BENGALURU: The Ministry of Science and Technology’s refusal to publicly share the Failure Analysis Committee (FAC) report on the back-to-back PSLV-C61 and C62 mission failures has sparked concern among space scientists and private industry players.
Union Minister Jitendra Singh recently said the report was out and anomalies were detected, but that they cannot share it on a public platform. Singh also acknowledged that experts were working on resolving it.
But scientists said such secrecy is counterproductive at a time when the government is actively seeking private sector participation in India’s space programme. Sources in Indian National Space Promotion and Authorization Centre (IN-SPACe) said the policy push includes Expression of Interest for transferring Launch Vehicle Mark-3 ( LVM-3) technology to private hands, following similar moves for PSLV and SSLV.
A senior space scientist, speaking anonymously, said the industry was invited because ISRO demonstrated its strength and was prepping to focus on advanced projects. “But when basics go wrong and information is withheld, why would companies invest?” he asked. The PSLV-C61 mission on May 18, 2025 failed due to a pressure drop in the third-stage motor chamber, preventing the EOS-09 satellite from reaching its intended 534 km Sun Synchronous Polar Orbit.
“The C-61 mission was not successful because of nozzle throat failure.The material was not right. Graphite was imported for the nozzle throat.This was changed to a carbon-composite component for C-62, which also did not succeed. The question which arose was whether it was fully ready for industrial use or not,” the space scientist said.
No Indian mission is fully indigenous, says scientist
ISRO sources pointed out that even the FAC report of C-61 failure was not made public,while ISRO said it is with the Prime Minister’s Office. “But that should not be the case when India is closely working with international agencies.
The C-61 mission was not successful because of nozzle throat failure. The material was not right. Graphite was imported for the nozzle throat. This was changed to a carbon-composite component during the C-62 mission, which also did not succeed. The question that arose was whether it was fully characterised and qualified for industrial use or not,” the space scientist said.
He added that no Indian mission is fully indigenous. “Even if we say missions are 100% ‘Made in India’, some components are imported. The present global turmoil is not just delaying execution of missions, but also leading to secrecy in making reports public.”
Another senior ISRO scientist, also refusing to be identified, said the two missions failing consecutively – and in similar conditions – raised some questions like whether the diagnosis done during the C-61 mission was right, whether the solutions listed were sufficient, whether all of them were implemented, and whether something had remained unresolved and not addressed during the C-62 mission. “Only successful mission technologies can be transferred, not otherwise,” the ISRO scientist said.
On May 18, 2025, the launch of India’s 101st mission – and PSLV’s 63rd flight – scheduled at 5.59am from the first launch pad of Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SHAR) in Sriharikota, the PSLV-C61 carrying the sophisticated EOS-09 earth observation satellite, did not reach its designated orbit. The EOS-09 satellite was to separate from the PSLV-C61’s fourth stage a little over 17 minutes after the launch and place in a Sun Synchronous Polar Orbit (SSPO) at an altitude of about 534 km. Soon after the launch, ISRO Chairman V Narayanan announced that there was a fall in pressure in the chamber of the motor case during the third stage propulsion system of the PSLV-C61 during launch, resulting in the failure.
On January 12, 2026, ISRO’s PSLV-C62 carrying 16 satellites, including a foreign Earth Observation Satellite, also recorded a failure. Narayanan was then quoted stating there were disturbances in the rocket which deviated from its designated flight path during the third stage of the launch when the strap-on motors were providing thrust during the flight’s 3rd stage.