08 Feb 2023
Awareness in LEO Panel Discussion
Moderator: Diane Howard, Director of Commercial Space Policy at the National Space Council
Richard DalBello, Director of Office of Space Commerce
Jeff O’Neil, Director of Government Affairs, Civil for Planet Labs PBC
Steph Earle, Space Policy and Outreach Branch Manager at FAA AST
Daniel Ceperley, CEO and cofounder of LeoLabs
Q&A
Q: Do you see major changes to the way commercial activities are getting into LEO regimes? How are you adapting to new LEO environment?
Stephen Earle:
Our perspective entering into LEO, the safety aspect, now talking about integration in space. Launch opportunity ends in space. AST is responsible for safe launch and entry into space. Current environment much harder to do that. The same paradigms had in the past are just not going to work. Safety, going to see a change. Safely into orbit Launch collision avoidance, distance and other is complex probability.
New operator having a reliable statistical valid probability is tough. Never launched into orbit may not be 100% sure. Probability calculations is very difficult hard to do. Standoff distance, old days could get there. Now with congestion have, can’t just get there. Get collision avoidance very late in process, only to find out [environment is] packed no open window for you. Suspects continue to work on those areas. A lot of new technology launch collision and those orbits.
Change paradigms about how to get into low earth orbit. Letting satellites propel themselves into final orbit. Changes and how to get into low earth orbit.
Richard DalBello:
Integration of more and more spacecraft into current LEO environment requires new generation of tools. First came in open assess data repository program. Point of the program is to create better tools that allow better decision making. Change in marketplace. Density of traffic. Need new generation of tools.
Dan Ceperley:
Added problem, there is a lot of debris left over from pervious activities in space. A lot of challenges that satellite operators face is the environment that have to operate in. Focus on is tracking that debris. Space traffic safety technology improving. 50 new rocket bodies abandoned in LEO last year. New mass in collision, risk. Safety front and center in everyone’s mind.
Q: Hear all concerns about things in LEO, commercial satellites have been in GEO for a really long time, what else makes LEO different that GEO?
Richard DalBello:
Geo and LEO, LEO is like living in downtown dc, GEO suburb neighbors far away little interference. Intense environment of LEO orbit. So many interactions, much more complicated. GEO focus much larger satellites, a few in fixed locations.
LEO have exact opposition, proliferation of objects in layers of shells in orbits. Just the dramatic difference pretty good coverage in GEO. Just finished pilot program. With no government data. Commercial pilot with commercial data commercial analytics. Analysis, highly confident done very well.
LEO much different environment. Don’t have coverage, depth of coverage that we need. LEO optics, mostly radar, don’t have depth of coverage need for objects. Would like better resolutions. Number of actual technical issues that making it much harder to solve.
Q: Discussed risks in LEO?
Dan Ceperley:
In business because all new traffic in Leo earth orbit. Need to create system that scales. This year set to hit 10,000 operate satellite mark. Industry grown tenfold. Track in LEO, radars form foundation of data infrastructure. Need to be tracking thousands of satellites per hour. A proliferated radar network had never been considered. Set out to provide the infrastructure and the backbone.
Radar west Australia…now contributing to tracking over the southern hemisphere. Keeping eye on debris is quite critical. Rocket bodies form challenge. Lots of fragments of debris from previous activities...Put a lot of the new satellites at risk, fair amount has deorbited, overall risk hasn’t dropped as much as expect. Quirks in the numbers that are important to keep an eye on.
Q: Operator perspective in LEO, avoid debris, reduce debris, preserve LEO?
Jeff O’Neil:
ASAT tests of past, have to stop creating these problems themselves. Supportive in administrative efforts create norm of banning ASAT tests…Transparent as possible where operating and where risk going to be. Share data as much as we can internationally as well.
Richard DalBello:
Critical issue. As we are building out system also engaging former relationship with EU SST. Also in dialogue with other people around world. Absolutely essential to be open dialogue. Departing world where space track.org and 18th [18th Space Defense Squadron] space force going to be sole source. As go forward more diverse answers with difference satellites, different sensors, different analytics. Creating a tower of babble today. Find path forward on this. All nations must be at the table. Currently today, we have environment where China is not playing. The China is major player, but not sharing in meaningful way. Would not work in air traffic control not going to work in space traffic control.
Q: If you had to isolate down to one overarching element or factor, LEO safety, What would it be?
