India has launched a miniature space shuttle called the Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV-TD). The purpose of the launch was to collect data about hypersonic flight and autonomous landing. The 1.75-ton model craft cost just $14 million to build:
India has launched an unmanned model space shuttle, joining the race to develop reusable spacecraft. The 7m-scale model took off from Andhra Pradesh and was expected to fly about 70km (43 miles) into the atmosphere before coming down at sea. Since Nasa stopped its Space Shuttle programme in 2011, there has been strong international competition to design alternative reusable spacecraft. Such vehicles could significantly cut the cost of space exploration.
India has been putting substantial research and resources into its space programme. A Mars orbiter launched in 2013 is its most high-profile space venture to date. It hopes to launch a full-scale reusable shuttle within a decade.
At The Space Review:
The experience and knowledge gained by the SRE-1 and CARE missions will be used for the human spaceflight program. While the RLV-TD flight has nothing to do with human missions, the experiment has great utility and hence the landing tests would add to competencies of ISRO. Nonetheless, the landing experiments (LEX) phase is yet to follow. Quite clearly, what is planned for May is but the first small step in a series of tests. One needs to be cognizant of the challenges inherent in the endeavor before prematurely raising expectations to the same levels as the American Space Shuttle.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by driverless on Wednesday May 25 2016, @02:19AM
The 1.75-ton model craft cost just $14 million to build
If NASA did it, it would cost $2.1 billion, be cancelled and resurrected in a different form five times, and arrive 20 years late.
(Score: 2) by Some call me Tim on Wednesday May 25 2016, @03:33AM
I know what you mean. The X-37 is about 5.5 tons and cost about $685 million, so about $15.5 million per ton. The RLV-TD comes in at about $8 million per ton. I wonder how they compare capability wise?
Cost estimate from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37 [wikipedia.org]
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 25 2016, @08:46AM
Math fail.
(Score: 2) by Some call me Tim on Wednesday May 25 2016, @02:54PM
Yes it most certainly is lol, Not sure how I did that, I must have been thinking of 42 or something ;-)
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday May 25 2016, @09:58AM
Someone already pointed out the math problem (its 124 not 15) but still I think the costs cannot be measured per ton, as building a small vehicle is many times easier than building and successfully launching a larger one. I would guess the costs to rise exponentially, actually, as a larger vehicle will need finer, more precise control as well as a lot more propellant.
(Score: 3, Informative) by gman003 on Wednesday May 25 2016, @01:52PM
The X-37 is also a fully-functional orbital spacecraft, while the RLV-TD is basically a wind-tunnel test article that went on one suborbital flight to test aerodynamics. A better comparison as a test article would be the IRVE-3 launch from 2012 - launching a test heat shield up to 450km and a 2600m/s reentry speed. That launch cost $17M, including the launch rocket. The mass of the payload was about a tenth the RLV-TD but it flew to almost ten times the altitude and velocity, so it effectively cancels out the differences in dV requirement.
(Also, the $685M figure is incorrect according to your source - you counted some of the money twice. "Over a four-year period, a total of $192 million was contributed to the project, with NASA contributing $109 million, the U.S. Air Force $16 million, and Boeing $67 million. In late 2002, a new $301-million contract was awarded to Boeing" - you added up all of the numbers to get $685M, when it should have just been $192M+$301M=$493M. In any case that number can only cover NASA's part in the project, and includes none of the DoD's expenses; nor did it account for the multiple flights of the X-37B).
(Score: 4, Insightful) by b0ru on Wednesday May 25 2016, @10:31AM
I'm delighted to see other nations' involvement in space exploration. India seem to be able to deliver on projects for a fraction of budget of other state level space agencies;
NASA's Maven [wikipedia.org]: 670M USD
NASA's MRO [wikipedia.org]: 720M USD
India's MOM [wikipedia.org]: 74M USD
Of course, it's easy to poke fun at NASA. I'm not sure how many other space agencies would've undertaken the JWST project, albeit far over budget and time scale. It's a remarkable instrument.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by richtopia on Wednesday May 25 2016, @01:50PM
India is my favourite of the Asian Space Race participants. They have made some serious achievements and play nicer with the rest of the world than the Chinese.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Asian_national_space_programs [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday May 25 2016, @05:54PM
> Of course, it's easy to poke fun at NASA.
Especially sad when most of NASA's problems come from that domed building in DC, and a fair portion from the house down the street.
> I'm not sure how many other space agencies would've undertaken the JWST project, albeit far over budget and time scale. It's a remarkable instrument.
It is, but it has accumulated more delays than its projected lifespan. I'm not sure whether it was technically feasible, but putting a non-infrared camera in it to keep it going after the cooling wears off would have made it a true Hubble successor.
(Score: 2) by b0ru on Friday May 27 2016, @07:18AM
I'm not sure whether it was technically feasible, but putting a non-infrared camera in it to keep it going after the cooling wears off would have made it a true Hubble successor.
Yes, indeed. The timing of the Herschel mission ending (running out of Helium coolant) was well into the project, so it was a bit late for them to learn that lesson the hard way. Whilst the mirrors were primed to provide peak reflectance for NIR and IR, I think a visual spectrum instrument with narrowband filters (HST-lite, as it were), would have been a great idea. The JWST is fairly massive, however, and it may have been a weight requirement which precluded it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 25 2016, @10:40PM
That's EXACTLY what the shuttle did, didn't it? The proposed "space bus" was going to make it SO cheap to get to space.
What did it end up at, $1B per launch I believe?