Falcon 9 Axiom-4 · Attempt 4 — Ignition & LZ-1 Touchdown, T-12h

🚀 Muhūrtha-Based Technical Risk Assessment
@SpaceX • @isro • @NASA • @Axiom_Space
Axiom-4 Mission Rescheduled Liftoff: Wednesday, 25 June 2025 | 02:31 AM EDT

I. Consolidated Astrological Forecast
A fresh Muhūrtha scan rates 02:31 AM EDT on 25 June as 90% auspicious—the best moment of time that the launch team has chosen until now! 🎉The timing supports an orderly countdown and clean ascent, yet it also flags a band of mid-level risks that flight controllers must keep on their consoles. The envelope of potential failure modes is as follows. Not every anomaly must occur; this is the spectrum most likely to manifest in some combination.

✅ On-Time Liftoff & Nominal Ascent | Probability = 1.0 (Certain)
A flawless T-0 is forecast. Falcon 9 Block 5 will show off again! It should leave the pad to the second, sail through Max Q, and land its booster on the droneship.

☢ Solar-Radiation Exposure (X-Class CME Threat) | Probability = Medium–High
Models show potential for an X-class CME within the launch + 72 h window. Dragon and ISS must be ready to enter storm-shelter mode: crew strapped in, non-essentials powered down, GOES proton data monitored.

🛰 Debris Interaction | Probability = Medium
Departure corridor crosses multiple space fragments. Minor flakes or plume-shed debris may tap the hull at stage sep; critical impact odds remain low, but continuous CARM/CAM is mandatory.

🤝 Docking-Interface Challenges | Probability = Medium–High
Mechanical couplings may feel "sticky." Dragon's nose-cone latch or IDA-3 alignment pins could need two-to-three approach cycles for a hard seal. Reserve propellant and crew time.

💰 Time-Engineering Note: Selecting this more auspicious window from the outset would have eliminated earlier scrubs, overtime shifts, and range re-bookings—saving the program millions in direct and opportunity costs. Next time, hire the Muhūrtha desk first.

🔮 Overall verdict: Launch proceeds, Falcon flies textbook, Dragon docks, and mission goals are met—provided teams stay sharp on solar weather, docking hardware, and Dragon propellant reserves. Vigilance over heroics. Congratulations in advance to SpaceX, ISRO, NASA, Axiom Space, and the entire international flight community. 🎉

Falcon 9 lit at 02:31 EDT to the second after a wind-profile data-upload anomaly resolved with <2 min to spare. Vehicle through Max Q clean. First stage touched down at LZ-1 (RTLS confirmed). Crew Dragon 'Grace' on target orbit. Trans-equatorial coronal hole + Earth-facing N-S filament activated the +72 h solar-radiation watch as forecast.

Attempt 4 — the GO that closed the Axiom-4 campaign (LA-007-010). Sealed 2025-06-24 (~T-12h), rating the June-25 02:31 EDT window 90% auspicious. The doctrine on display: an auspicious window does not promise zero issues — it promises success through them. A launch-escape-system wind-data upload nearly scrubbed the attempt (worked against a T-37 cutoff) and resolved in time; Ax-4 lifted off exactly on schedule. Campaign arc: three inauspicious windows each slipped; the first auspicious window flew clean and on time.

🚀 Muhūrtha-Based Technical Risk Assessment. @SpaceX • @isro • @NASA • @Axiom_Space. Axiom-4 Mission Rescheduled Liftoff: Wednesday, 25 June 2025 | 02:31 AM EDT. I. Consolidated Astrological Forecast — A fresh Muhūrtha scan rates 02:31 AM EDT on 25 June as 90% auspicious: a GO, with a spot-on ignition…

THE SEALED FORECAST — the June-25 02:31 EDT window rates 90% auspicious: a GO, clean ignition. The campaign's first truly favorable window — and this time the call is to fly.

GO for launch. 🚀 @NASA, @Axiom_Space, and @SpaceX are targeting 2:31 a.m. EDT, Wednesday, June 25, for launch of the fourth private astronaut mission to the International Space Station.

This time the agencies and the window agree — NASA/Axiom/SpaceX GO, weather 90% favorable. After three inauspicious slips, the auspicious window and the launch director align.

SpaceX — all systems good, weather 90% favorable

One hour, but they are working an issue that could result in no go for launch. They are trying to upload new data for "the wind conditions for the launch escape system".

THE ADVERSITY — a near-scrub: teams race to upload new launch-escape-system wind data, with a hard T-37-minute cutoff before it becomes a scrub.

NASASpaceflight — "Taking it to T-37 mins as the cutoff. If unable by then, it'll be a scrub."

At 2:31am ET on Wednesday, the Ax-4 crew from @Axiom_Space lifted off on the @SpaceX Dragon spacecraft from @NASAKennedy in Florida to the orbital outpost.

LIFTOFF — exactly at 02:31 EDT, on schedule, despite the wind-data scare. The fix landed in time and Crew Dragon reached its targeted orbit.

ISRO — Crew Dragon deployed into its targeted transfer orbit by Falcon 9

An auspicious Muhūrtha does not necessarily mean that an event will proceed without exceptions. In some cases, exceptions will appear but they will be resolved successfully. As you can see, the launch proceeded exactly at the scheduled time without any delay.

THE DOCTRINE, stated on the day — an auspicious window does not promise the absence of issues; it promises that issues get resolved and the event succeeds. It flew exactly on time.

#AXIOM4 Mission: The world watches as India scales the skies…

Officially confirmed and nationally celebrated — Gp Capt Shubhanshu Shukla on his way to become the first Indian aboard the ISS; a four-nation crew (US · India · Poland · Hungary).

PM Narendra Modi — welcomes the successful launch

NASA — a four-nation crew en route to the Space Station


GSLV Mk II / NISAR — T-0 No-Go, T-16d

Muhūrtha Risk Advisory & Open Challenge
Mission: NASA–ISRO SAR (NISAR)
Vehicle: GSLV Mk II
Pad: Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota
Published T-0: Wednesday, 16 July 2025 | 17:00 IST

I. Consolidated Forecast

Pilgrimages to Sri Venkateswara at the Tirumala Tirupati @TTDevasthanams hill shrine—often paired with a stop at Chengalamma Temple in Sullurpeta—are woven into @isro culture. Engineers regularly present miniature launch vehicles, seeking blessings for clean engine starts and perfect staging. The ritual never conflicts with calculus or telemetry; it complements them.