Stephen Earle:
Cadence driving the issues right now…Just need to advance our policy. How many rocket bodies still in orbit. FAA working on orbit debris mitigation rule. Those are the types of policies that need to go forward in this area. Space priorities framework on cusp of new area access to and readiness of space. Expansion change almost everything we do with respect to space. What does that mean for all of the agencies involved. All have to go back and look at all of policies and go to beginning. Bit like patent attorneys have one foot in policy area (space treaty relevant and current) 1966 department of transportation. At same time looking at technology of today to talk about assess to space probability of collision and all of the dynamics. Have to balance technical tools with policy put forward.
Q: MEO, GEO Pilot program? How did that go? Any plans for LEO?
Richard DalBello:
Initial results look really good. Doing in depth analysis. Fairly modest goal do as well as the 18th space force is doing with government systems. Do SSA in GEO with no government data. And answer the question could we do it. Watch the space industry days to explain. LEO is harder in part, because so few players in orbit. Aren’t a whole lot of players, some interesting things. Green room, pilot on launch COLA do more efficiently, more accelerated timeframe. Also did in LEO purchase a bunch of commercial data last year and see how that compares to government (analytic). Sure doing something, whether pilot or not sure, but are going to be doing focused investigation with analytic players both optical and analytics considerations
Q: Dan what would you do?
Daniel Ceperley:
Get a system operational and scale as quickly as possible. LEO is scaling quite traumatically…Commercial satellite leading us forward in interesting ways, providing good best practices good technical innovations…Stress test system. Puts us in test forces us to get better. A lot of information pulls back into launch. National space traffic management agency good thing needed regulatory agency rules of road looking forward to trac system.
Q: Reasons why have so many satellites in LEO? Benefits to those on Earth?
Jeff O’Neil:
Planet, have 200 satellites in orbit about size, daily image of the earth last six years or so 3.5 meter resolution. Utility so many different sectors, sort of what is driving us to play in orbital debris space. Testifying in congress talked about agriculture, using our daily data... Type of data agriculture/around world. Disaster response, imagery overhead. Seeing some of the devastation that is there. Mapping assistance. Wildfires. How can we use data planet, help ID fuel load in difficult mountains communities. How can users of our data target hazard and fuel that you have. Measuring force carbon from space. Provide data so people can make better decisions. Doing what can to turn into actionable decisions...
Q: When is enough enough? When is it too much? Are we at carrying capacity? Issue? Not an issue?
Jeff O’Neil:
Short answer, not there yet. We can work together across agencies across industry come up with smart rules of the road. Data sets and information, share and all operate safely and conduct our mission.
Steph Earle:
Space is big, Leo is infinite is wrong. Space is big and LEO is finite. There is a limit, like all other transportation. Space is the same way. We are getting to the point, where have to have conversation about how much is too much. Really have to look at domain planning and figure out exactly where we are. Rules of road and regulation coming to space, there going to come to space. Safety will demand that we do this (continue path going). Together all of agencies need to look at this. Environmental planning. Need to look at domain impacts….
Rich DalBello:
Look at Air traffic control have, at numbers [planes flying per day, launching from airport] that no one thought could ever reach. I think same for space…(200 people on field is mob, 200 people marching on a field is band quoting LEO labs). Organization and tools will allow us to greatly increase carrying capacity. Think going to see many STARLINK an many constellations like STARLINK. Certainly, couldn’t do it today, but with right tools will be able to do tomorrow
Daniel Ceperley:
Scaling, constellations scaling up. Driving tools, they are driving technology. Organizational procedures race to keep up.
Q: Good information in timely and actionable way. RFI Basic services. What responses been what was in RFI basic services laid out to be discussed?
Rich DalBello:
Government comes into market with already established commercial player. Think about how disruptive going to be when government comes in. Wanted to outline the core services that we would intend to provide for free. 1) hear from people already in market palace if going too far. 2) Also want to hear from satellite operators where didn’t think we were going far enough. As tools keep changing. The question is should the government be doing this OR should this be a service that someone buys? What is the future of operating responsibility? Government, what is our responsibility to provide safety for this. What is commercial role? In future needs to change (operators not good at knowing where satellites are...)
Q: What kind of incentives get operators involved?
Jeff O’Neil:
Incentive fact want to keep operating. Want to build that into the TRAC system. Good data going in, put good day in get good data out. Really think the more that. Core to who we are. Put up satellites. Then deorbit, part of our business model. A refresh tech and continue operating at those altitudes.
Steph Earle:
Responsible operations not the ones driving rules. It’s those one off, think know where they are going. Don’t intend to get into accident. Mentality that other people may have. We have a lot of capacity in us. This is becoming an international activity. What we want to see what we develop for the rules. We think that your people and your companies can have the same type of levels. Safe we don’t need to develop these, when other people are hazarding us operations more. Work on technology what can share. Continue to work on policy aspect and not take viewpoint because were good, everyone good. Work on making rules. Us operators understand know. Can meet them aisle. Irresponsible operators, point out responsible for safety and other reasons.
