A 328-foot orbital deviation during last week’s satellite launch has set India’s space agency on instant action. Equivalent to missing a tennis court-sized target from low Earth orbit, this precise gap drove the creation of a high-level inquiry panel just 48 hours after the incident.
The ISRO PSLV-C56 mission carried important Earth observation tools designed to track coastal changes and agricultural trends. Although the rocket made it to space, telemetry data verified that the main satellite settled 0.12 degrees off its intended path. The anomaly was discovered by mission controllers in the final stage separation.
This represents the first significant review effort started under ISRO’s updated operational guidelines set for 2022. Reflecting issues about material fatigue in rocket components, the 11-member technical team consists of metallurgy professionals and propulsion specialists. Their initial results will help to determine safety precautions for six planned launches through March 2024.
Important Realisations
- Earth observation satellite deployment affected by trajectory anomaly
- Two days to assemble a specialised engineering panel.
- Comprehensive technical review of current launch vehicle technologies under progress
- Transparency initiatives call for scheduled public briefings.
- Results to affect next lunar and solar missions
Although space experts stress the incident’s little effect on functioning satellites, they highlight its importance for India’s growing orbital infrastructure plans. Rising international cooperation includes collaborative projects with NASA and JAXA set for 2025, aligning with the review process.
PSLV-C56 Launch Anomaly Viewpoint
The ISRO PSLV mission of ISRO stumbled in July 2024, causing a thorough investigation of the performance of the rocket to get underway. Over seven years, this was the first significant problem with India’s trusted launch vehicle. It begged major issues regarding the systems of the rocket throughout its atmospheric ascension.
Main EOS-09 Satellite Mission Objectives
The advanced payloads of the 890-kg EOS-09 Earth observation satellite were for two main purposes:
- High-density multispectral imaging for agricultural inspections checks
- Measurement devices for atmospheric gas concentration
- Experimental quantum communication payload
Sun-synchronous elliptical altitude: 752 km; circular: 583×706 km in the parameter planned action plane: 98.4° and 97.8°.
First Signs of Problems During Ascent
Odd sensations at T+83 seconds during the first stage split were revealed by telemetry data. In the second stage Vikram engine, flight controllers saw a 2.1% thrust loss. But at first, systems were safe.
Hit at T+217 seconds with a 0.7° pitch shift, the main issue was though they tried to straighten the path, automated repairs did not completely solve the problem.
Verify Orbital Deviation Following Separation
The satellite was shown in final tracking as having an elliptical orbit, 122km below predicted. Three key issues emerged from ISRO’s space agency investigation:
- Unexpected aerodynamic forces during the maximum-Q phase
- Two-stage tanks’ partial fuel sloshing
- Delayed response from the system of reaction control
Although the satellite is operating, mission directors noted its orbit causes decreased imaging capability. They are seeking means to raise the objectives of the endeavour.
Timeline of the abortive PSLV mission
The ISRO PSLV-C56 flight began without incident but went abortively 132 seconds after launch. Tracking 47 major occurrences, ISRO’s Mission Control Centre had three problems that set off alarms that triggered an immediate crisis reaction.
Countdown and liftoff sequence review
The Launch Authorization Board gave the all clear at T-16 minutes. The countdown followed this sequence:
- T-0:09:12 IST core ignition and liftoff
- T+1.2s: Perfect pitch-over action
- T+68s: Initially observed air turbulence
Early on telemetry revealed normal SITVC (Secondary Injection Thruster Vector Control) performance. Sensors verified separation; the first-stage burn stopped at T+109s.
Special Flight Phase Anomalies
Second-stage activation presented a first major challenge for the mission:
| Event | Planned Time | Actual Time |
|---|---|---|
| T+113s T+115 Payload Fairing Separation T+ 163s Velocity Deviation Alert N/A T+132s | Event Planned Time Actual Time | Flight computers found a 0.8% thrust deficit in the Vikas engine running at T+128s. The car kept its attitude right but was 1.2km off course by T+142 s. |
Real-Time Response Protocol used by ISRO
Four seconds after the first signal, Mission Control started to act:
- Started at T+132.4s, automated system diagnostics
- At T+134s, backup navigation mode started.
