Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Next logical step is using a more efficient engine and fuel for SLV not adding more engine or more stages.
Iranian Space program
- Thread starter SOHEIL
- Start date
amardeep mishra
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2012
- Messages
- 1,323
- Reaction score
- 26
- Country
- Location
Yes in that way you are right beyond LEO, it can hardly do 1.7t. But you should realize that PSLV is actually an old rocket-- designed in late 80s/early 90s. So a lot of what it uses is not really efficient by modern standards. However if you see, GSLV MK-3, it uses solids only as boosters and nothing else-- everything else is liquid- either hypergolic or cryogenic.
My point is, with passage of time and money(budget), Iran will be able to design efficient rockets.
@TheImmortal
TheImmortal
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2017
- Messages
- 7,091
- Reaction score
- -12
- Country
- Location
You keep changing your arguement or maybe you forgot why you even argued with me in the first place.
Except Ghaem is for GEO insertion and thus stupid idea to use a solid fuel rocket for GEO insertion and then strap 4 SRB to get it there.
No need to build another SLV to send crappy satellites into LEO, Iran can just slap a 3rd liquid or solid stage on Simorgh and hit 500kg. Ghaem is an ICBM cover up...only logical answer.
Why in the world would you spend all your time developing a solid fuel rocket to do something your liquid fuel rocket is already doing? Makes zero sense. It’s not like Iran is worried about cost here it’s not exactly on some mass production satellite run here.
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Right now nothing to see as we have some serious methalorgy capabilities problem when it come to industrial level production that must be answered ASAP before anything else.
TheImmortal
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2017
- Messages
- 7,091
- Reaction score
- -12
- Country
- Location
Except Iran is not going to sit and develop a brand new liquid fuel engine for the sake of space rockets. Zero incentive. So with what it currently has it can build a Safir-3 very quickly scaling up a Safir-2.
Iran is building something....5.5 diameter....90+ton solid rocket engines out in Sharud Missile base. Iran can test this ICBM under the excuse of being a space rocket and skirt international condemnation.
To put in perspective, Simorgh can carry a 1Ton warhead 4,000 km. For it to be an ICBM(7000 km) it could only carry 100kg warhead.
But for Iran it would be stupid to try to convert to Simorgh into tactical ICBM as it is liquid based. However, a solid fuel SLV makes much more sense here. This is the only reason why I see Iran taking their space program toward solid only SLVs...for dual use purposes.
Hack-Hook
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 19,448
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
There is serious incentive for a better SLV and that's having functional spy satellite. Having military satellite for our Drones . building a fifth generation plane also is somehow problematic without having satellites to help you with data-link.
Having eye in the space seriously increase your battle awareness situation.
Sineva
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,657
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
If you were going to build a successor to the simorgh you wouldnt bother screwing around with the rodong/shahab based engines,they`re just too underpowered and heavy.You`d go for the dprk rd250/paektusan which in its single and twin chamber versions power the dprks irbm and both icbms.Just one rd250,in its 2 chamber form,has slightly more power than the entire 4 engine bloc that powers the simorgh.So we could imagine a simorgh 2 with an enlarged 3 meter diameter with its first stage powered by 3 or 4 2 chamber rd250s,another option would be using the sejil missiles first stage as s strap on booster as well,tho another possibility would be using the fateh 110 motor as a strap on booster,because they`re smaller you could use more of them and it also gives you the possibility to stage their firing ie you could have half the fateh 110 boosters igniting at launch along with the main engine while the rest of the boosters do an air start.With an slv like this you can easily put up payloads of well over 2 tons plus to leo without strap on boosters.
Plus the rd250 also has very credible military applications ie irbms,icbms.
The sad thing about this is just how close it actually came to success.If only the pbv had been tested on something like a safir prior to this launch they might have uncovered what ever problem shut it down prematurely.
Oh well,better luck next time.
Thats assuming that there is going to be a next time of course.
Galactic Penguin SST
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2017
- Messages
- 1,454
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Iranian Counter Nuclear Weapon
▲ Flashforward, Kim Jong Un inspecting a model of the 500 Meters Giant Parabolic Photon Concentrator (FAST Radio Telescope, Guizhou Province, P.R.C.).
