Answer

Introduction

On January 12, 2026, India’s space program faced a critical setback with the failure of the PSLV-C62 mission. A “roll-rate disturbance” in the third stage (PS3) resulted in the loss of 16 satellites, including DRDO’s strategic EOS-N1 (Anvesha). This back-to-back failure of the PSLV workhorse within eight months (following PSLV-C61 in May 2025) has exposed systemic vulnerabilities in India’s quest for space dominance.

Body

Key Challenges Hindering India’s Space Growth

• Quality Control Crisis: Successive anomalies in the PS3 solid motor stage point toward manufacturing defects or aging propellant stocks rather than mere design flaws.
  Eg: The Failure Analysis Committee (FAC) is currently investigating chamber pressure drops similar to the 2025 failure.
• Infrastructure Bottlenecks: Despite the rise of private startups, critical testing and launch facilities remain concentrated within ISRO, creating a “capacity queue.” Eg: Firms like Skyroot and Agnikul often face delays as state-led missions take precedence over private commercial launches.
• Import Dependency: India still relies on imports for over 70% of high-end components like space-qualified solar cells, semiconductors, and specialized carbon fibers.
  Eg: Project timelines for the NavIC constellation expansion have been repeatedly pushed back due to semiconductor supply chain disruptions.
• Human Capital Gaps: While India produces many engineers, there is a acute shortage of specialized talent in niche domains like optical thermal control and downstream analytics.
  Eg: Startups like Pixxel have highlighted the struggle to recruit engineers with “mission-ready” expertise in hyperspectral imaging.
• Legislative Vacuum: The absence of a formal National Space Act creates regulatory uncertainty regarding liability, insurance, and long-term private property rights in space.
  Eg: The current reliance on the Indian Space Policy 2023 lacks the statutory binding force needed for large-scale global venture capital inflow.
• Institutional Transparency: ISRO’s reluctance to publicly release failure reports for missions like C61 has created a “trust deficit” with global insurers and commercial partners.
  Eg: Commercial insurance premiums for Indian launches are expected to rise significantly in 2026 due to these undisclosed systemic risks.

Strategic Implications of India’s Space Vulnerabilities

• Erosion of “Workhorse” Credibility: Compared to the US (SpaceX) or China, India’s primary launch vehicle—the PSLV—is losing its reputation for extreme reliability and cost-effectiveness.
  Eg: Commercial clients from Brazil and the UK may now prefer more expensive but reliable alternatives like Rocket Lab or Arianespace.
• National Security Gaps: The loss of the EOS-N1 (Anvesha) surveillance satellite delays critical real-time hyperspectral monitoring of India’s borders during a period of regional tension.
  Eg: This vulnerability leaves India dependent on foreign commercial satellite data for intelligence, compromising strategic autonomy.
• Orbital Real Estate Loss: Lagging behind the US and China in ITU (International Telecommunication Union) filings means India is losing out on prime orbital slots and spectrum.
  Eg: China has placed over 1,000 satellites in orbit compared to India’s active fleet of less than 100, cornering “orbital real estate”.
• Technological Lag in Reusability: While the US (SpaceX) has perfected reusable rockets, India’s Next-Generation Launch Vehicle (NGLV) is still in the early R&D phase, making our missions economically less competitive.
• Weakened Deterrence Posture: Vulnerabilities in space-based navigation (NavIC) directly impact the precision of India’s long-range missile systems compared to the US GPS or China’s BeiDou.
• Strategic Reliance on Russia/US: Delays in indigenous missions like Gaganyaan force India into a state of “interdependent vulnerability,” relying on NASA or Roscosmos for critical technology.
  Eg: India’s 2026 mission manifest now hinges on foreign cooperation for high-thrust engines and life-support systems.

Conclusion

The PSLV-C62 failure is a sobering reminder that space remains an “unforgiving frontier” where past laurels do not guarantee future success. To maintain its status as a global space power, India must transition from a mission-centric culture to a “Zero-Defect” industrial ecosystem driven by private-sector agility and rigorous public-sector oversight. Turning these technical stumbles into a springboard for quality-led innovation will be the true test of India’s resilience in the new global space race.

DOWNLOAD PDF