You might all know about what im talking about here, but ill go over the story from the start anyway. Launch vehicles, aka rockets, of course operate in stages, which are ejected one after another, allowing the next stage of the rocket to fire. This is opposed to ballistic missiles which try to minimise many of the features that launch vehicles have in the interest of speed of launch and survianility.
Broadly speaking, there are four types of engine technology that can power the stage of a rocket. The most primative is solid-propellants that are ignited just like a firework, but it is worth noting that this technology is used on rockets even today, not least of which the powerfull Space Shuttle boosters in the USA. The next type of engine, used since the first German rockets like the V2, is liquid engine technology, using some kind of liquid propellant that can burn for longer, be shut on or off once started, and which takes up less weight. Then comes semi-cryogenic technology, where one of the propellants is strored at low temperatures, usually liquid oxygen, and thus more efficient propulsion can be achieved - this is used on stuff like the Saturn V itself. Finally, for all intents and purposes, the most efficient rocket motor consists of cryogenic engines, where all propellants are stored at very low temperatures, as on the Ariane.
The Russians are still to this day the undisputed champions of liquid rocket motor design, having perfected huge leaps in technology as early as the 50s with their clustered engines on the legendary Soyuz seen above. Although some motors are more efficient than others, this, as seen by the different launch vehicles using different motors, does not neccecarily determine the motor that will be used - some might be more cost effective, or easier to produce, or more efficient at certain stages of launch.
India is pretty efficient in the design of solid-fuel motors, having used them since day one on every launch vehicle - from primative sounding rockets, to the modern solid stage motors on the latest vehicles - the SLV and ASLV (seen above) were entirely solid-stage infact. For liquid engine technology, India purchased the Viking engine from the French at a time when the French were truely our greatest friends in space - India could have developed the ability itself to a decent degree, but instead managed to clench a great deal for the Viking motor - renamed Vikas when produced in India - it was used on the PSLV, launched in 1993. When it came to develop the GSLV-I, semi-cryogenic and cryogenic engines were considered for the craft.
All throughout India's space program, right back to the 70s, development of proper launch vehicles (as opposed to sounding rockets), was marred by the possibility that the USA would impose sanctions in an effort to cripple the Indian space program, which of course had the capability of providing technology to the ballistic missile program. Thus the ISRO from day one always attempted to indiginise technology, and production facilities to the extent that other countries didnt really have to - and did a damn good job at it. This proved to be a good call, as soon the USA was refusing to even provide catalogues of space-related parts such as gyroscopes, let alone sell anything. But when it came to acquiring the technology for the cyrogenic stage of the GSLV, the ISRO's usual foresight went down the drain. Some people estimated that a cryogenic engine would take 15 years to develop, based on other countries experience (China did in the 8 years), and on the basis of this, the ISRO chiefs, lulled by the amazing Viking deal, wanted to simply purchase the technology, and thus cut development to 6 years. In the meantime, home-development of indiginous cryogenic engines, which had already begun, was cut back and put on hold.
First India approached the French, old partners. In the past, they had actually offered to sell the cryogenic engine of the Ariane for just 1 crore Rs, just when the Viking contract was ending - but now that the Ariane's problems had been overcome, they did not want another competator in the launch buisness, and offered the same engine for 1000 crore Rs. So India went to the friendly Soviet Union to purchase their cryogenic technology for 264 crore. This is where things started going wrong. First, the USA amended its laws around this time, so that breaches of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), would have to be met with sanctions, by law. So the ISRO should have recognised that despite the fact cryogenic technology isnt used on a single ballistic missile because it is impractical, the USA would now impose sanctions on any deal - this wouldnt have mattered if the Soviet Union was still at its fullest strength. Then to compound the trouble - the Soviet union broke up, and the new Rosaviakosmos was doomed to cancel the deal, when faced with the choice of supplying a $150mn deal to India and getting sanctioned, or being welcomed into the global capitalist sattelite business.
And then, using the power of the fact that they are our biggest weapon suppliers, the Russians bribed Indian political babus into simply modifying the deal for the same price, instead of cancelling it, so that it would no longer gain sanction - thus for the same amount of Rs 264 crore, Russia would now only supply a couple of engines, and not the knolwedge of how to build them as well. Additionally, the sum would now have to be payed at dollar exchange rates, instead of the old Ruble-Rupee Indo-Soviet trade, effectively adding Rs 200 crore to the deal.
In all this time, the ISRO had squandered the oppertunity to be developing indiginous capability as they would have in the past, and thus the entire space program has probably been held back by a number of years because of this. As far as I am aware, the GSLV-II which would have an indiginous cryogenic engine, still hasnt been launched, 4 years after it was pridicted, due to the lack of developing an indigious one. ISRo let it slip - perhaps India could have been 5 years closer to the Chinese stage of launcher devleopment (they are 10 years ahead if payload capacity is any judge) if this fiasco hadnt occurred. Also, just goes to show just how much the Americans needlessly screwed about with India:
1). Cryogenic engines are too slow to fuel missiles
2). They require storage of sub-zero chemicals, etc
3). India has missile capabilities anyway
4). It was for the space progam, something which the MTCR allegedly dosent interfear with
Its also a real pity that we didnt grasp the 1 crore engine deal from the French - we would have had the technology very early, and been able to co-develop it with the French in the same way as the Viking, learning it every step of the way. If we had pushed indigionous development from day one, we would have had a GSLV by the late 90s, and the GSLV-III might even be complete - instead the launch market for GSLV-I weight sattelites is drying up, and the GSLV-III will be coming late. Our tallest rocket, and most advanced currently flying, is a failiure. Not of technology, but of management.