Yet a contradiction emerges: the temple visit is welcomed, but the astrological timing counsel that flows from the same tradition is set aside. That selective respect will prove costly. If this advisory is ignored—if the analysis is dismissed or mocked—no procession up Tirumala's 3,550 steps will rescue the mission. The GSLV Mk II will not lift off at 17:00 IST. A countdown hold, scrub, and re-schedule stand at Probability = 1.0 (certain).

Should the team nevertheless force a liftoff simply to prove this forecast wrong, the flight will be non-nominal. Guidance faults will arise, orbit insertion will miss the mark, and the result will be the loss of the launch vehicle and/or the $1.5 billion satellite. Even partial survival would leave @NASA @isro @NASAJPL NISAR unable to meet its science objectives.

Below are the only fault paths highlighted to date—no more, no less. Probabilities are attached; each is now rated High.

🪫 Electrical Power-System Undervolt | Probability ≈ 0.80 (High)
Weeks on the pad let individual battery cells drift. At least four minutes before liftoff (T-4 min) the avionics self-check will detect low voltage on the 28-volt bus and command an automatic hold.

🌡 Cryogenic Fuel-Temperature Imbalance | Probability ≈ 0.80 (High)
Liquid hydrogen (LH₂) cooled even 0.8 K too far can turn slushy, while liquid oxygen (LOX) may stratify. Engines will read the wrong mixture ratio and shut the start sequence within milliseconds.

🔥 Ignition-Sequence Mistiming | Probability ≈ 0.80 (High)
The hypergolic igniter pulse and main-valve opening must align within ~30 ms. Any slip will prompt the controller to abort, avoiding a hard-start over-pressure event.

🌬 Vent & Pressurization-Valve Stiction | Probability ≈ 0.80 (High)
Ice collars can lock a gaseous-nitrogen (GN₂) vent or a helium pressurization valve. Tank pressure will drift outside limits; flight software will veto continuation.

🛰 Guidance & Sun-Synchronous-Orbit Injection Error | Probability ≈ 0.80 (High)
If launch proceeds regardless, inertial-reference drift and star-sensor dropout will corrupt guidance. The upper-stage burn will significantly miss the required sun-synchronous-orbit plane. Recovery ΔV will exceed onboard propellant, dooming the satellite to an unusable orbit or outright loss.

II. Courteous—Yet Firm—Challenge
1⃣ Hold the published T-0—16 July 2025, 17:00 IST—exactly.
2⃣ Run the entire countdown unchanged; do not tweak a single step to appease this forecast.
3⃣ When the attempt ends, release the raw data—battery voltages, ignition-timing traces, valve positions, guidance logs, orbit vectors, and anomaly flags—so anyone can judge the outcome.

If the rocket lifts on time and flies clean, engineering excellence will earn full credit. If the sequence halts or the flight stumbles—as predicted—the record will show that astrological timing counsel deserves the same respect already afforded to the Tirumala Tirupati pilgrimage.

The 16 Jul window vanished. Eenadu floated 18 Jul; Deccan Chronicle then reported 30 Jul · 17:00 IST as the new target; NASASpaceflight's schedule calendar rolled over; ISRO's r_isro channel confirmed the slip. The pad never reached the T-4 terminal phase, leaving the specific fault probes unfalsifiable below the threshold — the higher-level scrub-call landed exactly as sealed.

Jul 16, 2025 · 17:00 IST window vanished

Sealed T-16 days — the consolidated risk advisory (2025-06-30) for the published 16-Jul 17:00 IST window, after an opening call ~20 days out. The value is a high-conviction no-go on a $1.5B flagship's officially-scheduled window (FAA NOTAM on the books) — not a tight window but a long, actionable lead on a date the agencies were tracking as GO. Scope: this grades the 16-Jul T-0 no-go HIT only; NISAR is operational and ultimately flew on 30 July — the call was window-specific, never a claim the mission would fail.

1.5 billion dollars is at stake! I guarantee with absolute certainty (probability 1.0) that the currently scheduled launch date for @NASA / @ISRO's NISAR mission is extremely inauspicious. If you'd like to safeguard national prestige and avoid unnecessary costs, please reach out.

The opening call — the published 16-Jul NISAR window is extremely inauspicious: a no-go. Issued ~20 days out with an offer to help; a $1.5B flagship at stake.

Out of respect for both the scientific method and millennia-old astrological practice, I would like to issue a courteous, professional challenge: 1⃣ Hold the currently published T-0 of 5:00 PM IST on July 16, 2025. 2⃣ Conduct the countdown and launch exactly as planned, without modifications based on this advisory…

A courteous, professional challenge — hold the published 16-Jul T-0, fly it as planned, and grade the call against reality.

Official NOTAM for GSLV NISAR launch from the @FAANews.

The go-posture, on the record — the official FAA NOTAM for the 16-Jul GSLV/NISAR window. The prevailing schedule was GO; the sealed no-go diverged from it.

Muhūrtha Risk Advisory & Open Challenge. Mission: NASA–ISRO SAR (NISAR). Vehicle: GSLV Mk II. Pad: Satish Dhawan Space Centre, Sriharikota. Published T-0: Wednesday, 16 July 2025 | 17:00 IST.

THE SEALED FORECAST — the consolidated Muhūrtha risk advisory formally sealing the 16-Jul 17:00 IST T-0 as a no-go: a hold / scrub / reschedule called certain, at T-16 days.

It looks like the launch will now be delayed as forecast. But this post is relying on a news article from @eenadunet. As per @NASASpaceflight, there is no change.

Honest caution mid-window — early delay reports surface, but flagged as unconfirmed against NASASpaceflight's "no change." No premature victory lap before the official word.

The joint NASA-ISRO NISAR mission on GSLV-F16 is now scheduled to lift off on July 30! 🚀 The launch is likely to take place at around 5 pm IST

CONFIRMED — the 16-Jul window did not hold; NISAR slips to July 30. The no-go, on the public record (the mission later flew on 30 July — the call was the window, not the mission).

New NOTAM for GSLV-F16 / NISAR — enforcement 26 Jul–14 Aug (the rescheduled window)


GSLV-F16 / NISAR — Slip & Orbital-Deviation Class

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.

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.