The DPRK official media have disclosed back in 2016, the Next Generation North Korean WMD and the only real game changer. Be warned, no nuclear blackmail can ever work against the invincible DPRK!
Destruction of Nuclear Bombs Using Ultra-High Energy Neutrino Beam
Hirotaka Sugawara (Univ. of Hawaii), Hiroyuki Hagura (KEK), Toshiya Sanami (KEK)
(Submitted on 7 May 2003 (v1), last revised 29 Jun 2003 (this version, v2))
We discuss the possibility of utilizing the ultra-high energy neutrino beam (about 1000 TeV) to detect and destroy the nuclear bombs wherever they are and whoever possess them.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0305062.pdf
Neutrino Counter Nuclear Weapon
Alfred Tang
(Submitted on 26 May 2008 (v1), last revised 25 Jun 2013 (this version, v4))
Radiations produced by neutrino-antineutrino annihilation at the Z0 pole can be used to heat up the primary stage of a thermonuclear warhead and can in principle detonate the device remotely. Neutrino-antineutrino annihilation can also be used as a tactical assault weapon to target hideouts that are unreachable by conventional means.
I. INTRODUCTION
Nuclear weapon is the most destructive kind among weapons of mass destruction. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are lessons in history that shall never be repeated. Since the end of World War II, world leaders had tried to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons by political means such as the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in 1968. Many countries did not sign the treaty. In fact it seems that more and more countries are pursuing nuclear weapon programs nowadays. After September 11, the concern is that nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of terrorists. Strategically speaking the importance of a counter nuclear weapon may soon rival that of the nuclear weapon itself. The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibility of a neutrino counter nuclear weapon technology. The idea of using neutrinos to detonate or melt a nuclear weapon was first proposed by H. Sugawara, H. Hagura and T. Sanami [1]. Their futuristic design is based on a 1 PeV neutrino beam operating at 50 GW. It is unlikely that such an intense ultra high energy neutrino beam can be realized in the near future. Even if such a neutrino beam is made available, its radiation hazard will render it politically nonviable. Other proposals such as installing neutron detectors at the border to intercept nuclear materials had been considered. The current trend of non-proliferation policy is focused on monitoring the production of fissile fuels. Research is being conducted to use anti-neutrino detectors to this end [2]. Anti-neutrinos are produced in nuclear fission through beta decay. They are indicators of the fissile fuel composition of the nuclear reactor. Neutrino signatures of the fissile fuels cannot be tampered with by virtue of the very small reaction cross section of neutrinos at low energy. On the other hand, the small reaction probability also means small detection probability so that large detectors are needed to detect them. A sample idea is to deploy hundreds of kilo-ton liquid scintillor detectors at 1000 km distance from the reactor to monitor the reactor anti-neutrino spectrum. The challenges of using anti-neutrino to monitor reactor are that (1) a rogue nation will not voluntarily allow IAEA to build anti-neutrino detectors around its reactors, (2) the number of anti-neutrino detectors must increase 4 folds for every doubling of reactor-detector distance, and (3) reactors are not needed if a rogue nation opts for uranium instead of plutonium bombs. For these reasons, anti-neutrino detectors are probably not the ultimate solution to non-proliferation. Another possible non-proliferation strategy is to develop a technology that counters nuclear weapons.
This paper proposes an alternative idea for a neutrino counter nuclear weapon that shares some similarities with the idea presented in Reference [1] but is technologically feasible, relatively cheap and safe. The present idea is to focus a neutrino beam and an antineutrino beam together in a small region to allow them to annihilate so that high energy radiations are released as reaction products. The radiations cause neutron spallation in the sub-critical nuclear material and initiate fission reactions. The plutonium heats up, ignites the chemical explosive around the fissile (fissionable material) in the primary stage of a thermonuclear warhead and subsequently detonates the nuclear weapon. The reason of thinking about neutrino for this application is that neutrino cannot be shielded. It can hit a target such as a nuclear submarine from the other side of the globe and can penetrate a deep underground concrete bunker and missile silo. Since neutrino can penetrate the planet to reach a nuclear weapon on the other side of the globe near the speed of light, a neutrino counter nuclear weapon is in principle untraceable and indefensible. It is suggested that a neutrino counter nuclear weapon is 100% effective [3].