Broadly speaking, there are four types of engine technology that can power the stage of a rocket. The most primative is solid-propellants that are ignited just like a firework, but it is worth noting that this technology is used on rockets even today, not least of which the powerfull Space Shuttle boosters in the USA. The next type of engine, used since the first German rockets like the V2, is liquid engine technology, using some kind of liquid propellant that can burn for longer, be shut on or off once started, and which takes up less weight. Then comes semi-cryogenic technology, where one of the propellants is strored at low temperatures, usually liquid oxygen, and thus more efficient propulsion can be achieved - this is used on stuff like the Saturn V itself. Finally, for all intents and purposes, the most efficient rocket motor consists of cryogenic engines, where all propellants are stored at very low temperatures, as on the Ariane.
The Russians are still to this day the undisputed champions of liquid rocket motor design, having perfected huge leaps in technology as early as the 50s with their clustered engines on the legendary Soyuz seen above. Although some motors are more efficient than others, this, as seen by the different launch vehicles using different motors, does not neccecarily determine the motor that will be used - some might be more cost effective, or easier to produce, or more efficient at certain stages of launch.
India is pretty efficient in the design of solid-fuel motors, having used them since day one on every launch vehicle - from primative sounding rockets, to the modern solid stage motors on the latest vehicles - the SLV and ASLV (seen above) were entirely solid-stage infact. For liquid engine technology, India purchased the Viking engine from the French at a time when the French were truely our greatest friends in space - India could have developed the ability itself to a decent degree, but instead managed to clench a great deal for the Viking motor - renamed Vikas when produced in India - it was used on the PSLV, launched in 1993. When it came to develop the GSLV-I, semi-cryogenic and cryogenic engines were considered for the craft.
All throughout India's space program, right back to the 70s, development of proper launch vehicles (as opposed to sounding rockets), was marred by the possibility that the USA would impose sanctions in an effort to cripple the Indian space program, which of course had the capability of providing technology to the ballistic missile program. Thus the ISRO from day one always attempted to indiginise technology, and production facilities to the extent that other countries didnt really have to - and did a damn good job at it. This proved to be a good call, as soon the USA was refusing to even provide catalogues of space-related parts such as gyroscopes, let alone sell anything. But when it came to acquiring the technology for the cyrogenic stage of the GSLV, the ISRO's usual foresight went down the drain. Some people estimated that a cryogenic engine would take 15 years to develop, based on other countries experience (China did in the 8 years), and on the basis of this, the ISRO chiefs, lulled by the amazing Viking deal, wanted to simply purchase the technology, and thus cut development to 6 years. In the meantime, home-development of indiginous cryogenic engines, which had already begun, was cut back and put on hold.
First India approached the French, old partners. In the past, they had actually offered to sell the cryogenic engine of the Ariane for just 1 crore Rs, just when the Viking contract was ending - but now that the Ariane's problems had been overcome, they did not want another competator in the launch buisness, and offered the same engine for 1000 crore Rs. So India went to the friendly Soviet Union to purchase their cryogenic technology for 264 crore. This is where things started going wrong. First, the USA amended its laws around this time, so that breaches of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), would have to be met with sanctions, by law. So the ISRO should have recognised that despite the fact cryogenic technology isnt used on a single ballistic missile because it is impractical, the USA would now impose sanctions on any deal - this wouldnt have mattered if the Soviet Union was still at its fullest strength. Then to compound the trouble - the Soviet union broke up, and the new Rosaviakosmos was doomed to cancel the deal, when faced with the choice of supplying a $150mn deal to India and getting sanctioned, or being welcomed into the global capitalist sattelite business.
And then, using the power of the fact that they are our biggest weapon suppliers, the Russians bribed Indian political babus into simply modifying the deal for the same price, instead of cancelling it, so that it would no longer gain sanction - thus for the same amount of Rs 264 crore, Russia would now only supply a couple of engines, and not the knolwedge of how to build them as well. Additionally, the sum would now have to be payed at dollar exchange rates, instead of the old Ruble-Rupee Indo-Soviet trade, effectively adding Rs 200 crore to the deal.
In all this time, the ISRO had squandered the oppertunity to be developing indiginous capability as they would have in the past, and thus the entire space program has probably been held back by a number of years because of this. As far as I am aware, the GSLV-II which would have an indiginous cryogenic engine, still hasnt been launched, 4 years after it was pridicted, due to the lack of developing an indigious one. ISRo let it slip - perhaps India could have been 5 years closer to the Chinese stage of launcher devleopment (they are 10 years ahead if payload capacity is any judge) if this fiasco hadnt occurred. Also, just goes to show just how much the Americans needlessly screwed about with India:
1). Cryogenic engines are too slow to fuel missiles
2). They require storage of sub-zero chemicals, etc
3). India has missile capabilities anyway
4). It was for the space progam, something which the MTCR allegedly dosent interfear with
Its also a real pity that we didnt grasp the 1 crore engine deal from the French - we would have had the technology very early, and been able to co-develop it with the French in the same way as the Viking, learning it every step of the way. If we had pushed indigionous development from day one, we would have had a GSLV by the late 90s, and the GSLV-III might even be complete - instead the launch market for GSLV-I weight sattelites is drying up, and the GSLV-III will be coming late. Our tallest rocket, and most advanced currently flying, is a failiure. Not of technology, but of management.