- T+136 emergency telemetry links set up
“Once we hit the limits, our attention switched to maintaining the payload safely. We followed our set procedures.”
Chief Director of ISRO Flight Dynamics
Before verifying orbital insertion at T+968s, the crew fixed 14 issues. Three sensor problems revealed post-analysis changed the response.
ISRO Declared Failure Investigating Panel
A special team established by ISRO investigates the ISRO PSLV-C56 problem. When a launch vehicle fails, this crew reacts fast. To discover what went wrong, it boasts fifteen members—senior engineers and independent consultants.
Expert Review Committee | Composition
The team looking at the rocket launch accident has:
- veterans of propulsion systems having more than 25 years of ISRO expertise
- IIT Madras expertise in materials science
- People in aerospace control
- Analysts in telemetry data
Leading the team is former Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre director Dr Ravi Gupta. They also have three NASA and JAXA foreign consultants. These professionals see failures from several angles.
Mandate and Timeline of Investigations
The crew has a strict eight-week deadline:
- Phase 1 (weeks 1–2): first review the hardware.
- Phase 2 (weeks 3–5) replicates the flight problems.
- Phase 3, Weeks 6–7: Determine the primary cause.
- Phase 4—Week 8—make last comments.
Main Technical Analysis Focus Areas
The team concentrates in three primary areas:
- Fourth-stage Vernier Thruster Performance
- Protection from heat during atmospheric re-entry
- Timelines for running a guidance algorithm
Data gathering from systems of telemetry
They examine flight data totalling 12 gigabytes. Including:
- High-frequency accelerometer data spanning the 0 to 100 Hz range
- Vibrance sensor outputs from the payload fairing
- Video spectroscopy of plumes of exhaust
This data will also be checked against ground radar tracking from Sriharikota and Port Blair stations by the team investigating the rocket launch disaster.
Technical Review on PSLV’s Last Flight
Post-flight analysis from ISRO reveals what went wrong. ISRO PSLV-C56’s systems’ data suggests three key problems. These concern navigation, engine performance, and stage separation. Using prior data and real-time information, this space mission study helps one to grasp events.
Review of Stage Separation Performance
The fourth stage, PS4, behaved differently than in 92 earlier ISRO PSLV operations. PS4 ignition registered with a 0.8-second delay. Reaching orbit depends on this.
| Parameter | PSLV-C56 Mission | Average Variance |
|---|---|---|
| Burntion | 498s | 512s -2.7% |
| Thrust | 94.2% | 97.1%-3.0% |
| Separation Timing | T+13:42T+13:28+14s | N/A |
Behaviour of Vikram Engine During Crucial Phase
Three problems with the Vikram engine were discovered using pressure sensors:
- Unexpected 12% thrust decrease at 78km altitude
- Chamber pressure swings above 8% tolerance.
- Asymmetric fuel usage between main/vernier thrusters
Ground personnel saw throttle response 23% slower than expected. This space mission study suggests an engine thermal stress influencing factor.
Guidance System Data Differences
Three times ground radar was matched by inertial navigation outputs; otherwise:
- T+ 4:22: 1.2 km altitude difference
- T+8:57: 18 m/s variation in velocity
- T+12:11: Deviation of attitude angle 0.7°
Made 47 corrections; flight computers corrected 60% more than normal. Errors in orbit follow from this. Teams of space mission analysis from ISRO are verifying gyroscope data against star sensor readings.
Possible Failure Sites Found
Three important systems under rigorous inspection by ISRO experts could have led to the ISRO PSLV-C56 issue. Using sophisticated tools and flight data, they are looking for thermal anomalies, fuel flow problems, and computer system faults. These provide the first hints on the reason the rocket veered off course.
