Article

2006-07-10 India-Pakistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2006-07-10 11:37|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The Russkies were never known for their cryogenic wizardry. Witness their moon shot attempt. IIRC, two of them blew up on the pad.

Posted by 11A5S 2006-07-10 12:17|| 2006-07-10 12:17|| Front Page Top

#2 veered off course and disintegrated about 30 seconds later

I don't think it was the cryo-controls. Sounds like either a structural problem at max-Q, a guidence failure, or some form of gimbal/engine failure. Between this and the Agni test, it sounds like ISRO is still on the expensive end of the learning curve. Ouch.

Posted by N guard 2006-07-10 12:29|| 2006-07-10 12:29|| Front Page Top

#3 Definitely a bad week for them.

Posted by Crolunter Phique5007 2006-07-10 12:53|| 2006-07-10 12:53|| Front Page Top

#4 Overloaded the structure trying to pack in another 8000 lbs of payload, I betcha.

Posted by mojo">mojo 2006-07-10 13:06|| 2006-07-10 13:06|| Front Page Top

#5 Fault was not with the Russian supplied cryo stage, it was with one of the liquid strapon boosters. The vehicle was destroyed by master control.

"Nair said it appeared from preliminary data that the pressure had dropped to zero in one of the four strap-on motors and it failed to give the required thrust to the GSLV.
Following this, the vehicle deviated to about 10 degrees, leading to the mission control giving the 'destruct command

Posted by john 2006-07-10 13:56|| 2006-07-10 13:56|| Front Page Top

Posted by john 2006-07-10 13:57|| 2006-07-10 13:57|| Front Page Top

#7 Is that fuel igniting on the side of the vehicle?

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:05|| 2006-07-10 14:05|| Front Page Top

#8 Could be part of the auxiliary booster airframe igniting.

Posted by 6 2006-07-10 14:13|| 2006-07-10 14:13|| Front Page Top

#9 The DRDO built the Agni-3 while the ISRO built the GSLV-1.

DRDO is certainly less capable - the problem with the missile yesterday seems to have occured far too early to be a stage separation problem. It is likely a Max-Q design fault. They used a very high trajectory to enable the 5000 km range missile to land 2000 km downrange.

ISRO went through this part of the learning curve about a decade ago. The problem may be with the contractor that supplied portions of the strapon booster.

There may very well have been a fuel leak from the strapon.
The very first GSLV launch had a booster failure but the onboard computers shut down the liquid straons before the solid main stage ignited. ISRO defuelled the booster, replaced it and launched a week later. That launch had problems with the Russian cryo stage thrust and the satellite was abandoned.

India has 3 more Russian engines in storage IIRC.
Either the next GSLV launch or the one after that will use an Indian cryo stage instead.

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:14|| 2006-07-10 14:14|| Front Page Top

#10 Could be part of the auxiliary booster airframe igniting.

I suspect the loss of pressure was due to fuel venting at the side of the strapon booster (UDMH+N2O4).

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:17|| 2006-07-10 14:17|| Front Page Top

#11 photos showing assembly of the stages of the vehicle and satellite destroyed today.

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:25|| 2006-07-10 14:25|| Front Page Top

#12 Speaking as a purely hypothetical, I wonder if we might have invented some gizmo that invisibly makes rockets not work, from a considerable distance, and from very high altitude, or even space?

Just saying.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-07-10 14:27|| 2006-07-10 14:27|| Front Page Top

#13 photo of one of the strapon engines

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:34|| 2006-07-10 14:34|| Front Page Top

#14 So they were using UDMH too?

More food for thought.

Posted by Phil 2006-07-10 14:35|| 2006-07-10 14:35|| Front Page Top

#15 That or a seal breach 'moose.

Posted by 6 2006-07-10 14:39|| 2006-07-10 14:39|| Front Page Top

#16 That UDMH+N2O2 liquid engine is an Indian version of the French Viking engine, used on the Arianne vehicle.

