SatNews

SVSW DAILY

The Swarms Are Coming

By Chris Forrester

Dr Zak Manchester, Assistant professor, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon Univ. talked about small spacecraft swarms, and where “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts”. He highlighted the benefits from 3D observation, for example. 

He explained that swarms, and where the spacecraft communicated with each other and had two high-level trends the first of which was increased autonomy. He showcased Range Based Relative Navigation, and the benefits came with no or very little extra cost. There was also Vision-based navigation where a spacecraft had one or two cameras on board. The craft was trained to focus on an Earth location for precise location and subsequently enabling full 3D examination and resulting, after a few hours, in a few metres of accuracy. More nodes added resulted in greater accuracy as the swarm grew.

The second trend was in harnessing the space environment and where a swarm entered into what he described a “formation flying” (and used by Planet Labs in some of their projects) and its associated Drag benefits.

Another project was using solar sails of some 5-meters square, and where small cube-sats were capable of “really sophisticated station keeping”. 

He stressed the “swarms are coming” for Earth orbit and beyond in the solar system more generally. Work was also been done in reducing propellant use and increasing lifetimes in orbit.

Compliance needs dialogue between both sides

By Chris Forrester

Silicon Valley Space Week’s Milsat Symposium 2024 opened October 23 with a compelling session (‘Optimized Creation of DoD Compliant Satellite Systems’) and a packed auditorium for its outstanding panel of industry experts.

Moderator Janna Lewis, SVP/Policy & General Counsel, Astroscale US, told delegates that the topic was highly relevant and crucial in knowing how to satisfy the Dept. of Defense in its aim to achieve compliant systems. 

Col. Nathan Iven, CTO/Innovation Officer, US Space Force, was asked what is driving the DoD’s needs. “The real driver for us is providing capability for the joint force in the face of a threat. The challenge from China, for example, has grown 500%, and they increasingly test us as does Russia with electronic warfare.” He added that compliance was establishing the very minimum requirements and understanding how the end result would be used.

Debra Facktor, Head of Airbus US Space Systems, Airbus US Space Systems, and asked whether industry understood the needs, said it came down to the ‘Why’ of what was required to be done. She explained that there are plenty of example of satellites that also needed protection, not least Weather satellites as well as communication craft. Cyber compliance is crucial so that we, and our international partners, can meet the DoD goals. She said the government’s ‘industry days’ were perhaps too few, and the more that dialogue took place, including at events like this, then the better the outcome. “The more dialogue helps eliminate confusion and mostly it is having access.”

Jonny Dyer, CEO, Muon Space, addressed the threat landscape and said that better education for commercial suppliers as to the threats is important, but there’s a huge part to play for commercial suppliers because we can move rapidly and we’ve seen this demonstrated in the Ukraine and adaptability and agility when addressing the underlying landscape is very important. “There’s a perception that small companies like ourselves don’t like firm and fixed price contracts, but in reality cost-plus contracting is extremely difficult and probably impossible, frankly, for us. But we can rapidly deliver solutions to government customers and we’d like government to look at and move away from cost-plus and put in place firm, fixed price, contracts.”

Maj.Gen. Steve Butow, Space Portfolio Director, Defence Innovation Unit (DIU) was asked whether there was a tension between the DoD and its commercial suppliers when the supplier might not be aware of the larger picture. He admitted this could be the case because in many ways “We are building the airplane when it is already in flight”. The Space Force does an extraordinary job and are very forward in adopting commercial solutions, but remember that our requirement for compliance is so that we can procure. The DoD is not, however, a regulator. The satellite builders are already required to be ‘compliant’ in order to get into orbit. It is our job to build bridges between the commercial sector and the Defense sector.

David Langan, Co-founder and CEO, Umbria told delegates that the first task was to study what was required, and to fully understand whether it was Cyber security and to know what had been achieved in the past and, of course, to come back to first principles and perhaps to look at new ways to move forward and achieve what the customer needed in terms of compliance and that’s faster, more effective and keeps costs down. “I don’t think anyone on the procurement side is looking just to tick boxes. In my experience everyone is looking to make progress.”

Langan highlighted the additional challenges that cost-plus placed on a supplier, not least the regulatory burden. It drives a completely different mindset that is often the antithesis of efficiency and in some ways incentivises bad habits.”