Daniel Ceperley:
That’s where independent validation, verification system. Keeping an eye on satellites not in same policy environment. Information on them drive global discussion.
Q: Kinds of things shared government?
Rich DalBello:
Tremendous interest in commercial space and space at large. One of the initiatives and space council has been fostering is focused dialogues and internationally. Key issues and commerce national security. Provide a forum for the companies of those countries to talk to each other about issues problems difficulties in collaboration.
Reach out, Industry partners. Both have given time AIA, CSF, SAI and others. Time and expertise. Finding when and both are incredibly valuable. As new countries come along with great aspirations. Haven’t even started to see China or India. Countries in Europe launch similar initiative. Talking to each other way more serious that before. Translate private sector to private sector dialogue, so governments hear and be more mindful to what is working and what is not working.
Q: What do you do for New Zealand?
Daniel Ceperley:
Go back to a point this touched on. Marketplace changes in market place government transitions can provide. The infrastructure for space traffic management space SSA been underinvestment in it. Primary driver single customer USAF only customer. Reason now see commercial SSA industry growing and thriving because multiple customers right now. Having multiple customers enables us to justify the environment in radar and software. Along with diversification of customers. A need to shift conversation a bit. Needs to be focused on buying data. Now in electronic goods, it’s about licensing the data. Data licenses central to whole discussion. What is the data being used for?
Develop track record and understanding of what satellites are doing on orbit. Possibly first space agency to keep after launch. Foundation building more policy regulations, prevents surprise, so can talk to satellite operator, talk to parliament, interesting best practice pushing tracking technology and polices forward and on orbit [with New Zealand].
[End Session]
Featured Speech
Dr. Ezinne Uzo-Okoro, Office of Science and Technology Policy
-Activity at OSTP wrapping up soon. But first leading commercial space in OSTP, what OSTP focuses on. Focusing on maximizing benefits of science and technology for security, environment prosperity. Portfolio is varied. Today like to focus on LEO. Which includes microgravity and research development.
-Continue US leadership in ecosystem. Overarching goal US government continues to enable and viable. Enabling, and prioritizing advancements of science. Using term microgravity as a place holder. Community patient with us and come along with us. Questions asking problems trying to solve with policy.
-Problems involve entire ecosystem not just microgravity. Goal here was to get the communities insights and fears and thoughts about upcoming transition from international space station to commercial platforms...unchartered territory. Presenting a lot of challenges for our community.
-Upcoming opportunity. Opportunities to engage and use current platforms and leverage lessons learned. Such that achieve vibrant LEO and advanced ecosystem. Given the dynamic system all working with early discussions with US government stakeholders. Review of literature. Need for bigger conversation, on how we reinvigorate discussion around microgravity and LEO Activities.
-Last July closed door workshop on microgravity R&D. Brought together cross-sector stakeholders…Everyone provided perspective and challenges impact opportunities, for US government to lead in this area. Helping to inform development of national policies. Unique gravitational environment of space. Focus on research. Extreme environmental considerations….
-Found that US government needs to come together to act. Convince inner agency and started a working group on how we are going to deal with anticipated conclusion of international space stations. How we view significant, and transition trends us. View us leadership managing and increasing. Increasingly capable commercial sector. Opportunity to discuss considerations and anticipations of shift. Largely government owned to largely commercial opportunity.
-Microgravity access and processes, opportunity to discuss funding and resources…no longer come from public sector. Next steps include asking broader community for input for microgravity…there shouldn’t be a gap between ISS and future commercial platform. Leverage space to maintain US role as a global leader. You all prioritize assured assess to LEO, all kinds of basic and applied research and also upcoming…regulations. Critical R&D and operational needs. Additional flight cadence and reliability. Also learned. Needed to provide more opportunity to fly. Needed more interoperability between platforms. Reliable flight hardware…
-Reliable and sustainable budget lines for interested parties for government research. And also commercial platforms to avoid a gap. Signal customer base…lastly asked about sponsoring national lab in LEO. Both academic and industry said US government should continue to sponsor a LEO lab. Entire US government ecosystem together. As continue to coordinate these topics….
-Policy development effort scheduled spring release. This includes 1)How do we continue to promote groundbreaking science in LEO? 2) Democratize international opportunities, so that we remain partner of choice. 3) What is the steps the US has to take to ensure market opportunities
-Although US has been move beyond orbit, moving towards moon, will not stop work in LEO.