The French needed a lot of aerospace engineers to work on the Viking design and India had them in surplus. The French got their engine and the Indians got the design.

The Russian SS-18 used the same UDMH/N2O2 combo.

North Korea used UDMH + IRFNA (inhibited red fuming nitric acid).

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:41|| 2006-07-10 14:41|| Front Page Top

#17 6 is probably right about the seal breach.
Would explain a lot.

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:42|| 2006-07-10 14:42|| Front Page Top

#18 That should be N2O4

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:43|| 2006-07-10 14:43|| Front Page Top

#19 The GSLV is a mongrel interim vehicle, put together using uprated engines from the smaller PSLV. ISRO needed a heavier vehicle and used the componants they had.

Its performaance is degraded because the solid first stage (125 tons HTPB+AP+Al) burns for 100 seconds while the four 40 ton UDMH+N2O4 liquid strapons burn for 160 seconds.

This means the expended first stage must be carried as dead weight until the strapons have been expended. Only then can the stage be jettisoned and the 80 ton UDMH+N2O4 second stage (which burns for 150 seconds) be ignited.

The 12 ton LOX/LH2 cryo third stage burns for 720 seconds.

The GSLV-3 will be a new vehicle - two 200 ton solid (HTPB+AP+Al) first stage boosters attached to either side of the second stage (110 tons UDMH+N204) with a 25 ton LOX/LH2 cryo third stage.

Posted by john 2006-07-10 14:55|| 2006-07-10 14:55|| Front Page Top

#20 Apparently the fuel used in the liquid engines in this vehicle is not plain UDMH but rather UH25 (a mixture of Unsymmetrical Di-methyl Hydrazine and hydrazine hydrate) - gives improved thrust

Posted by john 2006-07-10 15:00|| 2006-07-10 15:00|| Front Page Top

#21 Looks like there was a glitch in the Russian engine - didn't affect launch though

However, Nair denied any link between the glitch which delayed the launch and the problem which doomed the mission. The delay was due to a "minor" problem of ground servicing, he said.

One of the pumps with the cryogenic fluid had opened and failed to re-seal. A team had to be sent to close it and ensure that all parameters were normal before the lift-off.

Nair said the lift-off was normal, but in a few seconds the vehicle was found to be off trajectory and in 60 seconds, some parts had broken up.

Immediately, the 'destruct command' was given to ensure the wayward rocket did not fall on a populated area. It crashed into the Bay of Bengal.

However, the rocket blew up becuase, according to Nair, one of the four strap-on engines had failed. While the other three developed normal velocity, the pressure in the affected motor dropped to zero.

At this stage, the vehicle was out of control. Normally a deviation of up to 4° is allowed. But in this case, it had deviated by 10°.

Posted by john 2006-07-10 15:14|| 2006-07-10 15:14|| Front Page Top

#22 John, my email is on my web page (which you can find by clicking on the "website" link here) on the left side of the page about halfway down.

(There's only one post up atm, but I've been kinda busy).

Anyway, could you drop me a line?

Posted by Phil 2006-07-10 15:42|| http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com]">[http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2006-07-10 15:42|| Front Page Top

#23

Posted by john 2006-07-10 17:11|| 2006-07-10 17:11|| Front Page Top

#24

Posted by john 2006-07-10 19:32|| 2006-07-10 19:32|| Front Page Top

00:00 bigjim-ky
23:59 Wheang Spavirong9833
23:52 SR-71
23:49 RD
23:48 Frank G
23:41 Mike
23:38 Wheang Spavirong9833
23:28 bombay
23:27 twobyfour
23:23 Wheang Spavirong9833
23:18 muck4doo
23:17 DanNY
23:12 bigjim-ky
23:11 Old Patriot
23:04 Monsieur Moonbat
23:03 Zhang Fei
23:03 Wheang Spavirong9833
22:51 Frank G
22:42 Oldspook
22:38 xbalanke
22:38 Wheang Spavirong9833
22:36 Frank G
22:33 Oldspook
22:19 Wheang Spavirong9833