Sealed ~T-18d for the July-30 17:00 IST window, classing it for a schedule slip and an orbital-deviation. Graded PARTIAL, kept honest: the scrub-class call OVER-FIRED — the window slipped to 17:40 and NISAR flew successfully on July 30, so it is not a clean HIT; and the orbital-deviation class is only PARTIALLY substantiated — a verifiable insertion shortfall (~737 vs ~747 km, a ~45-50 day orbit-raise per ISRO's own commissioning statement) AND a CONFIRMED TLE-catalogue excursion on 19 Sep (pull the epochs yourself; independently flagged by orbital trackers). What stays OPEN is the excursion's physical interpretation — the agencies' 'data error' vs a real event — not the data itself. NISAR is reported operational; we never assert a mission loss, and the composite is graded PARTIAL because the scrub-class call over-fired (the rocket flew) and several named ascent sub-mechanisms did not.

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.

THE SEALED FORECAST — the July-30 17:00 IST window classed for a schedule slip and an orbital-deviation class.

WE HAVE A LAUNCH DATE. The NASA-ISRO joint NISAR mission is set to liftoff on GSLV-F16 on July 30th at 5:40 pm IST! At a cost of $1.5 billion, NISAR will be the most expensive Earth observation satellite ever launched!

The slip — the published T-0 moves off the forecast 17:00 to 17:40 IST.

ISRO — GSLV-F16 to launch NISAR on July 30 at 17:40 IST

GSLV-F16/NISAR Separation confirmed. Each stage, precise. Cryo ignition and Cryo stage performance flawless. GSLV-F16 delivered NISAR to orbit.

The launch SUCCEEDED — GSLV-F16 delivered NISAR to orbit on July 30. Stated plainly: this is not a launch-failure claim, and the slip-class call did not become a scrub (one reason this advisory is graded PARTIAL, not HIT).

Union Minister — congratulations on the successful GSLV-F16 / NISAR launch

On Mission NISAR Satellite, ISRO Chairman Dr V Narayanan says, "NASA was very excited to understand that India could successfully launch using the indigenously developed GSLV marked vehicle... It is one of the most precise launches that has ever happened in the world."

ISRO's characterization — the Chairman calls it one of the most precise launches ever. The documented insertion data that follows is what the seal's deviation-class was about.

So much for the claim of precise insertion into orbit! "NISAR is inserted at an altitude of 737 km and we need to actually rise up to 747 km and it will take about 45-50 days for those operations to take place."

The documented orbital-deviation the seal anticipated — NISAR inserted at ~737 km against the planned ~747 km (a ~10 km shortfall, a ~45-50 day orbit-raise per the commissioning statement). A documented deviation, NOT a mission failure — the satellite proceeds to its science orbit.

The 12m radar antenna reflector of #NISAR is now fully 'bloom' 🌸 Congratulations to @NASA JPL & @isro on this tremendous milestone! The systematic deployment—driven by multiple motor actuators & intricate cabling—faced many challenges. Some of the challenges involved were thermal behavior of composites…

The mission progressed — the 12m radar boom deployed on Aug 16, with ISRO noting the deployment "faced many challenges." Kept in deliberately: it worked, and the record does not hide that.

On September 19, there were four TLEs issued before the satellite stopped issuing additional TLEs for the next six days. The data suggests that orbit-guidance operations likely took place on September 19, 2025… multiple TLE revisions within hours indicate active orbit guidance, then a six-day TLE silence, after which the data reverted to a ~747 km science orbit.

The TLE record itself — the public catalogue for NISAR (object 65053) shows an anomalous excursion on 19 Sep: apogee ~748→1,219 km, perigee ~746→193 km, then a six-day gap before the data reverts to ~747 km. CONFIRMED, verifiable fact — pull the epochs yourself — and independently flagged by orbital trackers and a public r/ISRO discussion. A FEYNMAN CHALLENGE — the plain, physical question no hand-waving survives, because the catalogue is nature's own record and nature cannot be fooled: across the SAME six days NISAR's data went dark, the GSLV rocket-body DEBRIS (object 65054) was tracked with continuous, accurate TLEs. So explain, simply — how is the largest AND most expensive satellite ever launched (~$1.5 billion), under close watch through its 90-day commissioning, "untrackable / a data error" for six days while its own spent booster is tracked fine the entire time? Either a straight answer or the contrast stands. It is checkable in the public catalogue — strong circumstantial evidence. What's confirmed is the data and the contrast; the operator's further inference — that the reverted value may not, by itself, confirm re-acquisition — he labels his own speculation. This advisory asserts NO deliberate cover-up and NO mission loss: NISAR is reported operational; the physical interpretation of the excursion stays open.

Independent orbital tracker (@flyingwktk) flags the NISAR TLE anomaly

Public r/ISRO discussion — "What's up with NISAR?"


LVM3-M5 / GSAT-7R — Weather Impedance & Cryogenic Anomaly

Announced 2 Nov · 17:00 IST T-0 of GSAT-7R / CMS-03 on LVM3-M5 is high-risk on a ~$500M Navy payload. Two spectra named: weather impedance and catastrophic abnormal termination / propulsion.

Cyclone Montha lands 28 Oct (4 days pre-T-0). Chairman Narayanan acknowledges on record post-flight that 'weather was not that cooperative' and the campaign was a 'tough challenging time'. C25 cryogenic shut-off anomaly observed at T+950.94 s; ISRO publicly reframes as 'in-flight re-ignition' innovation. AI cross-analysis (Grok) and independent observers flag it as off-nominal cryogenic behavior.

Sealed ~8 days out (a YouTube intelligence advisory, 2025-10-25) for the Nov-2 LVM3-M5 / GSAT-7R launch — the corpus's one sealed defense-communications-payload call (the Indian Navy's satellite). The value is specificity across TWO named components that both landed and are independently documented: a weather impedance — named ~8 days out, before the specific cyclone's track was a settled forecast; and because the read is locked before the advisory's multi-hour video production (AI generation, 4K conversion, upload, platform processing — longer still for this first such video), the call predated the same-day IMD cyclone alert that then followed. It was borne out by a severe cyclonic storm (Cyclone Montha) striking the coast, with ISRO's Chairman acknowledging the weather on the record — and a cryogenic anomaly (the C25 stage shut-off at T+950.94s, in ISRO's own mission brochure). The mission succeeded — the named risks were real, the satellite was delivered.

Respected Chairman of ISRO, Namaste. I am honored to present a detailed intelligence advisory for the launch of the GSAT-7R communications satellite, designed exclusively for the Indian Navy…

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — naming, in advance, both a WEATHER IMPEDANCE and a CRYOGENIC ANOMALY for the GSAT-7R / CMS-03 launch (the Indian Navy's comms satellite).

Documenting launch time as per NASA space flight data.

The scheduled window on the record.

India: IMD issues alert for severe cyclonic storm; landfall in Andhra on Oct 28.

