested the multiple Independent vehicles (or payload) launch capability by these sort of tests/launch.

& we have already tested the crucial re-entry by the success of A-5.

Now we have to integrate the two tech to form an A-6.

BTW, @MST, RLV-TD will be launched later this year, this will be milestone in achieving this tech as it will be a TSTO (Two-Stage Two Orbit). Where both stages will be independently re-entry capable as well as reusable (correct me if wrong). This will prove both the capabilities in a single rocket i.e. re-entry + multiple vehicles.

 

[ANPP]

If anyone think that ISRO don't have technology for reentry vehicle, than I will like to say that ISRO already tested it few years ago & test was complete success.
For MIRV tech, all things are set up & we already tested it. I am also waiting for RLV-TV, that will surly change the things & good replacement for PSLV & also low cost.

 

[Nan Yang]

Dear Prof. Nan Yang,

Good To See you Sir

First, I hope you understand that PSLV was atleast an Indian rocket so counted as 1 mission.

Second, SARAL is as much an Indian satellite as it is French (since it is made by a JV b/w the two). SARAL is an ISRO built satellite with Payloads ARGOS & ALTIKA supplied by the France (thus the name Satellite with ARgos & ALtika - SARAL). Just like Chandrayaan was an Indian satellite/orbiter with NASA supplied Payloads. Thus, ISRO is counting it as TWO MISSIONS.

Thank You.

Just making sure what mission means. That is all. Nothing more. Even if celebrating 102 space missions sound a lot better then 37 launches.

So congratulation on ISRO record of 31 successful launch to date.

The very existence of the capability (through tests) will lead nations to take preventive action. Look at statements coming from DRDO after Chinese tests "We have all the elements of ASAT in place". Isn't this how a race starts? Also Unless there is War no one is going to use the ASAT in real scenario.

Does India have a Kinetic Kill Interceptor ?

 

[ANPP]

Just making sure what mission means. That is all. Nothing more. Even if celebrating 102 space missions sound a lot better then 37 launches.

So congratulation on ISRO record of 31 successful launch to date.



Does India have a Kinetic Kill Interceptor ?

so far no, i think. But explosive kill can do the job. And kindly explain kinetic kill so imp for ASW.

 

[ptltejas]

just within a day more than 379 replies........wow.