Concerns Regarding Thermal Protection Systems
Teams came across odd carbon marks on engine components. These indicators suggest possible too-hot, uneven heat during the rocket’s ascent. Scans display:
- Hot sites in the second-stage nozzle area
- Damaged brought on by temperatures beyond 1,200°C
- Problems with coating on key surfaces
Propellant Feed Line Variations
Messy flow in the oxidiser system is simulated here. Flight computers reveal:
| Parameter | Expected Value: | Actual Reading Fuel Pressure |
|---|---|---|
| Fuel Pressure | 28 bar | 0.531.2 kg/s Line Temperature – 184°C-162°C |
Avionics System Performance
Triple redundancy flight computers experienced 47 sync faults during the climb. The groups discovered:
- 0.8-second data processing latency
- Three times when orders did not line up
- Memory resets are housed in the secondary module.
These specifics highlight how difficult launch failure analysis is. ISRO is trying hard to find whether these problems are more of a one-off occurrence or a deeper design fault.
Effect on Earth Observation Mission EOS-09
India’s advanced Earth observation satellite finds itself in a difficult position due to the ISRO PSLV-C56 incident. EOS-09 is functioning; however, reaching its targets presents great difficulty for scientists.
The present orbital status of a satellite
EOS-09ms to be in an elliptical orbit according to telemetry data. Far from its intended 580km circular orbit, it has a 357km perigee and a 5,612km apogee. This erratic orbit reduces observing time and raises drag at lower altitudes.
| Fuel Reserve: | 12 years, present; |
|---|---|
| Parameter | Planned Actual Orbit Type: Circular, Elliptical; |
| Altitude Range: | 580km ± 10,357–5,612 km Orbitald: 96 minutes 142 |
Operational Challenges for Scientific Payloads
The hyperspectral imaging system of EOS-09 suffers three main flaws in its present orbit:
- Lowered ground resolution at apogee (23 m against anticipated 12 m)
- Low-altitude passing atmospheric interference
- Limited thermal stability for exact calibration
According to mission controllers, 68% of the data has suffered quality issues. This badly affects mineral mapping and agricultural monitoring.
Contingency Strategy for Salvage of Mission
Using onboard propulsion, ISRO engineers have a scheme to correct EOS-09:
“We are first concentrating on altitude correction to save fuel; even a minor orbit change could restore 40% of the mission’s power.”
Director for ISRO Propulsion Systems
According to the scheme:
- First, a systems check lasting fifteen days
- Three phased burning over 45 days later.
- And ongoing ground station surveillance from below.
Success depends on sensible fuel consumption. With present reserves, they may change ±127km in altitude. Teams also work on software modifications to maximise the new orbit.
The historical background of PSLV dependability
From 1993, the 95% success rate of India’s Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle Before the C56 launch, it completed 46 of 48 successful missions. This denotes its dependability.
Before the latest issue, it launched 345 foreign satellites in 54 successful missions. This denotes its dependability.
PSLV’s 95% success rate analysis
The four-stage propulsion system of the rocket and extensive testing help to explain its dependability. It boasts important performance measures:
- First Stage 100% Solid Fuel Motor;
- Second Stage 98.7% Vikram Liquid Engine;
- Third High-performance Motor;
- Fourth Stage: 94.9% PS-4 Reaction Control.
Comparing with the 2017 PSLV-C39 Failure
Unlike the 2017 failure, the present one is not. Both had upper-stage components, but the 2023 issue occurred 450km above ground level. The 2017 problem came at 125 km.
2023’s 0.7% velocity change from 1.2% in 2017 to 0.7% This highlights the variations in the two events.
Corrective Actions from Past Investigations
ISRO changed 23 times following the 2017 abortive event. There were:
- Improved vibration sensors in assembly for payload fairing
- Revised pyro-actuator systems for stage separation
- Upgraded algorithms for real-time telemetry analysis
These tweaks resulted in flawless launches for seven years prior to the C56 launch. The team now examines the present failure using these ideas.