WEATHER IMPEDANCE materializes — the advisory named this risk ~8 days out, before the cyclone's track was a settled forecast; the IMD's severe-cyclonic-storm alert for Andhra (the launch pad's own state) followed, and Cyclone Montha bore the call out. The first named component, on the public record.

I must tell that we had really a tough challenging time during the launch campaign. You know that the weather was not that cooperative. But… even under this difficult weather condition, we could come out successfully and accomplish the mission in a grand manner.

ISRO's OWN confirmation — the Chairman acknowledges the weather was a major impediment to the campaign. The weather-impedance call, confirmed by the agency itself.

Satellite separation occurred without C25 shutoff.

THE CRYOGENIC ANOMALY — the C25 cryo stage's shut-off is documented at T+950.94s in ISRO's own mission brochure, and independent trackers flagged that separation occurred without the expected C25 shutdown. ISRO characterizes it as a planned in-flight re-ignition demonstration; the operator and others read it as a shut-off anomaly. The DATA is documented; the CHARACTERIZATION is disputed — the second named component, materialized.

ISRO CMS-03 / LVM3-M5 mission brochure — C25 shut-off at T+950.94s (official)

Independent tracker — "15-sec delay between C25 shutoff and sat-sep… underperformed slightly?"

LVM3-M5 successfully places the CMS-03 / GSAT-7R communications satellite into the targeted orbit.

The mission SUCCEEDED — GSAT-7R (CMS-03), the Navy's comms satellite, was delivered. Both named risks (weather impedance + cryogenic anomaly) materialized and are documented; the launch still succeeded. A clean HIT on the named risks, honestly noting the mission's success.


Artemis II — Slip & Six-Mode Spectrum, First Crewed Flyby

Announced 6 Feb · 21:41 ET T-0 of Artemis II is unsuitable. Six engineering anomaly classes named with explicit probabilities; 90% cumulative call on multi-hour-to-multi-week hold extensions.

NASA + SpcPlcyOnline + cbs_spacenews + SpaceflightNow publicly confirm wet dress rehearsal slip + launch delay to 8 Feb 2026 — 4 days post-seal, 7 days pre-T-0. Announced 6 Feb · 21:41 ET window vanishes. Grok AI cross-analysis quantifies financial drag and acknowledges humans hold the calibration edge (Exhibits 7–8).

Sealed ~11 days pre-T-0 (a video advisory, 2026-01-26) on the highest-profile crewed flight since Apollo 17. The value is twofold: a specific delay-call on the announced Feb-6 window (named an 85-90% anomaly spectrum — avionics/electrical incl. cabin-lighting, cryo-loading holds, telemetry) against an active NASA campaign posture; and a documented AI head-to-head — xAI's Grok published its own high-nominal forecast, NASA then slipped to NET Feb 8, and Grok conceded the human call aligned closer with events. One dated exchange, not a claim AI can never match it.

Artemis II NET Feb 6 ~9:41PM ET window is cosmically heated—not ideal for this historic crewed lunar flyby. High risk (85-90%) of anomalies: electrical glitches including potential cabin lighting loss during Orion transition, cryo loading holds, telemetry ghosts. My Jyotish Intelligence advisory recommends a delay.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — the announced Feb-6 Artemis II window is unsuitable: an 85-90% anomaly risk across a six-mode spectrum (avionics / electrical incl. cabin-lighting, cryo-loading holds, telemetry), with a recommendation to DELAY.

Advisory published on X + YouTube (Episode 15)

Extensive outreach to NASA and space / political leadership

For comparison, here's the five-line forecast from AI @grok.

THE HEAD-TO-HEAD — for comparison, xAI's Grok publishes its own Artemis II forecast: a high-nominal, low-anomaly read. The AI's position on the record, beside the human delay-call.

Grok's analysis of the financial implications of ignoring the advisory

Good morning from NASA's Kennedy Space Center. The countdown clock should be ticking right now for a crucial fueling test of the Artemis 2 moon rocket. According to multiple sources, the test has been delayed 48 hours but still no official word from the space agency.

The first signs — the wet dress rehearsal's fueling test slips ~48 hours amid NASA silence.

NASASpaceflight — "they never got into the countdown. No word from NASA."

Due to weather, we now plan to fuel our Artemis II Moon rocket on Monday, Feb. 2, at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. With this adjustment, the earliest possible launch date is Sunday, Feb. 8. A launch date will be set after teams have reviewed the results of the wet dress rehearsal.

NASA CONFIRMS — the announced Feb-6 window is off; fueling slips to Feb 2 and the earliest launch is NET Feb 8, pending the wet dress rehearsal. The delay called ~11 days out, on NASA's own word.

Space Policy Online — the slip confirmed

Based on NASA's FY23 SLS annual costs of ~$2.6 billion, a rough per-day estimate is about $7 million. For a 2-day delay, that's around $14 million. Actual losses could vary based on factors like fueling status or additional resets — this is not official.

The cost quantified — Grok estimates ~$7M/day, ~$14M for the two-day slip the advisory warned of.

Human edges out AI — your delay call aligned closer with events.

THE CONCESSION — having published its own nominal forecast, Grok grades the head-to-head against itself and gives it to the sealed human call. An AI, holding the pen against its own model, scored it for the human. One dated exchange — not a claim AI can never match it.


Artemis II — Feb 8: WDR Scrub on LH₂ Leak

Re-targeted 8 Feb · 21:20 ET T-0 of Artemis II is unsuitable. Seven engineering anomaly classes named with explicit probabilities; 90% cumulative call on multi-hold extensions.

NASA halts WDR at T-5:15 on a liquid-hydrogen leak at the core-stage tail service mast umbilical; leak rate exceeds limits after multiple reseat / warm attempts. NASA publicly targets March as earliest launch opportunity. Six of seven named anomaly classes fire on the public record — cleanest mechanism HIT in the Artemis II series to date.

Sealed ~7 days out (video advisory, 2026-02-01) on the Feb-8 Artemis II window — window 2 of the Artemis campaign (LA-014→018), after the Feb-6 window (LA-014) had already slipped. The forecast carried a 90% holds/delays probability across a six-mode anomaly spectrum, including a cryogenic-loading / valve class. Two days later the Feb-3 wet dress rehearsal terminated at T-5:15 on a liquid-hydrogen leak at the tail service mast umbilical — and NASA slipped the launch to March pending a second WDR. The named cryogenic and holds/delays classes, realized on NASA's own record.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — the Feb-8 Artemis II window carries a 90% probability of holds / delays across a six-mode anomaly spectrum, including a cryogenic-loading / valve class. The campaign's second window, called before the wet dress rehearsal.

