GSLV-F16 / NISAR — Slip & Orbital-Deviation Class
Sealed on: 2025-07-12
Claim: Muhūrtha Risk Advisory
Mission: NASA–ISRO SAR (NISAR)
Agencies: @nasa @nasajpl @isro
Vehicle: GSLV Mk II
Pad: Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota
Published T-0: Wednesday, 30 July 2025 | 17:00 IST

I. Astrological Advisory
The launch window at 17:00 IST on July 30, 2025, is flagged as highly unfavorable and inauspicious. The following forecast outlines the most likely failure modes. Not every anomaly must occur; this is the spectrum most likely to manifest in some combination. Based on these failure modes, proceeding with the launch is not a risk worth taking with a $1.5 billion investment—indeed, it would be reckless.

II. Spectrum of Failure Modes

🗓️ Schedule Slip — Probability: 90%
Although we will proceed with the launch countdown this time, a punctual liftoff at 17:00 IST remains highly unlikely. Meteorological factors, vehicle issues, and range constraints are expected to cause holds, delays, scrubs, or rescheduling. Notably, high-altitude winds—jet stream winds at upper atmospheric levels—can generate turbulence that destabilizes the rocket during critical ascent phases. These winds can lead to guidance errors, structural oscillations, or oscillatory stress, which may require reprogramming of guidance systems or cause launch delays. In extreme cases, they could necessitate holding the launch until conditions improve. Ignoring these warnings risks a watery demise or uncontrolled explosion. A similar schedule slip advisory was issued for the launch of the @blueorigin New Shepard NS-24 rocket, owned by @jeffbezos. The launch was first put on hold due to cold launch-site temperatures and subsequently scrubbed due to issues with ground systems.
Evidence: https://x.com/vijayjyotishusa/status/1824307635103076432

🔥 Thermal Excursions & Explosion — Probability: 90%
Thermal excursions during ascent, MECO, and separation are expected. Although the GSLV's fuels are of exceptional quality—usually an advantage—breaching thermal thresholds can turn this strength into a significant risk. Reaching these critical temperatures could ignite the fuels, leading to thermal runaway, explosive failure, or rapid disassembly. The combination of thermal stress and potential guidance or control system failures greatly increases the likelihood of total failure. A similar thermal excursion warning was issued for the launch of @SpaceX Starship 2 and shared with @elonmusk. Unfortunately, it was not considered, resulting in a catastrophic explosion of the LOX tank.
Evidence: https://x.com/vijayjyotishusa/status/1824307998422179901

🚩 Orbit Deviations & Deployment Failures — Probability: 80%
Guidance anomalies during separation or burns could cause the satellite to drift from its planned sun-synchronous orbit. Such deviations impair instrument activation and orientation, risking premature reentry or total loss of control. A similar orbital insertion anomaly advisory was issued for the launch of the @nasa @astrobotic Lunar Lander 'Peregrine,' which flew on the @ulalaunch Vulcan rocket. Despite extensive outreach, including to @ulalaunch CEO @torybruno (who is very approachable and I like him!), the advisory was not considered for various technical and business reasons, and the launch proceeded as scheduled. Consequently, the predicted anomalies occurred during orbital insertion, resulting in the complete loss of the lunar lander Peregrine.
Evidence: https://x.com/vijayjyotishusa/status/1824307269741449356

🔴 Loss of SAR Imaging — Probability: 90%
Severe guidance or orbit errors will compromise the satellite's imaging capabilities, preventing its radar antenna from maintaining proper orientation or stability. As a result, high-resolution imaging of Earth's surface will be impossible, rendering the payload either partially or entirely ineffective, resulting in mission failure.

📡 Communication Failures — Probability: 80%
System errors and particularly—software bugs—may cause loss of contact with ground stations, preventing timely guidance corrections or abort commands. This can lead to uncontrolled drift, reentry, or mission shutdown, with no way to intervene.

III. Standing Offer for Collaboration
I am ready to suggest an astrologically favorable alternative that satisfies all range, orbit, and payload requirements. Our shared goal remains: a flawless NISAR mission that advances science for all. The decision rests with the launch team.
Stated probability at seal: 0.86 (Likely)
Outcome (Jul 21 → Sep 19, 2025, lead time ~18 D): Schedule slip confirmed 9 days pre-T-0 (17:00 → 17:40 IST). Insertion ~10 km off-plan (NASA contradicts ISRO 'precise insertion' claim). 19 Sep telemetry: apogee +471 km, perigee −553 km within ~12 hours — ~25× the published ±20 km tolerance. Both NASA and ISRO publicly silent.
Verdict: PARTIAL