The trade-off of developing a counter weapon is the introduction of a new weapon. If the new weapon is less destructive than the original weapon, an ethical argument can be made in support of its development. If remote detonation of a nuclear weapon is made possible by a neutrino counter weapon, a nuclear weapon in the homeland becomes a liability so that there is a real strategic incentive to reduce the stockpile. In that case, there will be a much more convincing political reason to promote non-proliferation. This work aims to study the theoretical feasibility of the neutrino counter nuclear weapon as a first step in this direction. The use of neutrino as a tactical assault weapon will also be discussed.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3991.pdf
Reference:
中微子武器有可能吗？国内研究现状如何？
https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2523440-1-1.html
▲ Iranian-DPRK Orbital Solar Concentrator Counter Nuclear Weapon. 주체105(2016)년 3월 4일
▲ DPRK Directed Energy Counter Nuclear Weapon. Uploaded on December 23, 2018.
To see the peace-loving North Korean people as warmongers, only shows how brainwashed one is, being exposed to the 24/7/365 hideous enemy's propaganda.
Indeed, the great Choson people has always stated that its legitimate and only goal was the right of peaceful coexistence among all nations.
As a proof of His goodwill, General Kim Jong Un will no hesitate to contribute to the world denuclearization, if He could in return obtain the withdrawal of all U.S. troops stationed in the Korean peninsula, and lead a reunified Federal Republic of Korea, formula first proposed by Kim Il Sung, another Great Person of the Mt. Paektu.
Moreover, Choson's treasured nuclear sword is nothing compared to its next and still top secret superweapon in development, and known only to a few outside of North Korea, as The Relativistic Through-Crust-and-Mantle (classified) particle WMD, unlocked by having mastered thermonuclear fusion technologies.
The DPRK official media have disclosed back in 2016, the Next Generation North Korean WMD and the only real game changer. Be warned, no nuclear blackmail can ever work against the invincible DPRK!
Destruction of Nuclear Bombs Using Ultra-High Energy Neutrino Beam
Hirotaka Sugawara (Univ. of Hawaii), Hiroyuki Hagura (KEK), Toshiya Sanami (KEK)
(Submitted on 7 May 2003 (v1), last revised 29 Jun 2003 (this version, v2))
We discuss the possibility of utilizing the ultra-high energy neutrino beam (about 1000 TeV) to detect and destroy the nuclear bombs wherever they are and whoever possess them.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0305062.pdf
Neutrino Counter Nuclear Weapon
Alfred Tang
(Submitted on 26 May 2008 (v1), last revised 25 Jun 2013 (this version, v4))
Radiations produced by neutrino-antineutrino annihilation at the Z0 pole can be used to heat up the primary stage of a thermonuclear warhead and can in principle detonate the device remotely. Neutrino-antineutrino annihilation can also be used as a tactical assault weapon to target hideouts that are unreachable by conventional means.