Outreach to the NASA Artemis Launch Team.

Outreach — the advisory put directly to NASA's Artemis launch team ahead of the rehearsal.

Artemis II WDR scrubbed. Hydrogen leak during terminal count. NASA: "The Artemis II wet dress rehearsal countdown was terminated at the T-5:15 minute mark due to a liquid hydrogen leak at the interface of the tail service mast umbilical, which had experienced high concentrations of liquid hydrogen…"

THE SCRUB — the wet dress rehearsal is terminated at T-5:15 on a liquid-hydrogen leak at the tail service mast umbilical: the cryogenic-loading / valve anomaly class, realized.

NASASpaceflight — WDR terminal count, live

The broader spectrum, on NASA's own record — alongside the LH2 leak, NASA's Feb-3 statements and press conference detail an extended Orion closeout with a hatch-valve repressurization (structural / pressure), intermittent ground audio dropouts (avionics / telemetry), and thermal preconditioning attempts (propulsion / thermal): the named anomaly classes, clustered in one test.

NASA — agency leaders' post-WDR press conference (live)

NASA completed a wet dress rehearsal for the Artemis II mission in the early morning hours on Feb. 3. To allow teams to review data and conduct a second wet dress rehearsal, NASA will now target March as the earliest possible launch opportunity for the Artemis II mission.

NASA CONFIRMS — the Feb-8 window is gone; NASA targets MARCH and a second WDR. The 90% holds / delays call, on the agency's own word.


Artemis II — Mar 3: Second WDR, Slip Confirmed

Re-targeted 3 Mar · 17:30 ET T-0 of Artemis II is unsuitable. Four pre-launch anomaly classes named; 85–95% cumulative call on significant pre-launch anomalies; 40–60% on-time likelihood.

NASA confirms a second wet dress rehearsal with tanking NET 19 Feb, seal replacements at high-concentration LH₂ areas, GSE filter replacement on reduced hydrogen flow, interface reconnect work post-leak, and comprehensive data + telemetry review — pushing the earliest launch opportunity to 6 Mar or later. The 3 Mar window is eliminated.

Sealed ~17 days out (video advisory, 2026-02-14) on the March-3 Artemis II window — window 3 of the campaign (LA-014→018). The forecast: cumulative holds/delays plus cryogenic-loading / seal anomalies make an early-March launch unviable. NASA's mid-February work bore it out — engineers replaced seals after the Feb-3 hydrogen leak, a partial fueling test left filling issues unresolved (reduced LH2 flow → filter replacement / GSE inspection), and a second wet dress rehearsal was set for Feb-19 tanking with NO launch date until after a successful rehearsal: the March-3 window, eliminated.

Following last week's fueling test for Artemis II, engineers replaced seals in an area where a hydrogen leak was seen and remated the connections to the rocket. This week teams are conducting a range of tests in advance of the next rehearsal including at cryogenic temperatures and pressure.

The troubleshooting underway — after the Feb-3 LH2 leak, engineers replace seals and remate connections, running cryogenic-temperature and pressure tests before the next rehearsal.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — the March-3 window (5:30-7:30 PM ET) will not hold: cumulative holds/delays and cryogenic-loading / seal anomalies make an early-March launch unviable. Window 3 of the Artemis campaign.

Artemis II Hydrogen Filling Issues Remain. A partial test was not all good news, and now next week's planned second Wet Dress Rehearsal appears to be headed towards a delay.

The trouble persists — hydrogen filling issues remain; even the planned second WDR looks headed for a delay.

We're targeting Thursday, Feb. 19, as the tanking day for the second fueling test ahead of our Artemis II test flight around the Moon. A formal launch date will not be set until after a successful rehearsal and data reviews.

NASA CONFIRMS — a second WDR (Feb-19 tanking) is required, and no launch date will be set until after it: the early-March window, including March 3, is eliminated. The cumulative-holds / cryogenic call, borne out.

NASA blog (Feb 16) — seal replacements, reduced LH2 flow → filter replacement, GSE inspection


Artemis II — Mar 6: ICPS Helium Anomaly & Rollback

Re-targeted 6 Mar · 20:29 ET T-0 of Artemis II is unsuitable. 70+-step countdown risk map including LH₂ micro-leaks, helium tank-press spikes, ICPS timing offsets, telemetry-pipeline overload.

NASA confirms an interrupted helium flow to the ICPS upper stage emerging during post-WDR reconfigurations; rollback preparations underway, foreclosing the March 6 window. The named helium-driven pressurization mechanism fires on the public record within 2 days of seal.

Sealed ~15 days out (video advisory, 2026-02-19) on the March-6 Artemis II window — window 4 of the campaign. The standout is SUBSYSTEM specificity: the seal named an ICPS (interim cryogenic propulsion stage) upper-stage HELIUM anomaly and a rollback. Two days later NASA reported an interrupted helium flow to the ICPS and began rolling the vehicle back to the VAB (completed Feb 25), ruling out a March launch; the root cause was a dislodged seal in the ICPS helium quick-disconnect line. Graded 0.72 — the named ICPS-helium + rollback class hit precisely; some sub-mechanisms (a full terminal-count near-scrub) never had a March countdown to fire in. Reconstructed: the source analysis had no links, so the rungs are independently sourced to NASA's Feb-21 + Mar-3 blogs and SpaceNews / NASASpaceflight / SpacePolicyOnline.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — for the March-6 Artemis II window: an ICPS upper-stage HELIUM anomaly and a rollback, alongside LH2-loading and terminal-count strain. Sealed Feb 19 as the second wet dress rehearsal ran and a March-6 target was being set.

THE NAMED ANOMALY — two days after the seal, NASA reports an interrupted flow of helium to the SLS rocket's interim cryogenic propulsion stage (ICPS) and begins preparing to roll the vehicle back. The exact subsystem the seal named.

SpacePolicyOnline — Artemis II delayed due to the upper-stage problem

THE ROLLBACK — NASA rolls the SLS / Orion back to the Vehicle Assembly Building (completed Feb 25), ruling out a March launch and aiming for April — the rollback the seal named, just ~24 hours after a March-6 date had been set.

ROOT CAUSE — NASA traces the ICPS helium blockage to a dislodged seal in a quick-disconnect line feeding helium from ground equipment into the stage; repairs completed, keeping an April launch on track. The named ICPS-helium anomaly, root-caused to the precise interface.

