Talk:Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle

}}

Very Indian

Can someone shed some light on how much of the PSLV was developed, manufactured and designed in India?

I suggest reading 'From Fishing Hamlet to Red Planet' for detailed information on the development of the PSLV. Heman.phinehas (talk) 18:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Here's accessible link to its EPUB on ISRO website.  Ohsin  13:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

PSLV development

That APJ Abdul Kalam was behind the development of PSLV configuration is supported by numerous reliable sources. This statement shouldn't be removed unless it is contradicted by a reliable source.--150.107.10.178 (talk) 15:19, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

A design matures iteratively weighing trade-offs, building upon previous, constantly evolving and eventually settling into something that gets funding. The fact that APJ's team was behind the configuration that was eventually selected and funded hasn't been contradicted just given a proper context through reliable sources and placed into suitable section. On approved initial configuration not meeting IRS requirements I am adding a quote. Terminal liquid stage was first such stage developed wholly in India and is the reason why PSLV today has so much flexibility, so that change was significant.  Ohsin  17:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

You omitted several important points. You didn't mention that out of all proposed models, two were put up for discussion among the experts and the model proposed by Kalam was chosen. The configuration underwent several improvements and changes but it was not replaced by a new configuration.--150.107.10.98 (talk) 07:40, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

It may be a cultural thing, but after many years editing spacecraft-related articles in Wikipedia, it is evident that there is some vanity in the Indian articles, where editors often remark and exalt the intelligence or contributions of particular scientists or engineers. Aerospace is clearly a group effort that builds upon past developments, so I strongly suggest to focus on the physical hardware, and less on who's idea stuck best. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Agreed and good works recording Indian spaceflight make it a point to not get into that individual worshiping trap. This common tendency to forcefully create a historic narrative ending with a Tony Stark-ish eureka moment comes mainly from Indian media, these articles end up as drop in 'citations' with text copy pasted to create patched up articles ignoring neutral POV. Seen many good contributors give up and move away from editing due to this.  Ohsin  22:00, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@150.107.10.98: Again proposal was by his team and configuration significantly changed with new stage, there were other changes too that I also chose to omit. Looking at whole development cycle, how many proposals were there in final discussion is trivial and only important turn around events need to be mentioned. Final configuration can in no way be attributed to a single person and biases due to such selective mention in popular media need to be checked, needless to say self attributive sources as well, where a person is concerned only with highlighting him/herself.  Ohsin  22:00, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Dr Kalam's team was wholly behind the initial configuration. The book From Fishing Hamlet to Red Planet says in Pg 173 that a group headed by S Srinivasan starting studying configurations to put 600 kg to SSO and that this evolved into the PSLV. This is also mentioned by Nambi Narayan in his autobiography 'Ready to Fire' where Dr Kalam did not support having liquid propulsion in the PSLV rocket. The page 207-208 in his book talks about how Srinivasan and Brahm Prakash finally decided to include Vikas engine in the PSLV. So in conclusion, it was not entirely Dr Kalam's configuration or by a team under him but a contribution of many experts that led to the generic configuration that finally flew. --Heman.phinehas (talk) 15:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

@Heman.phinehas: If you can make appropriate edits, adding those books as citations it would make it bit more balanced.  Ohsin  14:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

New Section : Launch Profile

I was planning to make a section in the article for the launch profile of PSLV variants. Specifically the PSLV XL. I wanted to ask, whether it is appropriate to write the profile of one of the Cartosat launches as the "Launch Profile" of PSLV. Extorc (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Would be good idea if it is typical flight profile and not very specific as details vary depending on mission.-- Ohsin  13:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ohsin: I have added the section. Please have a look at it, I have tried to keep the timestamps rounded. Extorc (talk) 21:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

References

ISRO - own access to SSO

The Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) is an expendable medium-lift launch vehicle designed and operated by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO). It was developed to allow India to launch its Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellites into sun-synchronous orbits, a service that was, until the advent of the PSLV in 1993, only commercially available from Russia. PSLV can also launch small size satellites into Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO).[11] 112.79.72.250 (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

No orbit for payload tag seems no longer applicable - removed

Payloads are specified for 3 different orbits : LEO- SSO sub-GTO and GTO, so can this tag be removed ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rod57 I agree. It's no longer applicable. Dhruv edits (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Y ok - it's gone. - Rod57 (talk) 09:59, 30 April 2023 (UTC)