[End Session]
Opening Keynote
Kelvin B Colemann, FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST)
-As we look forward to future, good to take look back. 2022 record breaking year for commercial space transportation. Total of 84 licensed operations, again another record breaking year. Seeing record go down, expect to break that record again. In 2017, did 26 operations (launch/reentry). Over five-year period more than 300% increase in launch and industry cadence.
-Past November, saw successful competition of 500 safe commercial space launch activity. First commercial space launch took place in 1989. Took us 33 years to get to 500, get to the next [iteration] of 500 in the next few years…
-The number most proud of is zero. Zero accidents, zero public industries, or public casualties. Safety is north star in FAA. A lot of that credit not only goes to what we do in commercial space, but also the industry…thank all of you for embracing strong safety culture and commercial space. We of course provide regulations, but you of course have the accountability….
-Just at close of last year, we saw FY23 omnibus bill come through, got some additional funding. Are job intention is to keep pace with increased demands for products and services that we provide in the industry. President made supportive [and] helpful proposal to the hill to bring us necessary resources to the fiscal ear. Office of space commercial transportation to receive the products and services that we needed…meet demands of innovative, industry growing…
-Vice President Kamala Harris, stated the innovation creativity and drive with commercial space companies combined with government…could not agree more. Administration identified three key areas impactful work we do every day. 1) clear, predictable, flexible set of rules to meet needs of private sector. 2) Good STEM education; ensure attract, develop, and retain the space workforce that we all need to ensure future that we all desire. 3) We have been focused on safety of human space flight participants.
-Leverage informed consent regime, continue to enable this part of the industry as sector grows. Know that commercial space flight is important…in the meantime our office cannot afford to wait for sun setting and not be prepared to move forward.
-Number of things working on to prepare for regulation of commercial space flight. Not leaning in to say ready to regulate, we are not. Important work is to prepare ourselves for eventuality. Did this in two ways. 1) Recommended polices for commercial flight safety (working with NASA) also adding if these practices were in fact become regulations, what compliance look like with respect to regulate practices. Hoping to share with industry at large when get that done. 2) Creation of Aerospace rule making committee, working on a charter for that (ARC, space SPARC). Come to table with industry and talk about what an appropriation framework ought to look like. Some of you have the experience. A couple of ARCs there, good feedback…this will be different have a little bit of time to flesh out issues, won’t be rushed. 3) working with ASTN, F47 committee, take a look at appropriate standards for commercial space in generally, but more specifically commercial space flight.
-COMSTAC, [has been] instrumental looking at commercial human space flight. Another committee stood up few days ago….Big problems challenges that we face.
-Should mention, Wayne Monteith, introduced the national space port interagency working group. Really important to help figure out how to leverage the capabilities of the full and complete spaceport network here in the United States. Great federal ranges, 14 licensed space ports. Trying to figure way to tap into all of capacity to get the most out of the industry.
-Look forward to future and trying to be proactive, able to complete update MOA national transportation safety board. Long proud history of partnerships. Our history great pristine public safety…Roles and responsibilities that each organization undertake if there is accident of mishap. Accident someone hurt, kill, significant property damage. Mishaps, mishaps not a bad thing do happen, will be FAA led investigation. Great set of roles and responsibilities laid out.
-One other area really working on, Locks Methane. Number of companies moving to new propellant combination. Working closely with NSAS, SF, DoD to better understand nature of propellent. Made some investments with AST to do research. Also need support and industry as well to help continue to move that forward. Trying to be proactive around challenges seen, before becoming too big of challenge.
-US leads world in space launch and re-entry. We have a dual mandate. Dual mission responsibility…We don’t do marketing, we are not buy company. Do encourage facilitate and promote commercial space facilitation safety. Do that primarily with work that we do with international partnerships. With UK, France, New Zealand, Japan, etc. Promoting very successful safety framework. It’s the rules it’s the regulations, practices, that are helping international partners as they stand up their own regimes. Beneficial to US companies promotes interoperable and enables duplication. Cultivate with them in promoting safety moving forward.
-Now thinking about 100 launches in a month maybe, every couple of months. Our time now to move commercial space transportation forward to the future. Common purpose to make commercial space transportation safe and successful.
Fireside Chat
Moderator: Honorable Mike Rogers, former member of Congress and Chair of HPSCI
Gwynne Shotwell, President, COO SpaceX
Q: Tomorrow big day space X, comment?
Attempted 33 engine static fire booster for Starship. Final ground test can do, before light up and go for first flight test hopefully happens next month or so.
Q: Work with a lot of professional women engineers now, would you say better opportunities?
