India's space program, spearheaded by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), has achieved remarkable feats over the years, with 44 satellite launches conducted between 2017 and 2026.

Yet, a troubling pattern emerges when examining these missions: five outright failures, each tied directly to national defence objectives. This string of setbacks has ignited serious concerns over reliability, oversight, and the broader implications for India's space-based security architecture.

The failures are not isolated incidents but cluster notably, with three occurring within the span of just one year—from January 2025 to January 2026. Such concentration underscores potential systemic vulnerabilities in handling defence-linked payloads, where precision is paramount and margins for error are non-existent. Rocket launches operate on a zero-tolerance principle; even the slightest deviation can cascade into total mission loss.

These satellites served critical roles in espionage, navigation, and earth observation, functions indispensable to military operations and strategic surveillance. Their costs, often escalating into hundreds or thousands of crores, amplify the financial sting. Replacements demand not only fresh funding but also extended timelines, straining resources already stretched thin by India's ambitious defence modernisation drive.

Dependence on foreign satellite providers looms as a stark risk in their absence. This could compromise operational autonomy, introduce data sovereignty issues, and slow down time-sensitive strategic programs. For a nation prioritising self-reliance through initiatives like Atmanirbhar Bharat, such reliance represents a strategic liability.

Each failure stemmed from distinct technical glitches, often involving proven launch vehicles like the PSLV and GSLV. This randomness points to lapses in pre-launch testing, quality assurance, and integration protocols rather than inherent vehicle flaws. Defence missions, by their nature, warrant the most rigorous scrutiny, yet these incidents suggest gaps in that rigour.

Consider the most recent debacle: the PSLV-C62 mission on 12 January 2026, carrying the DRDO-developed EOS-N1 (Anvesha) hyperspectral imaging satellite. Designed to discern materials on Earth's surface via spectral analysis of reflected sunlight—distinguishing soil, water, metals, and vegetation—it targeted a 511-kilometre orbit. Accompanying it were 15 smaller satellites from India, Europe, Brazil, and Nepal, mostly experimental.

Disaster struck at the third stage's conclusion, as the rocket veered off course. ISRO Chairman Dr V Narayanan confirmed data analysis was underway, but the outcome was clear: the rocket and all payloads were lost. This marked the PSLV's second failure in quick succession, following the May 2025 mishap, eroding confidence in a workhorse long deemed reliable.

Barely eight months prior, on 18 May 2025, PSLV-C61 lofted EOS-09 (formerly RISAT), a 1,700-kilogram radar imaging satellite capable of all-weather, day-night surveillance—vital for defence reconnaissance. Six minutes post-lift-off, the third-stage solid fuel motor suffered a chamber pressure drop, dooming the mission. This rare PSLV shortfall severely impaired India's earth observation fleet.

Earlier that year, on 28 January 2025, GSLV-F15 aimed to bolster NAVIC, India's indigenous navigation constellation akin to GPS, with NVS-02. Marking Sriharikota's 100th launch, it achieved initial orbit placement.

However, a satellite-internal valve malfunction halted oxidiser release, preventing engine firing. Stranded in an elliptical transfer orbit (perigee 170 km, apogee 36,500 km), it fell short of the required 35,700 km geostationary circle, rendering it useless for military positioning and timing.

Rewind to August 2021 amid the Covid-19 pandemic: GSLV-F10 carried EOS-03 (GISAT-1) for continuous regional monitoring in disaster management, agriculture, and resource tracking. A cryogenic upper-stage failure—triggered by a liquid hydrogen valve leak—halted operations before reaching its 36,000 km slot. Delayed from 2020, this loss delayed agile observation capabilities.

The sequence began in August 2017 with PSLV-C39 and IRNSS-1H, precursor to NAVIC. A heat shield refused to separate, trapping the satellite within the rocket. Essential for regional navigation aiding government and military users, its failure exposed early vulnerabilities in payload fairing mechanisms.

These incidents transcend monetary losses, which have ballooned considerably. They erode India's space-based deterrence and intelligence edge, particularly amid escalating border tensions and regional rivalries. NAVIC disruptions, for instance, could hamper precision-guided munitions and troop movements.

Reliable domestic imaging and navigation form the backbone of modern warfare doctrines. Gaps here force pivots to foreign alternatives like Galileo or commercial providers, introducing latency, costs, and geopolitical strings. In an era of hypersonic threats and drone swarms, such dependencies could prove operationally crippling.

ISRO's overall success rate remains enviable, yet defence missions buck this trend disproportionately. Why? Defence payloads often integrate cutting-edge, often experimental tech from DRDO—hyperspectral sensors, synthetic aperture radars, atomic clocks—pushing integration complexities. Rushed timelines amid security imperatives may sideline exhaustive testing.

Quality control emerges as a recurring theme. Valve malfunctions, pressure anomalies, and stage deviations suggest lapses in component-level verification and simulation fidelity. Cryogenic stages, notoriously finicky, have faltered twice, hinting at persistent challenges in handling super-cold propellants.

Oversight mechanisms warrant review. While ISRO excels in civilian missions, defence linkages introduce classified elements, potentially obscuring full transparency. Inter-agency coordination between ISRO and DRDO, though improving, may harbour friction points in design reviews and failure probes.

The clustering of failures—three in 12 months—signals urgency. Post-2025 mishaps, has ISRO ramped up non-destructive testing, AI-driven anomaly detection, or redundant systems? Public disclosures remain terse, fuelling speculation over root-cause rectifications.

India's strategic horizon demands flawless execution. With China advancing reusable rockets and anti-satellite weapons, and Pakistan leaning on Chinese Beidou, ISRO cannot afford slips. NAVIC's full operationalisation and hyperspectral constellations are linchpins for Aatmanirbhar defence.

Lessons abound: prioritise defence missions in simulation queues, enforce dual-vendor sourcing for critical components, and institutionalise independent failure audits. Enhanced ground infrastructure, like upgraded vibration test facilities, could bridge gaps.

Public-private synergies offer promise. Start-Ups like Skyroot and Agnikul are innovating launchers; integrating them could distribute risk and accelerate iterations. Yet, ISRO must lead by embedding military-grade reliability as a non-negotiable.

These stumbles test India's resolve to forge a sovereign space shield. Bolstering oversight, investing in redundancy, and fostering a culture of unrelenting precision will be key. Only then can ISRO convert these setbacks into stepping stones for unassailable space dominance.

Agencies