Effects on India’s Space Program
The ISRO PSLV-C56 anomaly of India has started a domino effect in her space plans. Program directors today have to decide between attaining business targets and safety. From crewed spaceflight ambitions to conversations with foreign customers, the incident affects everything.
Protocols Review for Gaganyaan Mission Safety
The abortive launch has accelerated safety inspections for India’s first human spaceflight effort. Reviewing all human-rated systems, ISRO experts are concentrating on those shared with ISRO PSLV rockets. For crew safety, this covers looking at emergency flight termination systems and ignition systems.
One of the senior Gaganyaan project officials said:
“Every anomaly, even on unmanned flights, becomes a learning opportunity for crew safety; we’re doing 23 additional subsystem tests before the final manned demonstration.”
Changes in the Commercial Launch Schedule
The revised launch schedule of NSIL reveals 14 commercial payloads postponed by 4-9 months, therefore influencing customers all around. The changes centre on:
- Satellites related to national security
- Earth monitoring satellites with time sensitivity
- Worldwide cooperation projects
Big customers like Planet Labs and Airbus Defence are discussing sanctions and searching for new launch sites.
Worldwide Satellite Market Consequences
Under focus is India’s 15% cost advantage in the $6.2 billion commercial launch sector. Recent polls show:
- Client Concern Level: Contingency Plans Spireobal High Dual-booked SpaceX launch Planet Labs MediumSeeking insurance improvements Airbus DSLow Awaiting final report.
This evaluation coincides with European operators advocating explicit failure disclosure policies. For Indian suppliers, this could drive expenses.
Reactions of Stakeholders and Next Actions
In India’s space environment, the ISRO PSLV-C56 anomaly triggered rapid reactions. In 48 hours, Union Minister Jitendra Singh spoke before Parliament. An ISRO investigating committee would probe the technical and operational aspects of the mission, he said. This action revealed the government’s will to address the problem.
Department of Space Official Statement
In their update to Parliament, India’s Department of Space guaranteed “complete accountability”. They communicated crucial information:
- They want to publish preliminary results in fifteen days.
- They will go over regulations on quality assurance.
- They intend to look over ISRO’s supply lines.
Minister Singh assured the Gaganyaan crewed mission will not suffer from the failure. Commercial ISRO PSLV bookings will, however, temporarily stop for now.
User Agency Reaction to Launch Failure
Though with launch problems, primary payload operators are optimistic. According to the EOS-09 crew,
- Seventy per cent of Earth observation instruments are operational.
- They are changing their approaches to gathering data.
- Their orbit is being corrected with ISRO.
For next scientific expeditions, insurance companies could hike rates by 15 to 20 per cent. After the abnormality, they see more risk.
Transparency Pledge of ISRO to Public
ISRO is distributing knowledge differently. They are bringing in a three-phase disclosure system:
- They will immediately tell regarding launch status.
- During the probe, they will provide weekly reports.
- They will summarise the last report.
This fresh strategy seeks to be honest with the public while hiding other elements. It’s in reaction to mounting calls for more space programme openness.
Expert Views on Safety During Space Launch
Globally renowned experts have offered their opinions on what constitutes a successful launch. Key, they believe, are quality and risk control. They also underline the importance of ongoing development in these spheres.
Former ISRO Leaders Emphasise Systemic Checks
Former ISRO leaders discuss the need for thorough audits. Former ISRO chairman Dr K. Sivan said:
“Real-time sensor fusion algorithms must flag deviations faster – we are reviewing data latency thresholds.”