SpaceNews — SLS upper-stage helium-flow problem fixed


Artemis II — Apr 1: FTS + LAS 11-Min Hold (Launched · Scrub Overcalled)

1 Apr · 18:24 EDT T-0 of Artemis II carries 90–95% scrub probability in three precise zones — Zone 2 (FTS/LAS-armed false telemetry + GO-poll overload) named as the most critical cluster.

NASA lifts off at 18:35 EDT — 11 minutes late — driven by exactly the Zone-2 mechanisms named (FTS communications no-go, fixed with Shuttle-era VAB equipment, + LAS battery-temperature-sensor out-of-range). The full scrub the 90–95% headline pointed at did not happen — NASA launched the same window. Zone-3 perigee under-performance did not occur (burns nominal; FD3 correction burn cancelled for precision). Graded NEAR.

Sealed ~15 days out (video advisory, 2026-03-17) on the April-1 Artemis II window — window 5, the campaign's final call and its honest NEAR. The forecast carried a 90-95% SCRUB probability across three zones. Outcome, graded against the operator himself: Artemis II LAUNCHED on April 1 (an 11-minute slip to 6:35 PM EDT) — so the headline scrub call OVER-FIRED, and this is graded NEAR (kept in the ledger, scored 0.5, never laundered to a HIT). What DID hit precisely was Zone 2: an FTS 'no-go' (Shuttle-era equipment summoned to verify) and a LAS battery-temperature-out-of-range issue produced exactly the 11-minute hold predicted. Zone 1 (LH2 topping/replenish, monitored, no major leak) and Zone 3 (solar array nominal, but a low perigee-raise burn requiring an Orion correction) were partial. The over-call IS the honesty differential — the named arming/validation failures were real; the scrub was not.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — the April-1 6:24 PM EDT window carries a 90-95% SCRUB probability across three zones: LH2 loading/conditioning (Z1), holds + GO-poll + terminal-count incl. FTS / LAS validation failures (Z2), and upper-stage / Orion separation incl. perigee-burn under-performance (Z3). Framed deliberately non-alarmist for NASA leadership.

NASA PAO: The range is working an issue with the FTS (Flight Termination System). Apparently Shuttle era FTS equipment is needed to verify the FTS issue, it is currently being picked up from the VAB. The range is no go for now. #ArtemisII

ZONE 2 hits — the range works an FTS (Flight Termination System) issue, summoning Shuttle-era equipment to verify; "the range is no go for now." The arming/validation No-Go the seal named.

NASA PAO: New issue: 1 of the 2 batteries of the LAS (Launch Abort System) has a temperature that is out of range, not an issue right now, but this will be an issue further in the count, troubleshooting underway. #ArtemisII

ZONE 2 again — a second validation issue: a LAS (Launch Abort System) battery reads a temperature out of range. Together the FTS + LAS issues drove the 11-minute hold — the exact 'FTS & LAS re-attempts adding critical minutes' the seal named.

LAUNCH at 2235:12 UTC of SLS flight 2 with Artemis 2 from Kennedy Space Center. Artemis 2 has now maneuvered to a -2 x 70385 km x 28.3deg orbit.

THE HONEST PIVOT — Artemis II LAUNCHED at 22:35 UTC (6:35 PM EDT), an 11-minute slip from 6:24. So the headline 90-95% SCRUB call OVER-FIRED: it flew. This is exactly why the advisory is graded NEAR, not HIT — kept in the ledger, not laundered. (The catalogued ~-2 km perigee also flags the Zone-3 perigee-burn under-performance that needed an Orion correction.)

Solar array wings deployed and latched :) #ArtemisII

ZONE 3, kept honest — the solar-array deploy was NOMINAL, so the predicted latch-delay did NOT occur (an over-call on that sub-point), even as the low perigee-raise burn (above) needed an Orion correction. The partial calls are shown beside the hits, not hidden.


New Glenn NG-3 — 2CAT Tank-Test Anomaly & Window Slip

14 Apr 06:45–09:45 EDT NG-3 window carries high probability of late-discovered propulsion / tank / pressure-class anomalies forcing a short scrub of 1–3 days for additional testing or replacement.

High-energy anomaly during routine second-stage tank testing at Blue Origin's 2CAT facility (Rocket Park, Merritt Island, FL) causes visible roof damage to the building. NET slips from 14 Apr to 16 Apr — the pressure / tank-test sub-mechanism named in Zone 2 fires 5 days pre-T-0 (4 days post-seal).

Sealed ~7 days out (video advisory, 2026-04-05) before the April-12 NG-3 window — first of the New Glenn NG-3 campaign (LA-019→022). The forecast named a 2CAT / second-stage tank-test high-energy / pressure anomaly and a window slip, on an early booster-reuse profile prone to hidden internal degradation. Days later a high-energy anomaly during a routine second-stage propellant-tank test at the 2CAT facility (Merritt Island) breached the building's roof (Blue Origin confirmed the anomaly), and the NG-3 window slipped to NET April 16. The named tank-test anomaly and the slip both materialized. HIT (0.78).

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — for the New Glenn NG-3 (BlueBird) window: a high likelihood of delays and a sudden pressure / high-energy anomaly in propulsion / tank-testing operations, with hidden internal degradation on an early booster-reuse profile.

During a routine test at our 2CAT facility in Florida, we experienced an anomaly during test execution. There were no injuries, and safety protocols were in place at the time of the test.

THE NAMED ANOMALY — a high-energy anomaly during a routine SECOND-STAGE propellant-tank test at the 2CAT facility (Merritt Island) breaches the building's roof (confirmed by satellite imagery + Blue Origin's own statement). Exactly the pressure / tank-test high-energy anomaly the seal named.

🚨 Update on mission New Glenn | BlueBird Block 2 #2. Current status: To Be Confirmed NET April 16.

THE SLIP — the NG-3 window slips from April 12 to NET April 16, the schedule slip the seal named; Blue Origin set the revised target following the 2CAT incident.

Blue Origin delays New Glenn to April 16 after the test-site damage

Launch now set for 4/16 (delayed another 2 days)


New Glenn NG-3 — Engine Replacement & Hot-Fire Hold

Re-targeted 16 Apr NG-3 window carries high probability of multi-day slip driven by Zone 1 hidden-internal-degradation in the reflown booster surfacing via final-week engine-health anomaly.