I. INTRODUCTION
Nuclear weapon is the most destructive kind among weapons of mass destruction. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are lessons in history that shall never be repeated. Since the end of World War II, world leaders had tried to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons by political means such as the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty in 1968. Many countries did not sign the treaty. In fact it seems that more and more countries are pursuing nuclear weapon programs nowadays. After September 11, the concern is that nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of terrorists. Strategically speaking the importance of a counter nuclear weapon may soon rival that of the nuclear weapon itself. The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibility of a neutrino counter nuclear weapon technology. The idea of using neutrinos to detonate or melt a nuclear weapon was first proposed by H. Sugawara, H. Hagura and T. Sanami [1]. Their futuristic design is based on a 1 PeV neutrino beam operating at 50 GW. It is unlikely that such an intense ultra high energy neutrino beam can be realized in the near future. Even if such a neutrino beam is made available, its radiation hazard will render it politically nonviable. Other proposals such as installing neutron detectors at the border to intercept nuclear materials had been considered. The current trend of non-proliferation policy is focused on monitoring the production of fissile fuels. Research is being conducted to use anti-neutrino detectors to this end [2]. Anti-neutrinos are produced in nuclear fission through beta decay. They are indicators of the fissile fuel composition of the nuclear reactor. Neutrino signatures of the fissile fuels cannot be tampered with by virtue of the very small reaction cross section of neutrinos at low energy. On the other hand, the small reaction probability also means small detection probability so that large detectors are needed to detect them. A sample idea is to deploy hundreds of kilo-ton liquid scintillor detectors at 1000 km distance from the reactor to monitor the reactor anti-neutrino spectrum. The challenges of using anti-neutrino to monitor reactor are that (1) a rogue nation will not voluntarily allow IAEA to build anti-neutrino detectors around its reactors, (2) the number of anti-neutrino detectors must increase 4 folds for every doubling of reactor-detector distance, and (3) reactors are not needed if a rogue nation opts for uranium instead of plutonium bombs. For these reasons, anti-neutrino detectors are probably not the ultimate solution to non-proliferation. Another possible non-proliferation strategy is to develop a technology that counters nuclear weapons.
This paper proposes an alternative idea for a neutrino counter nuclear weapon that shares some similarities with the idea presented in Reference [1] but is technologically feasible, relatively cheap and safe. The present idea is to focus a neutrino beam and an antineutrino beam together in a small region to allow them to annihilate so that high energy radiations are released as reaction products. The radiations cause neutron spallation in the sub-critical nuclear material and initiate fission reactions. The plutonium heats up, ignites the chemical explosive around the fissile (fissionable material) in the primary stage of a thermonuclear warhead and subsequently detonates the nuclear weapon. The reason of thinking about neutrino for this application is that neutrino cannot be shielded. It can hit a target such as a nuclear submarine from the other side of the globe and can penetrate a deep underground concrete bunker and missile silo. Since neutrino can penetrate the planet to reach a nuclear weapon on the other side of the globe near the speed of light, a neutrino counter nuclear weapon is in principle untraceable and indefensible. It is suggested that a neutrino counter nuclear weapon is 100% effective [3].
The trade-off of developing a counter weapon is the introduction of a new weapon. If the new weapon is less destructive than the original weapon, an ethical argument can be made in support of its development. If remote detonation of a nuclear weapon is made possible by a neutrino counter weapon, a nuclear weapon in the homeland becomes a liability so that there is a real strategic incentive to reduce the stockpile. In that case, there will be a much more convincing political reason to promote non-proliferation. This work aims to study the theoretical feasibility of the neutrino counter nuclear weapon as a first step in this direction. The use of neutrino as a tactical assault weapon will also be discussed.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3991.pdf
Reference:
中微子武器有可能吗？国内研究现状如何？
https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2523440-1-1.html
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4885/31487803767_7c98fddf26_b.jpg
http://
https://www.flickr.com/photos/arirangmeari/31487803767/
http://
https://www.flickr.com/photos/arirangmeari/31487803767/
Galactic Penguin SST
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2017
- Messages
- 1,454
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Iran has managed to design,manufacture,and test its new and powerful solid-fuel based Space launch Vehicle called Ghaem.
Ghaem project is part of a series of launchers, planned by Iran for next 10 years to meet its needs in the field of space launch vehicles for its space program.Ghaem is a four-staged all solid fuel expandable launch vehicle capable of launching payloads to LEO,MEO and GEO orbits and employs a very sophisticated design to be able to handle all types of payloads to those orbits.
Ghaem is not a man-rated launcher but many of its design specifications will be employed for our future manned space missions.
This prestigious and extremely sophisticated program was initiated and lead by Hassan Tehrani Moghadam and his team years ago and unfortunately experienced a set-back during a failed test back in 2011 which took the lives of several Iranian scientist including General Moghadam but eventually resulted in success in 2014.All stages are now flight-ready hardware.
With Ghaem Iran is now among a very elite group of space fairing nations capable of launching payloads to GEO and beyond.
Our beloved Hassan Tehrani Moghadam left a legacy similar to what Sergei Korolev left for Soviet union and Wernher von Braun left for Germany (and eventually US) and Ghaem is just the tip of its iceberg.