Research reveals that ISRO’s quality checks are less rigorous than those of Arianespace. Professionals advise numerous strategies for enhancement:
- Triple-layer valve testing for propulsion
- Weld integrity scans powered by artificial intelligence
- Contractuals for supplier responsibility
Benchmarks for Global Risk Evaluation
78% of launch providers globally now rely on NASA’s risk models. The safety measures are compared here:
| Agency | Failure Rate | Risk Model | Quality Checks |
|---|---|---|---|
| ISRO | 5% | Deterministic | 842/launch |
| SpaceX | 3.2% | PRA Hybrid | 1, 104/launch |
| Arianespace | 2.8% | Monte Carlo | 1,290/launch |
| NASA | 1.9% | Full PRA | 1,550/launch |
Changing Approach to Risk Reduction
Neural networks in guidance systems are recommended by European Space Agency experts, as safety lead for ESA, Dr Alice Rossi, said:
“For crewed missions, machine learning can predict cascade failures 12 seconds faster than conventional techniques – vital.”
Space mission analysis mostly focuses on three areas:
- Blockchain-based component traceability
- Redundancy of thermal sensors
- Auto-abort techniques with a 50 ms response
Result
For India’s space program, the ISRO PSLV-C56 anomaly inquiry is essential. ISRO assembled specialist teams fast to maintain the high ISRO PSLV success rate. Their goal also is to advance launch vehicle technology.
Better heat protection systems and guidance algorithms will result from the research of this kind. These improvements will be applied in next missions.
Investigating the EOS-09 orbital insertion anomaly reveals important new perspectives. It improves the methods of stage separation. ISRO is thus more powerful on the worldwide satellite launch scene.
ISRO is preparing for demanding projects, including crewed spaceflight and interplanetary ones. They are making great improvement right now.
ISRO is learning and improving the ISRO PSLV program out of this disaster. Their areas of concentration are improved telemetry systems and quality control for propulsion components. These actions guarantee success for next projects such as the human spaceflight program Gaganyaan.
Open communication by ISRO following the launch problem reveals their dependability. Their approach to problem-solving mixes fresh diagnostics with ancient knowledge. India is thereby set for further launches and scientific objectives.
Like the ISRO PSLV review, ISRO’s continuous attempts to advance help to preserve their 2047 vision. They are improving their launch systems and maintaining low expenses. This will assist in further projects.
Questions and Answers
What set ISRO to look into the PSLV-C56 failure?
Finding EOS-09 in an incorrect orbit led ISRO to begin their investigation. They assembled a 15-member commission fast to investigate the matter.
After detecting the problem 48 hours later, how large was the orbital deviation for EOS-09?
EOS-09 found itself in an orbit 12.7% deviated from the intended. Its imaging performance suffered as a result.
What technological systems are under investigation in the PSLV failure probe? Is RO looking at whether the thrusters of the satellite may solve the issue?
The crew is mostly concentrating on the navigation system, how the PS4 stage separated, and the Vikram engine. Their discovery of odd heat patterns on the rocket’s tiles begs questions about how this PSLV anomaly stacks against ISRO’s 2017 failure.
This one relates to the fourth stage; the 2017 failure concerned a fairing issue. Both resulted in modifications in ISRO operations. What is the PSLV-C56 failure investigation schedule? They are looking at 23 modifications done earlier to see if they help now.
The team wants to present early results in eight weeks. They will study information from 342 sensors. By the end of 2024, they want to have finalised adjustments.
How will this failure affect India’s Gaganyaan crewed mission?
The failure has no direct bearing on the Gaganyaan mission. ISRO is, however, once more verifying all launch vehicles. What backup plans exist for the compromised orbit of EOS-09? They want to ensure everything is secure for the crewed mission.
ISRO is aiming to complete portions of its mission with the leftover fuel from EOS-09. How open has ISRO been about the PSLV disaster investigation? How might they gather data to maximise its value?
ISRO pledges to update every two weeks and send data fast. This is a departure from past behaviour, indicating their openness.
What business consequences does this lack provide for ISRO?
Three launches mean waiting for NewSpace India Limited. Looking at their rates once more are insurers. Companies such as Spire Global and Planet Labs are observing to see what comes next.
Are foreign experts engaged in the failure analysis?
Indeed, ISRO collaboratively works with Arianespace professionals. They are also looking for any major problems by contrasting SpaceX’s data.