Dave Limp confirms full BE-4 engine replacement on the reflown booster GS1-SN00002 on 13 Apr — on-record admission of the exact 'BE-4 engine subsystem wear → component swap in the final weeks' call. On 14 Apr the hot-fire test is held and rescheduled to 15 Apr; NET slips from 16 Apr to 18 Apr. The Zone 1 hidden-internal-degradation cluster named at advisory level fires 2–3 days pre-T-0.

Sealed ~5 days out (video advisory, 2026-04-11) on the NG-3 attempt-2 window — named an engine replacement + a hot-fire hold (ground-systems verification, last-minute holds, hidden internal degradation on early booster reuse). Two days later Blue Origin's CEO Dave Limp confirmed a full SEVEN-engine replacement on the first refurbished (reused) booster; the next day the hot-fire test was held and the window slipped from April 16 to NET April 18. Both named events materialized. HIT (0.85). (Limp framed the swap as an elective upgrade-test rather than a fault; the seal called the replacement either way — the documented fact is the full engine swap on the reused booster.)

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — for the NG-3 attempt-2 window: an engine replacement and a hot-fire hold, amid ground-systems verification issues, last-minute holds, and hidden internal degradation on an early booster-reuse profile.

With our first refurbished booster we elected to replace all seven engines and test out a few upgrades including a thermal protection system on one of the engine nozzles. We plan to use the engines we flew for NG-2 on future flights.

THE ENGINE REPLACEMENT — Blue Origin's CEO confirms a full SEVEN-engine replacement on the first refurbished (reused) booster, framing it as an elective upgrade-test. The engine replacement the seal named, on exactly the early-reuse profile flagged — engines swapped, whatever the characterization.

$ASTS Hold reported for the Hot Fire test over on the live stream.

THE HOT-FIRE HOLD — the static-fire (hot-fire) test is held, slipping to the next day; the NG-3 window then re-baselines from April 16 to NET April 18. The hot-fire hold the seal named, on the public record.


New Glenn NG-3 — 18 Apr Day-Wide No-Go & Hot-Fire Stand-Down

Treat the entire 18 Apr 06:45–09:43 EDT NG-3 launch day as no-go. Eleven-window segmentation with firm no-go on Window 1 and overall scrub probability exceeding 70%.

Within hours of seal on 15 Apr, Blue Origin stood down on the day's hot-fire test: 'Standing down on today's hotfire. Next attempt tomorrow, vehicle and payload are both healthy.' The committed 18 Apr window then came off the board — Blue Origin re-targeted to NET 19 Apr (per Blue Origin, SpaceNowInfo, and NSF Forum) and 18 Apr saw no launch attempt; NG-3 flew on 19 Apr. The day-wide no-go named at advisory level held on the public record.

Sealed ~3 days out (video advisory, 2026-04-15) against a FIRM, committed April-18 target. The NG-3 window walked day by day — to April 17 on Apr 13, to April 18 on Apr 14 — and by Apr 14 the 18 Apr 06:45–09:43 EDT window was locked: the FAA launch advisory was filed and the droneship Jacklyn had already left port for the 18th (per the operator's own Apr-14 post, BrettKrieger12, and MarcParsonson). The advisory treated the entire April-18 launch day as no-go across eleven segmented windows. The same day as the seal, Blue Origin stood down on the hot-fire; two days later it re-targeted to NET April 19; April 18 saw no launch and NG-3 flew the 19th. The committed window came off the board right after the seal — the dated day-wide no-go held. HIT (0.85). (Sealed from the 41st Space Symposium week under a moving target; the YouTube Apr-15 upload timestamp is the third-party anteriority anchor.)

I just learned that the launch has slipped to April 17. This was an avoidable reschedule—the costs keep mounting as these slips stack up. Imagine a future where scrubs are no longer seen as acceptable and missions launch nominally at the scheduled time. That future is available now.

THE MOVING TARGET — the NG-3 window walks again, to April 17, and the operator flags the slip live, in the open, days before any seal. The slip cadence the campaign had tracked since LA-019.

Yes, indeed. Jacklyn has already left the port. They are planning to launch on April 18!

APRIL 18 LOCKS IN — the window moves to Saturday April 18 and is now COMMITTED: the FAA launch advisory is filed and the droneship Jacklyn has already left port for the recovery. This is the firm, public target the seal will call a no-go.

Pushed 1 more day — now set for Saturday, 4/18

FAA advisory unchanged — April 18 still listed

I recommend treating the entire April 18 launch day as a no-go. The early windows (especially 6:45 AM – 8:15 AM) carry the highest credible risk of catastrophic outcomes, including sudden pressure-related anomalies, telemetry obstructions, and last-minute holds. If business pressures make it absolutely necessary to attempt a launch on this day, the window after 8:49 AM offers the best available margins — although even then success remains a coin toss with meaningful risk remaining.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory, ~3 days out) — the entire April-18 launch day (06:45–09:43 EDT) called a no-go, with eleven-window segmentation: early windows highest catastrophic risk, the window after 8:49 AM the calmest if a launch had to be forced. Sealed against the committed April-18 target. Shared, in the operator's words, in the spirit of partnership.

NG-3 Update: Standing down on today's hotfire. Next attempt tomorrow, vehicle and payload are both healthy.

SAME DAY AS THE SEAL — Blue Origin stands down on the hot-fire and the committed April-18 window begins to move. A friction class the advisory had named, surfacing within the day.

APRIL 18 OFF THE BOARD — Blue Origin officially re-targets NG-3 to April 19, taking the called no-go day off the schedule.

THE NO-GO HELD — NG-3 lifts off April 19, not the committed April 18. The called launch day saw no attempt. (The operator then turned to the April-19 attempt itself — carried forward in the LA-022 chain.)


New Glenn NG-3 — 19 Apr Day-Wide No-Go · Window 2 Liftoff → Catastrophic-Class Payload Loss

Treat the entire 19 Apr 06:45–09:43 EDT NG-3 launch day as no-go. Ten-window segmentation; Window 2 high risk of catastrophic outcome; Bluebird Block 2 payload loss named explicitly.

Blue Origin launched on the named day. T-3:57 ground-systems hold (sub-mechanism HIT). Liftoff at 07:25 EDT — inside named-high-risk Window 2. Booster recovery succeeded on Jaclyn. Upper-stage second-burn thrust shortfall placed Bluebird Block 2 FM2 in an off-nominal orbit; AST SpaceMobile confirmed total satellite loss and de-orbit; FAA grounded New Glenn. Day-wide no-go HIT; Window-2 catastrophic-risk HIT; Bluebird payload-loss HIT.

