12-11-2010, 11:48 PM
[quote name='Arun_S' date='11 December 2010 - 11:16 AM' timestamp='1292087333' post='109791']
Given that the upper stage is 1 m dia, it would also contain lesser fuel (compared to my estimate of 5 years ago), per unit length. Once we know teh actual length of teh stage, I can estimate the fuel inside and using ROCKSIM tell its range versus payload.
Incidentally at least 2 countries (space / missile orgs) have checked ROCKSIM and have found its results compares closely with their inhouse full fledged missile flight simulation software application. As my friend tells me, dont know what magic voodoo logic is in the ROCKSIM, but it always gives the correct result.
[/quote]
Arunji,
1. When you say A-IIP S/S has higher energy fuel, do you mean higher energy than HTPB/AP/Al combo used by ISRO for PS-3 stage on PSLV ? Also, the A-IIP S/S is made of FRP rather than carbon-fibre. What is used in A-III F/S and A-V T/S ? Would it be FRP or kevlar/carbon fibre ?
2. how long is the current setback likely to delay A-IIP and A-V ? Does it affect A-V ?
3. A-III should probably be pushed for now. The sooner operational trials take place, the better.
4. Hope the current A-IIP failure is not due to QC. That would be more worrying than a (minor) design flaw like in A-III test 1. This failure is more severe going by news reports. I guess each new missile is an altogether new animal in some sense.
5. Regarding canisterization, wont the high L/D affect prospects of canisterization ? Even for Brahmos and Shourya, L/D < 14 as far as I can see. Here, it seems to be higher...
Given that the upper stage is 1 m dia, it would also contain lesser fuel (compared to my estimate of 5 years ago), per unit length. Once we know teh actual length of teh stage, I can estimate the fuel inside and using ROCKSIM tell its range versus payload.
Incidentally at least 2 countries (space / missile orgs) have checked ROCKSIM and have found its results compares closely with their inhouse full fledged missile flight simulation software application. As my friend tells me, dont know what magic voodoo logic is in the ROCKSIM, but it always gives the correct result.
[/quote]
Arunji,
1. When you say A-IIP S/S has higher energy fuel, do you mean higher energy than HTPB/AP/Al combo used by ISRO for PS-3 stage on PSLV ? Also, the A-IIP S/S is made of FRP rather than carbon-fibre. What is used in A-III F/S and A-V T/S ? Would it be FRP or kevlar/carbon fibre ?
2. how long is the current setback likely to delay A-IIP and A-V ? Does it affect A-V ?
3. A-III should probably be pushed for now. The sooner operational trials take place, the better.
4. Hope the current A-IIP failure is not due to QC. That would be more worrying than a (minor) design flaw like in A-III test 1. This failure is more severe going by news reports. I guess each new missile is an altogether new animal in some sense.
5. Regarding canisterization, wont the high L/D affect prospects of canisterization ? Even for Brahmos and Shourya, L/D < 14 as far as I can see. Here, it seems to be higher...