Johann Bradley, Technical Consultant, Brainstorm Technologies, said communications were key and while initial requests were valuable, he also liked government reference architecture for what were often complex tasks. “For the future, he welcomed the systems now in place where knowledge and progress could be shared and which allowed communication from both sides. I remain optimistic.”

Building and Exploiting Diversity in Collaboration

By Chris Forrester

Silicon Valley Space Week wrapped its Satellite Innovation sessions with a panel that discussed the benefits of collaboration and how to leverage supplier diversity and technology. Miguel Valero (MD, Space Strategies LLC) moderated his experts and talked about diversity and the new demands coming from the industry.

Bradley Williams, Associate Director for Flight Programs, NASA HQ, (and in particular the Heliophysics science mission which studies the sun). He had seven launches planned for 2025 as part of a 16-mission portfolio of projects, although stressed that his mission budgets were extremely modest. 

Dr Markus Geiss, Commercial Director, DCUBED, (based in Munich, Germany, and focusing in particular on release actuators, solar arrays (“and anything that can be folded and which goes big in space”) and although a start-up said that from a commercial perspective it had just opened a Denver office in the US. One fascinating aspect of DCUBED products is the use of Origami-style structures that are – they say – “easy to manufacture and use”.

Patrick Shannon, Founder/CEO, Trust Point, which is building a fully commercial, next-generation GPS system. It will complement the existing GPS operation. He said the concept was to address new threats. He said he did not think that vertical integration, while valuable, was quite so essential these days. More important, he suggested, was a good supply chain expert on the staff.. 

Williams added that his ‘lean in’ strategy was focused on the small satellite arena, and his smaller budgets meant he had to leverage the supply chain for maximum value. He said he wanted to ‘lean in’ to gain the benefits of achieving cost-effective results to his programs. International collaboration was also important so that ideas could be exchanged, diversifying risks and building expertise and improved solutions adopted. 

Dr Guiss said DCUBED was founded because of a perceived shortage of suppliers in the sector. “As a European company and a new player there has been some hesitation [from buyers] but there are also opportunities in the sense that we could be the one-out-of-twenty vendors which will not let you down. We pull the all-nighters, we express the shipments, we want to make you successful.” 

Shannon said that while there were success stories such as SpaceX and Planet Labs which were very much vertically integrated, he felt that such vertical integration was no longer quite so important. “This, I believe, is a good thing. It means you do not need all the core competences in your own business to tap into the expertise of your suppliers. The talent that’s available in a supply chain is super-important, and becomes very valuable if it can be managed. We have to build a few hundred satellites, and we needed very dependable suppliers on this journey with us.”

Williams cautioned about using international suppliers which while being very important – and frequently at little or no cost to NASA – was ensuring transparency. “We need, of course, confidence and reliability for everything but increasing diversity at sub-system levels also required everyone to be part of a team and to grow and develop the project together.” 

Launch cadence, and rivaling SpaceX

By Chris Forrester

Moderator Randy Segal (Partner, Hogan Lovells) said that besides SpaceX there was currently a very limited launch cadence from rivals to SpaceX. Panellists at the Silicon Valley Space Week’s Satellite Innovation sessions each stressed how their launch organisations were coming on stream and in some cases being very successful with their offerings. 

Adam Spice (CFO Rocket Lab) said that while he was not matching SpaceX’s 150 launches per year and SpaceX had in his view a 10-year lead on the market, but Rocket Lab’s Electron vehicle was coming. “Besides, if a launch competitor does not have a reusable vehicle then they might as well not be in the market. The barriers to entry are high. We are looking at carrying humans but this aspect alone is not going to pay the bills.”

Mr Spice added that launch is a challenging business full of risks and with typically a “lumpy” revenue stream. Having a diversified business makes those challenges much easier. “We believe that just having a launch business, and nothing else, is a real challenge. Building a satellite is nothing like as difficult as building a rocket. By the time you’ve built your 20th rocket then you have moved away from the prototype.”

Devon Papandrew, VP/Business Development, Stoke Space, said that the market wanted extra capacity and many wanted an alternate to SpaceX. “But even if all of us on this panel are successful I don’t think it will change the cadence much, and SpaceX will still dominate. But reusability is a different beast in terms of design. Vertical integration is probably essential going forward.”

Dr Giulio Ranzo, CEO at Avio, explained that ‘by law’ his company is not permitted to launch US-based satellites. “It is evident that there’ are now single streams that brings together launch, satellite building and other related activity into one competitive solution for customers. But regulators don’t like monopolies for launch.”