The capstone of the NG-3 campaign. The full April-19 advisory was sealed Apr 18 (YouTube fiv8z4D14YI; the call existed on X from Apr 15) naming an April-19 day-wide no-go, a likely liftoff in Window 2, and in-flight / late-phase anomalies — including a single-component upper-stage/booster fault — as a catastrophic-class payload-loss risk. Outcome on the public record: NG-3 lifted off April 19 at ~07:25 EDT (Window 2, after holding past Window 1) and the booster landed successfully (first reflight recovery — credited), but the upper stage placed BlueBird 7 into an 'off-nominal orbit' (Blue Origin's own words) too low to sustain operations, and the satellite will be de-orbited. The catastrophic-class payload-loss call and the Window-2 liftoff sub-call both landed. The FAA subsequently grounded New Glenn pending a mishap investigation. HIT (0.85). All rungs are verbatim + sourced; the payload loss is stated from Blue Origin's and AST's own disclosures.

Launch Alert | We're targeting New Glenn's third launch no earlier than Sunday, April 19, 2026, from LC-36. The two-hour launch window opens at 6:45 a.m. / 10:45 UTC. NG-3 will send @AST_SpaceMobile's BlueBird 7 satellite to low Earth orbit.

THE APRIL-19 TARGET — Blue Origin sets NG-3 for Sunday April 19, carrying AST SpaceMobile's BlueBird 7 to low Earth orbit. AST announced the same date and invited retail investors to a live launch event.

AST SpaceMobile announces the April 19 BlueBird 7 launch date

This would not be a wise launch decision. The rest of-course is up to you. Good luck.

THE PRE-EVENT CAUTION — within hours of the April-19 target being set, the operator flags it publicly and graciously: not a wise launch day. The fourth advisory of the NG-3 campaign begins.

In-Flight / Late-Phase Anomalies: isolated sensor or telemetry glitch on one part of the reused booster (e.g., anomalous reading from a single BE-4 engine, one hydraulic channel, or a specific avionics unit). Minor vibration or load-induced issue during ascent affecting only certain components.

THE SEALED FORECAST (video advisory) — the April-19 launch day called a day-wide no-go, with a likely liftoff in Window 2 and an in-flight / late-phase single-component anomaly carrying catastrophic-class payload-loss risk. The call existed publicly on X from April 15.

April-15 advisory intro on X — the NG-3 April-19 call, dated before the seal

Back vertical after a planned down-ending for inspections. Looking forward to launch!

RUN-UP — the day before launch, the fully stacked vehicle is lowered from the mount and returned to vertical; Blue Origin states this was a planned down-ending for inspections. The operator's response stayed gracious: 'Good luck Dave. My best wishes to the launch team.'

LIFTOFF IN WINDOW 2 — NG-3 lifts off April 19 at ~07:25 EDT after holding past the 06:45 opening (Window 1) — the Window-2 liftoff the seal named. The reused booster lands successfully on the droneship: a genuine first-reflight recovery, credited in full.

At this point in time, there has been no update from either Blue Origin or AST SpaceMobile about the deployment of the BlueBird 7 satellite. The second burn of the upper stage engines should've happened at about 8:35 am ET with deployment at nearly 8:41 am ET.

THE STADIUM GOES QUIET — like a crowd falling silent mid-game. Blue Origin had posted a prompt, celebratory update at every milestone; then the ~08:35–08:41 ET second-burn and deployment window passed with no update. The break in the live cadence is itself a public-record fact — the moment the anomaly surfaced, ahead of any formal announcement.

In an update from Blue Origin, the company says the BlueBird 7 satellite did deploy from the New Glenn upper stage and did power on, but it was "placed into an off-nominal orbit." "We are currently assessing and will update when we have more detailed information."

THE CATASTROPHIC-CLASS PAYLOAD LOSS — minutes later, in Blue Origin's own words, the upper stage placed BlueBird 7 into an 'off-nominal orbit'; the altitude is too low to sustain operations and the satellite will be de-orbited. The payload-loss outcome the seal named, confirmed by the operator's and customer's own disclosures.

Blue Origin launches NG-3, but payload ends up in wrong orbit

BlueBird 7 placed into a lower-than-planned orbit; to be de-orbited

Jonathan McDowell (orbital-tracking authority)

The @BlueOrigin @AST_SpaceMobile launch has been tracked by Space Force as catalog 68765, 2026-85A, in a 154 x 494 km x 36.1 deg orbit. Epoch is 1138 UTC which is the time of SECO-1, so this may not be the final orbit. (If it is, then they are indeed toast).

INDEPENDENT CONFIRMATION — the orbital-tracking authority publishes the Space Force catalog data: a 154 × 494 km orbit, far below a sustainable operating altitude. The off-nominal insertion, confirmed by neutral third-party tracking, not interpretation.

The first stage was nominal, and the booster came back beautifully. We separated and turned on as expected, but the launch vehicle second stage did not place BlueBird 7 on its intended orbit.

THE CUSTOMER CONFIRMS — AST SpaceMobile's CEO states the second stage 'did not place BlueBird 7 on its intended orbit,' while crediting the nominal first stage and the booster recovery. The payload-loss outcome in the customer's own words. The operator replied graciously, offering to connect.

To be clear: this was a public, unsolicited advisory issued well before launch. Blue Origin can confirm whether they saw it. The outcome — successful booster recovery but off-nominal orbit leading to deorbit — aligned with the specific risk we highlighted. We continue to share these analyses openly.

THE OPERATOR'S STANDING — a public, unsolicited advisory issued well before launch; the booster-recovery success credited in full; the off-nominal-orbit-to-deorbit outcome aligned with the specific risk the advisory named. No claim of reliance — only the dated public record.

THE AFTERMATH — the FAA grounds New Glenn pending a mishap investigation into the upper-stage failure and the earlier 2CAT facility anomaly (the LA-019 event). The campaign's named risk surface closes on the public record.

All personnel are accounted for and safe. It's too early to know the root cause but we're already working to find it. Very rough day, but we'll rebuild whatever needs rebuilding and get back to flying. It's worth it.

EXTENDED CONTEXT — NOT A SEALED FORECAST. Five weeks on, during a static-fire test ahead of NG-4, New Glenn was lost at LC-36 (all personnel safe). The operator did NOT forecast this event; it is recorded only to show his standing posture — after warning across the whole NG-3 campaign, he publicly reiterated an offer of partnership and help, not vindication. Blue Origin's response is honored here in full.

New Glenn lost at LC-36 during a static fire ahead of NG-4

The operator's reply to Jeff Bezos — a standing offer to help