We Were Not Their First Call. This Was Apparent.
ORC was engaged for an S-02 Express Retrieval following a time-critical conjunction event at LEO 693 km. ORC-V4 “Patience” was dispatched from standby. The object was retrieved and deorbited over the South Pacific uninhabited zone within 19 days of mission commencement. The surcharge was applied per S-02 terms. Regulatory confirmation was received. The mission is considered complete.
The client contacted ORC having spent approximately fourteen weeks attempting to contract five other firms. We did not know this when we received the initial enquiry. We found out during the pre-mission characterisation call, when the client mentioned, with the weary specificity of someone who has told a story several times, that we were “their last option.”
We have been someone’s last option before. It is not our preferred position. It is also not, technically, a problem for the retrieval itself. The object does not know or care how many firms were asked first. Patience does not know or care. We focused on the mission.
The situation, by the time we were engaged, was more complicated than it had been fourteen weeks earlier. The object had drifted. Two conjunction flags had been raised. The characterisation data the client had was partly from the original survey and partly from [REDACTED].
Patience reached rendezvous on day 11. The capture was clean. The conjunction flags were resolved by notification to the relevant tracking platforms within 48 hours of successful capture. The deorbit was completed on day 19. Regulatory confirmation received.
The client, on receiving the post-mission report, said it had been “a relief.” We said we were glad to have helped. We did not say that the situation would have been considerably simpler fourteen weeks earlier. We were thinking it. We did not say it.
| Service tier | S-02 Express Retrieval · surcharge applied |
| Vehicle | ORC-V4 “Patience” |
| Altitude | LEO · 693 km |
| Mission duration | 19 days |
| Time from ORC engagement to completion | 19 days |
| Time spent trying other contractors before ORC | ~14 weeks |
| Total elapsed time from problem identification to resolution | ~16 weeks. It did not need to be 16 weeks. |
| Conjunction flags at time of ORC engagement | 2 (both resolved post-capture) |
| Contractors who declined or failed | 5. We are not naming them. |
| Client’s description of ORC on engagement | “Last option.” We are choosing to take this positively. |
- The pre-mission briefing pack has been updated to include a section on “early engagement.” The section notes that time-critical situations become more time-critical as time passes. The section does not mention this specific mission. It is nonetheless about this specific mission.
- Dr. Chen’s identification of the position discrepancy caused by Contractor 2’s transit attempt was incorporated into the updated characterisation data and mission plan. This required an additional four hours of planning. We did not charge for this. We are noting it here.
- The client has since enquired about an ongoing monitoring retainer and a framework agreement for future retrieval services. We have provided both. The conversation about early engagement was brief. It was sufficient.
- We are not naming the five previous contractors. Three of them have, at various points, referred clients to ORC. We consider this the appropriate resolution to a situation that does not require further commentary.