JPL Close Approach vs Launch Library 2
Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.
JPL Close Approach vs Launch Library 2: common questions
Which is more reliable, JPL Close Approach or Launch Library 2?
On our scheduled checks, JPL Close Approach leads on measured uptime — JPL Close Approach at 98.0% versus Launch Library 2 at 3.9% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.
Which is faster, JPL Close Approach or Launch Library 2?
Launch Library 2 has the lower median latency in our checks — JPL Close Approach responds in 676 ms versus Launch Library 2 at 546 ms (P50). Tail latency (P95) is in the table above; for most workloads the median is the number that shapes how the API feels.
Do JPL Close Approach and Launch Library 2 need an API key?
Neither needs a paid key — JPL Close Approach is callable with no signup, and Launch Library 2 is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.
Can I call JPL Close Approach and Launch Library 2 from the browser?
Only Launch Library 2 is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. JPL Close Approach needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.
Are JPL Close Approach and Launch Library 2 free for commercial use?
JPL Close Approach has unclear commercial terms, and Launch Library 2 has unclear commercial terms. We track service terms and the data license as separate fields — see the Commercial use and Data license rows above, and confirm both before shipping either in a paid product.