Talk:SCE-200
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Removing content where wikileaks is cited.
[edit]Removing content where wikileaks is cited Wikipedia:External_links/Perennial_websites#Wikileaks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Standardengineer (talk • contribs) 06:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
As per wide consensus across wikipedia, wikileaks cannot be cited as reliable source but consideredto be referred to as an external link. I am posting the removed content here for future reference. standardengineer (talk) 06:28, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Removed content
On June 2, 2005, India and Ukraine signed the Framework Agreement between the Government of Ukraine and the Government of the Republic of India on Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, which would enter in force on February 15, 2006.[1] This framework was strictly for peaceful applications and specifically specified full compliance with international export control regimes. In particular, with the Missile Technology Control Regime as India should provide the Ukraine all assurances that any technology transfer would only be used for peaceful purposes. Article 3 of the Framework agreement specifies, among other topics, cooperation on the sphere of production of space transport systems and conducting special scientific researches for assembling, producing, launching, operating and using the launch vehicles, satellites and other space systems.[2] On November 2006, within said Framework, a contract was signed for Ukraine to develop a liquid staged combustion rocket engine using kerosene and liquid oxygen as propellant for ISRO. The terms of the contract were the transfer of blue prints, since the designer, Yuzhnoye Design Office lacked the manufacturing capabilities to actually build such an engine. But no engineering analysis methods nor software would be part of the transfer. And it also stated further restrictions on the contract:only ISRO would be the importer and end user; the engine could only be used for peaceful purposes; it could not be copied, modified, upgraded, re-exporter nor transferred to a third party without the permission of Yuzhnoye and the export control authorities of Ukraine; and the use for military applications was strictly forbidden. The agreement also invested the Ukrainian government with authority to conduct inspections in order to verify the compliance with the contract terms.[2][3][4] [2] [3] [4]
All or part of the information in the text above may not be true because it appears that India already has extensively modified the engine. The wikileaks data says yuzhnoye did not transfer engineering details or test data but only transferred blueprints. This means India has to extensively use it's own knowledge to make the design work which contravenes with the restrictions listed in the leaks. India is unlikely to not modify the engine. so this goes heavily into the realm as original research. As the consensus is not to use wikileaks as a reliable source but just to use it as possible reference I edited the article to reflect that.
standardengineer (talk) 06:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
References
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
mfa-ukraineindialegalactswas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ a b c "UKRAINE: APPEAL FOR USG FORBEARANCE ON INDIA SPACE PROGRAM COOPERATION". WikiLeaks. 2007-09-07. Retrieved 2015-08-10.
{{cite web}}: line feed character in|title=at position 52 (help) - ^ a b "UKRAINE: U.S. FEEDBACK ON SLV ENGINE COOPERATION WITH INDIA AND MIXER CASE". WikiLeaks. 2007-09-28. Retrieved 2015-08-10.
{{cite web}}: line feed character in|title=at position 50 (help) - ^ a b "UKRAINE: YUZHNOYE AND ISRO PROPOSED ROCKET COOPERATION". WikiLeaks. 2008-05-21. Retrieved 2015-08-10.
{{cite web}}: line feed character in|title=at position 44 (help)
RP1 vs Isrosene
[edit]In infobox we have LOX/RP1 mentioned as propellants. I was wondering if RP1 is close enough in composition or properties to Isrosene to keep it that way or we need an amendment. Aparently Isrosene is what ISRO refers to RP1 counterpart, developed to fuel SCE-200 further details on its properties are in linked citation [1][2] Ohsin (talk) 01:30, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Specification for RP-1 is as per MIL-DTL_25576D linked here https://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/specs/MIL_DTL_25576D.pdf . Based on my comparison between them they look to be absolutely similar except for the fact that RP-1 used rounded Fahrenheit points to define some temperature linked specs while ISRO used rounded celsius points. And ISRO itself calls it RP-1 in the tender document. See the first heading in page 9 of the tender document.[1] standardengineer (talk) 06:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- I noticed they call it RP-1 themselves and saw that RP-1 doc as well. Was hoping for more insight if there is enough deviation in composition, production process behind it or some other grounds that we might be missing to justify it being called 'Isrosene' and link it separately in RP-1 under similar "RP-1-like_fuels". Ohsin (talk) 15:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b "REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR ESTABLISHING ISROSENE PRODUCTION PLANT (IPP)" (PDF). LPSC,ISRO. Retrieved 1 August 2016.
- ^ "Isrosene RFP alternate link". archive.org. Retrieved 14 June 2017.
About recent edits
[edit]
Done @119.74.165.123 your point has been verified. Putting the source link here (third paragraph) — Akshadév™ 💬 04:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)