SinaBina
November 2014
For those interested to have just an idea of how does the first stage look like during test and integration and how sophisticated it is ,please check the following video .
Interesting facts:
1-The temperature of nozzle is so high and the shock waves so powerful that it can simply turn finest grade steel into crumpled piece like aluminum foils.
2-Ghaem employs TVC technology
Note:This is NOT Ghaem.
First stage of Ghaem has diameter of 3.5 meter ,Length of 20 meter and weighs around 230 Tons.
@Guynextdoor2
@IND151
@SrNair
@Optimus prime
Hey dude, look at your Father Christmas's present! A first ever disclosure of the North Korean version of the Iranian "Qaem" SLV, powered by a single main engine in the first stage, with a second stage of smaller diameter, and no air fins in the first stage, thus very similar to your CGI rendering!
http://www.dprktoday.com/content/photo/2016/20160304-kp-01-7.jpg
http://www.dprktoday.com/index.php?type=42&no=1964
왕들의 궁전-만경대학생소년궁전을 찾아서 (2)
나어린 미술가들의 솜씨
访王的宫殿--万景台学生少年宫（2）
儿童美术家的手艺
16-03-09 10:51
http://www.xici.net/d228225918.htm
http://www.dprktoday.com/index.php?type=42&no=1964
왕들의 궁전-만경대학생소년궁전을 찾아서 (2)
나어린 미술가들의 솜씨
访王的宫殿--万景台学生少年宫（2）
儿童美术家的手艺
16-03-09 10:51
http://www.xici.net/d228225918.htm
TheImmortal
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2017
- Messages
- 7,091
- Reaction score
- -12
- Country
- Location
The question is how close is Iran to building the RD250 given how close it is to DRNK.
The ideal liquid rocket engine would be the RD250. However, there are no indications Iran is working on it.
The only engines we know Iran has is this R-27 aka engines used in Khorrmashahr Missile.
Sineva
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,657
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Yes,that is a very good question.I guess we will just have to wait and see....and hope of course.
skyshadow
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2017
- Messages
- 5,056
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
We made a satellite ten years ago that was better than payam and doosti .
the real reason is that we just did not send them when they were built so we have to send them now because rouhani stop our space program so now we are where we were 7 years ago.
can you read Persian?
تسنیم: یکی از موضوعاتی که در دوران مدیریت شما رخ داد، ساخت "ماهواره شریفست" بود که هنوز پرتاب نشده، علیرغم اینکه اعلام کردند مشکلی نداشته است، چرا این ماهواره هنوز پرتاب نشده است؟
روستاآزاد: بهنظرم این مسئله را باید از سازمان فضایی بپرسید که چرا این ماهواره پرتاب نشد. ماهواره شریف یکی از بهترین ماهوارههایی است که ساخته شده و افراد مختلف به آن صحه گذاشتند.
در ابتدا رفتارهایی درباره ماهواره شریفست انجام شد که قدری مبهم و مشکوک بود و ما هم متوجه نشدیم که پرتاب این ماهواره چرا انجام نشد، حتی رونمایی از آن انجام نشد و نگذاشتند که انجام شود. در جایی که ماهوارههای مختلف ساخت صا ایران و وزارت دفاع و دانشگاه علم و صنعت رونمایی شدند و مرتب از ماهواره امیرکبیر صحبت میشود، اما نگذاشتند و اجازه ندادند ماهواره شریفست حتی رونمایی شود.
برای ما هم این رفتارها مبهم بود. زمانی که آقای ترکان رئیس سازمان فضایی بودند با ایشان و جانشینشان آقای فاضلی صحبت کردم، اما هیچکدام پاسخ صریحی در این زمینه ندادند.
تسنیم: بهچهدلیل این ماهواره را رونمایی و پرتاب نمیکردند؟
روستاآزاد: بهزبان میگفتند اشکال فنی دارد، اما در جلسات خصوصی که از آنها میپرسیدیم اشکال فنی ماهواره شریفست چیست که ما آن را حل کنیم حرفی نداشتند.
