GSLV D3 failure should not demoralise, but revitalise
The failure of the GSLV D3 launch and more specifically, the failure of the indigenous cryogenic engine is undoubtedly a major setback for the space programme. It must have been heart-breaking for the development team that slogged 17-odd years. But the crash has to be taken in its stride and written off to statistical probability. Just five nations have reliable cryogenic technology. All have research budgets that dwarf ISRO and all went through decades of tests and experimental failures. Cryogenic engines use super-cooled gases (usually liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen) as fuel. As the liquids mix and vapourise in the rocket chamber, they expand explosively, imparting thrust. In theory, it is the most efficient form of rocket propulsion. But while the principles derive from Newtonian mechanics, the technical challenges are staggering. Cooling gases to -190ºC and storing them as liquids until the optimum moment is difficult. Things can go wrong at many stages. ISRO will have to work out what exactly did go wrong. There can be no question about staying committed to the programme. Space capability depends on reliable cryogenic engines and India cannot piggyback indefinitely on Russian cryogenics. ISRO possesses only two Russian engines at this instant and there are no guarantees the Russians will sell any more. GSLV D3 with all payloads costs Rs 330 crore. The engine itself costs around Rs 180 crore. These are drops in the ocean of potential returns. India’s entire space programme spends Rs 5,800 crore per annum, that is around 0.1 per cent of GDP.
The return is already many multiples of expenditure. The potential returns could be much higher. Satellite capability has helped extend the TV-Telecom footprint to remote areas where satellite-based technology costs a fifth of the alternatives. Licensing fees and revenue shares from those services already pay for the entire space programme with plenty to spare. In addition, sat-technology has enabled mapping, remote-sensing and zoning services. Improved road planning, municipal tax collection, safe drinking water and irrigation programmes, as well as better weather and crop forecasting, can be attributed to satellite capability. The potential for use in anti-insurgency exercises also exists. Again, the returns exceed the expenditure by magnitudes. Indigenous cryogenic engines will make India a major player and a possible game-changer in the multi-billion-dollar commercial satellite market. According to estimates published in MIT’s Technology Review, India may eventually be able to put payloads in orbit at costs of $67/kg. The Russians charge $3,500/kg for a commercial payload and NASA charges even more.
If those estimates are near-credible (they are endorsed by at least one NASA adviser and ISRO has some patents on the designs), an Indian presence would change the market dynamics. Hence, there are sound commercial reasons for the “haves” to be reluctant to share technology. Well-vented fears of potential dual-use in the missile programme may just be a convenient excuse. It is true, however, that cryogenic engines are critical to inter-continental ballistic missile (ICBM) design. From South Block’s perspective, whether India develops ICBMs or not, possessing cryogenic capability could scarcely hurt.
Given the multitude of reasons to push on with the cryogenic engine development programme, the political establishment should back it to the hilt despite this setback. Give ISRO the time and resources to return to the drawing board and seek solutions.