Pablo Gallego Sanmiguel, SVP/Sales & Customers, PLD Space said PLD was already competing with SpaceX and was itself targeting carrying humans on its rockets.  “Two weeks ago, we announced a plan to include human space flight. There is a market for human activity.”

Israel Figueroa, Director of National Security Programs, Firefly Aerospace, said that Space Planes, a single stage to orbit, is at least 5 years away. “Whoever can solve the problems could well have a business and it could be financially a game changer. But once Starship comes on stream it will again change the market. Not everyone will want to be on a rideshare for their satellites.”

OneWeb, examined in detail

by Chris Forrester

A few days ago, a SpaceX rocket launched the final batch of OneWeb satellites into their high orbits, ready to complete the operator’s constellation and provide in-orbit spares.  Kevin Steen, President/CEO of OneWeb Technologies (and CEO of Eutelsat Americas) was interviewed by Janna Lewis (SVP/Policy and General Counsel, Astroscale US) and updated delegates at the Silicon Valley Space Week on OneWeb’s latest thinking especially in regard to relations with the US Dept. of Defense.

Janna Lewis asked Kevin Steen about his early days. He said that he had only been in the space industry for some 10 years, and in his experience those then involved were largely focused on RF but in recent years had seen multiple satellite spot beams, and now down to developing satellites in less than two years, with a commensurate fall in costs.

Steen said there had been other changes, not least fresh thinking from a more commercial point-of-view. “Our coming together (Eutelsat and OneWeb) brought together geostationary and LEO assets, and where OneWeb would not compete with its terrestrial clients.  “We can do unique things with pricing, which is exciting for us and our client end-users. It allows everyone to start being creative.”

He was asked about Eutelsat and it being a ‘foreign parent’. It placed extra obligations on OneWeb and Eutelsat to observe regulatory requirements. Steen said that under the overall umbrella he was now able to exploit the many advantageous ‘pros’ compared to the ‘cons’. 

The US government’s demands means that there’s usually a follow-on from NATO or the ‘5-Eyes’ security requirements of the member nations. “We believe it is a ‘win-win’ for us, and it doesn’t matter where the revenue goes provided its within our umbrella.”

He explained that there could easily come a time when OneWeb would supply the receive terminals ‘free’ as part of the overall contract and thus remove the potential barrier to entry that a terminal’s costs might represent. “However, I am not going to get into a price war. We will not compete on price, nor do I think we need to.”

Will SpaceX and Starlink Dominate?

By Chris Forrester

Dr Tim Farrar, president of TMF Associates and a well-known industry advisor and commentator, moderated the New Satellite Architectures: On-board Processing, Optical Crosslinks and Interoperability session which was part of the Silicon Valley Space Week and the event’s Satellite Innovation strand. 

The session’s panel of experts covered a great deal of ground and Dr Farrar said optical satellite links demanded more examination. “Is there a conflict between what SpaceX was doing and the rest of the sector?”

Jeff Thornberg, CEO, Portal Space Systems, who has worked for SpaceX, said that the market is ‘duking’ it out and there’s the potential for government to make a decision as to whether it will allow one major player, with a considerable market presence, to dominate simply because it is inexpensive and with considerable coverage.

Dr Robbie Robertson, Co-founder/CEO Sedaro, said there were options now for the US Dept. of Defense to decide what it should do with its important financial backing. “Government’s money spend is important, and one dare not bet too much on what might be a mismatched solution. The DoD budgeting rules should be a guide. 

Francis O’Flaherty, MD, Rivada Space Networks, praised SpaceX and how rapidly it had made progress with its coverage and service. He mentioned the recent SpaceX deal with agricultural supplier John Deere. Nevertheless, he stressed that Rivada still had excellent opportunities and for those who wanted highly secure delivery of their traffic.  “There are many nations which are very concerned about Starlink, and they want to be in control of their own networks. There’s plenty of opportunity for other players, but it isn’t healthy to have just one player dominating.”

Dr Michael Bartholomeusz, CEO at NOVI said he sensed that SpaceX was focussed and not that interested in Earth Observation, for example, which was NOVI’s zone of interest.

Tom Barton, Co-founder/CEO, Antaris, said he did not sense that SpaceX, despite what it was doing, would wholly dominate the segment.  “We are going to see greater operability and the volume of handsets controlled by the world’s telcos was very important.”  He reminded delegates that 25 years ago there were dozens of cellular handset systems, “but now there are just two”. However, he also said that while in 10 years’ time SpaceX might enjoy 50% of the market, but there would be other players.