در آخرین جلسهای که با آقای شریعتمداری رئیس سازمان هوا و فضا داشتم وقتی بهصراحت از دیگر حاضران جلسه سؤال کردند که اشکال ماهواره شریف ست چیست، اعتراف کردند که هیچ اشکالی ندارد. کاملاً مشخص بود که قضیهای پشت این داستان است، اینکه آن چیست باید از سازمان فضایی پرسید.
ما شایعاتی در این رابطه شنیدیم، اینکه وقتی ماهواره رونمایی شود این مسئله اعتباری برای رئیس دانشگاه صنعتی شریف میشود و چون مجموعه دولت یازدهم بهدنبال تغییر بود این اقدام نباید صورت میگرفت؛ البته این در حد شایعه بود. یکی از رکوردهای خیلی خوب دانشگاه در مدت چهار سال گذشته ساخت ماهواره شریفست است که هنوز هم پرتاب نشده است. اخیراً سازمان فضایی اعلام کرده که در بهمنماه پرتاب میشود. دقیق نمیدانم، البته مأموریت ما فقط ساخت ماهواره بود.
https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/...اشکالی-اجازه-ندادند-ماهواره-شریف-ست-پرتاب-شود
i see your point but it should also be noted that Iran is far behind the US in the technology of rocket and rocket engine development so we can not compare Gheam with Space X Falcon 9 and Gheam was our first missile prototype for an heavy satellite launcher for GEO , so we can only build missiles with the technologies that we have. and they said that Gheam has one 3.5 m Solid fuel booster or engine for its 1 stages. they did not say anything about Several boosters for its 1 stages.
hi. sorry i do not have any information about that maybe @SOHEIL can help you more on this topic.
yes im sad too but they learned a lesson and the good thing is they want to build payam 2 in 6 months ant try again if rouhani let them. and there is doosti satellite too that they want to send some time in 2 months. believe me, our scientists are not upset by this failure. we did not send the previous satellite that our scientists made, and i remember that our scientists were crying hard after hearing the news that the government did not allow them to launch the satellite.
Persian Gulf 1906
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,428
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
yes, sharif satellite indeed seems to be the best satellite that i know about in terms of resolution, but if it is built so long ago why didnt they build sharif-2 with even better resolution?
it's only 50kg so why can't we use safir SLV to launch it? safir has good record in launching such size payloads and is smaller so not as expensive as simorgh i guess
what is so good about doosti compared to sharif?!
skyshadow
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2017
- Messages
- 5,056
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
indeed it was the best satellite. they built sharif-2
two years after sharif-1 and they gave both of them to the space agency to launch but the government did not let space agency to launch them with safir SLV.doosti and sharif difference. well first of all sharif was built by sharif university but doosti was built by Iran space agency organisation. sharif-2 satellite can take (5 m) resolution pics but it did not had a good solar Panel for battery charging and the satellite activities in other hand doosti satellite witch is not as advanced as sharif-2, it just can take (30 m) resolution pics but it has much better solar Panel for battery charging as you know we just started to make great progress in building solar Panels so doosti is better in this regard. in the end of the day sharif university is much more advanced than Iran space agency organisation in making satellite and that is the difference.
doosti satellite
Persian Gulf 1906
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2018
- Messages
- 1,428
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
is it really that important that doosti has a little better solar panels when it will orbit for 20-30 days at best anyway?indeed it was the best satellite. they built sharif-2
doosti and sharif difference. well first of all sharif was built by sharif university but doosti was built by Iran space agency organisation. sharif-2 satellite can take (5 m) resolution pics but it did not had a good solar Panel for battery charging and the satellite activities in other hand doosti satellite witch is not as advanced as sharif-2, it just can take (30 m) resolution pics but it has much better solar Panel for battery charging as you know we just started to make great progress in building solar Panels so doosti is better in this regard. in the end of the day sharif university is much more advanced than Iran space agency organisation in making satellite and that is the difference.
do you have source for sharif-2 with 5m resolution? i thought the best current resolution was 10-15m
they should build sharif-3 then with <5m resolution and the better solar panels, not like the government will let them launch a satellite any time soon anyway!
Similar threads
- Article