Farrar used as an example the battle between Apple and Android, and the appeal of SpaceX is inexpensive, non-premium service, and questioned on the upcoming presidential election and whether a Trump victory would leave Elon Musk in control of cost cutting in Washington and how that could impact not only SpaceX but its competitors. 

O’Flaherty said there were some services from SpaceX which directly impacted Rivada’s business plan given that Starlink was so inexpensive relative to what Rivada needed to make a business. “But there’s still opportunities that we are happy with. But SpaceX is a dominant player and who knows whet the next couple of years will bring. But they are giving us some robust competition. I want to see Starship come on line which might give us some savings.”

MSSA: Aiming for seamless and agnostic roaming 

By Chris Forrester

Mark Dankberg, Chairman of the Board, CEO, Co-founder, Viasat Inc., and was welcomed as a “real treat” by organiser Silvano Payne of SatNews. Dankberg, addressing delegates at the Silicon Valley Space Week, said he was focusing in his presentation on new concepts in D2D and usage and interoperability by non-terrestrial networks. 

Dankberg introduced the new Mobile Satellite Services Association (MSSA), of which Viasat was a founder member, but said that infrastructure now being developed needed standards. “As with terrestrial where such standards exist, but satellite is a very different architecture, and where are the business models?”

Dankberg said that standards are vital if national sovereignty amongst the world’s operators was to be managed successfully, and interoperability had to be managed – and this has never been managed before in the satellite industry. 

The promise of what is coming, he said, is dependent on dynamic cooperation between the D2D players, and then to build a new industry. “The MSSA members have pre-agreed some standards and ways of working which would enable a worldwide market to emerge and not to challenge a nation’s sovereignty.”

“We see D2D as being an augmentation to terrestrial, not a replacement of terrestrial. But where would these services be introduced, and when? Would city and urban dominate and exceed what we can handle efficiently?”

“Remember, we need to plan for potentially millions of devices. How will services evolve and how will services be priced?  Key, however, is to enable interoperability. The MSSA does not insist on conformity, but we recognise that interoperability is beneficial to everyone.” 

Spectrum, and coordination amongst and between operators is vital. “We all want seamless handover, but what can we manage? Airtime pricing is a headache, and the MSSA will be conducting research and testing. How will an operator manage its service when the device is in a vehicle?” he asked.

“The other thing that we are thinking about is non-exclusive roaming and augmentation of their services, and there’s talk of hundreds of millions of dollars in potential revenues. Perhaps, but we don’t want terrestrial players to take spectrum out of the option. We want terrestrial operators to augment D2D not to limit access. We need roaming ability: None of the existing satellite suppliers work with their rival’s equipment. The end user should see a seamless and operator agnostic, but the challenge then is to create a business model that is value enhancing. The devices need to be interoperable within and across satellites and constellations,” said Dankberg.

Optical Data Transfer needs standards, and volume production

By Chris Forrester

Chris Quilty, Co-CEO Quilty Space, explained for delegates to the Silicon Valley Space Week held at Mountain View, Calif., that optical connectivity was increasingly important and generating considerable interest in the space community. “We’ve been at this for the best part of 20 years, but it is still considered by many to be a new technology. In the past communications were dependent of radio frequencies. Now we have constellations measured in the thousands and a market demand for optical links. But we need standards, of course.”

Gregg Burgess, VP/Space Systems at General Atomics Electromagnetic System said standards were vital for space comms. The Space Development Agency (SDA) is creating common and joint standards but these still need to be incorporated and tested. 

Dr Inuk Kang, Director of Space Systems Engineering at CACI agreed, but said that the SDA requirement was mostly for LEO applications and there was a need for a standard for longer inter-satellite distances. He added that a sub-$100,000 cost for a unit was possible once volume production was underway. 

Justin Luczyk, GM of TESAT Gov. at Tesat Spacecom praised the SDA initiative and its financial backing for the development of the standard, whether for military or commercial applications. “We now have that groundwork and manufacturers know that the standard exists and can be used and supported. However, he stressed that the next generation of satellites would need backward compatibility for hardware that’s going to be in orbit 8, 10 or 15 years.”

Quilty said this was all well and good, but industry needed 100 Gb/s capacity and questioned whether this would require new satellites and not just uprated communications equipment. Dr Kang said there was work being done on a universal translator capable of 100 Gb/s and costing less than $100,000 per unit but again this needed standards, perhaps a new body of standards. Quilty’s panel agreed that there would have to be multiple standards as was the case in the telcoms industry and even cellular. 

However, SpaceX is not adhering to the SDA standard, and is reported to be happy to supply its laser units to rival spacecraft operators. Luczyk said that the SpaceX design is proprietary. Dr Kang suggested that the SpaceX version is a direct competitor to the SDA terminal. 

M&A can be hurtful

By Chris Forrester

Silicon Valley Space Week brought together acknowledged experts in the M&A field and very much focused on space-related activity.  Alexis Sáinz, Partner, Hogan Lovells, moderated the session which included solid advice from investment bankers, advisors and valuers and ranging from small start-ups to extremely larger industry players. “We are in a wave of massive industry consolidation, with SES and Intelsat, Viasat and Inmarsat and others,” she said.

Karl Schmidt, MD, KippsDeSanto said that the markets were good at the moment and that trades were taking place at a rate of around 250 aerospace deals last year but 2024 is quieter and not helped by the upcoming election. The coming together of SES and Intelsat presents difficulties for their suppliers. Inevitably there will be changes and for those currently supplying the two giants life could get difficult. On the more positive side hopefully there will be a healthier company which will be good. 

Armand Musey, Founder & President, Summit Ridge Grp said that the IPO market was not strong today although that creates opportunities from the Private Equity players. The overwhelming influence is the role of SpaceX and Starlink which has dramatically affected the industry and in particular the FSS sector and launch providers and their related suppliers. This, when you have such a huge player, directly affects the debt and equity markets. Earth Observation is not affected by this so that segment is doing better, but others are nervous and the SES and Intelsat deal could be considered as ‘defensive’. 

Musey addressed the SES/Intelsat transaction, saying that most of the FSS operators have been trading at below book value and despite including the cash they received from the C-band sale of spectrum. “This is a sign that the FSS sector is not doing well. There has been customer defections and pricing pressure because of Starlink. Their Video clients are increasingly shifting to fiber so they are being squeezed from both sides. The ripple effect from these struggles affects everyone downstream is enormous. He added that SES’s trend to adopt more vertical integration could now be on hold pending the regulators examination of the deal.

Francois Chopard, CEO, Starburst, explained that in 2021 and 2022 and in late-stage start-ups activity rose to $15-$20 billion, but since then has decreased. “We have seen SPAC activity and some private round with about 20 new companies with initial valuations of more than $1 billion, but public cash from NASA and ESA cash has increased. We have also seen activity from the Middle East with the creation of new Space Agencies, and also in Thailand and south-East Asia. One of the other consequences of the SES/Intelsat deal affects Europe’s two satellite manufacturers, Airbus and Thales-Alenia. There’s talk of them merging their space activity and at the very least restructure and this affects their own supplier chains.”

PNT is developing, and alternate systems are needed

By Chris Forrester

Dr Bryan Benedict, Snr Director of Innovation & Satellite Programs, SES, delivered a superb presentation that was completely focussed on PNT (Position, Navigation and Timing), and asked what role there could be from commercial interests in ‘new’ PNT applications.

He listed the six established PNT systems (GPS, Russia’s Glonass, China’s BeiDou, Europe’s Galileo, Japan’s QZSS and India’s IRNSS) and showcased how dependent the world was now on GPS-type systems. “Our kids have no idea how to use a map such is their dependence on GPS. But there’s more with the US and Europe’s improved GPS and now with super accuracy.”

But there were challenges with hostile Jamming and Spoofing/Cyber interference. “There is very heavy jamming taking place today especially over the Ukraine. There’s also the risk from satellite collisions and the resulting debris field which can affect PNT systems.”

Dr Benedict explained that the end of one GPS system was not necessarily the end of the world, but timing was everything. “The world’s governments, especially the US, are looking for multiple solutions and are actively working with industry to say ‘help us’ with alternate strategies. But this also presents difficulties insofar as development work and investment is concerned. What will be the demand? Will people pay for access to your solution? What will it cost, and will there be a ROI? We are totally dependent on GPS both for the military and commercial. As far as a ‘new’ alternate was concerned, the fact is that the US government is likely to be your only customer, because everyone else can get the service for free.”