Better opportunities [but] the numbers have not changed [that much]. Roughly ten percent when I was in school in [STEM],…now seeing on average than number to be 20 to 25 percent. [I] Saw someone wanted to be like. Role models play a key role.
Q: Talk about innovation, Space Force [idea] came around [when I was in] HPSCI, vast majority of classified budget is space. How do we allow private sector to commercialize space…talk about innovation and [also relationship with working with the government]?
A lot to unpack. Perfect example, [our] partnership with NASA. Commercial orbital transportation program. Program yielded falcon 9...NASA gave us set of performance-based requirements. Let us figure out how we as a commercial company could meet them. Other companies had a different solution. Commercial and government can work together to bring an even better solution to the table. Still would not be where we are today had we not worked with NASA on that. Then we invested billions into falcon 9 to get to where we are today.
NSS space satellites to orbit and serve crew. NASA had a demand function…they served as a market, which opened up other markets. Common goals and willing to be flexible both ways and NASA accommodated us as well. Talk to any NASA leader at that time. We drove them crazy. Rapid change. Continuous re-design cycle. You want a package a static data set to go analyze (government). The two are very not complimentary.
Innovation will remain in a free economy [and] grow. We need to figure out together between company and regulators, what is the right way? How can we accommodate regulations in the innovation cycle. By now ship [in reference to STARSHIP program for SpaceX] doesn’t look anything like it did two years ago (materials changed engines changed, software changed). Figure out how to work with regulators to make it process and shorter. Our competitors don’t have to play by the same rules.
Q: How would you do that? How would you work with government on the cycle. Recommend government approach to this? Regulation, how do we bridge that. Transformation innovation?
The organizing have to communicate regulate. Has to be open dialogue. Don’t toss regulations out. Take what do have lessons learned. What worked what didn’t work. Fix that piece…
Q: How do we get right talent in room?
[In reference to idea of going back and forth from government to private sector]. Such a litigious society, how are you not going to favor that company especially if come back. Don’t want to end career by bringing to regulatory agency and going back. And not allowing to regulate. That’s hard.
Q: STARLINK played a really important role in conflict around world, wasn’t a lot of other great options and what it accomplished. Talk a little bit about that experience.
Extraordinary capability, very complimentary for other solutions on ground. Fiber great for urban [populations]. Conversation with Irish gov, letting fiber cover cities. Some historic buildings don’t want to drill. Fiber has a role in city dense areas. Fiber really expensive and harmful for environment to go to last cottage. Why should government pay for infrastructure?
Roughly 4000s satellites right now. Connected in Antarctica. Hero’s internet makes lives better, changed ability to do important work…leased to provide Ukraine connectivity and help them in their fight for freedom. It was never intended to be weaponized. Ukraine leveraged ways unintentional. Helpful in conflict, but also be careful how use it…
Q: Test case…access when so much assess being shot down.
Fibers can be cut. Some satellites can be jammed as well. So many. Numbers are very important provided reliance. Five years more satellites in orbit. OneWeb placing organization, not sure if providing services yet. Think a lack of connectivity will be very far behind us. There should be no reason, why someone on this planet can’t get connected anywhere.
Q: US government should launch boutique satellites...what does LEO offer from commercial side that government can use?
Just standard comms. If providing comms to aircraft JSX, Hawaii…providing connectivity to passengers in airplane. Can provide connectivity to passengers in military aircrafts too. Some government derived capabilities. Separate from STARLINK that they are picking up and leveraging.
Q: China…Russia certainly weapons…know Iranians working program to weaponize…how do you think that shapes up commercial?
No question space debris space safety is going to be a huge issue. Being a good steward to space environment is critical everything to do, with orbits propulsion systems. Coordination, real time coordination. [For example] both move in wrong direction could accidently hit it. Really important to have ability to deorbit a body that is no longer useful. There will be a lot of orbiting satellites. Think about militaristic way, flip and talk about what an integrating place. People flying in space, maybe picking up pieces of orbital debris. Employees astronauts. Place to go, incredibly important for people to explore…
Q: Talk about moon, tomorrow’s test, gets us to moon, the next step in ability for survival? [What do we need to do]?
Get orbital get orbital quickly. Get a lot of time on that machine. Don’t want 15th flight to be carrying people want the 100th to have people. Can think about machine, should have 100s…initially will be STARLINK. Bugs features frails throwing own stuff in orbit, so if lose it not disapoointing customer. Get.. propellant exchange. Refill vehicles to do destinations. Biggest technical hurdles just process. Refueling challenge, getting beast to orbit challenge. Think refueling next big technology challenge. The other challenge is time in ship. Moon few days away, Mars is 4 to 6 months away. Human element keeping people in close quarters interesting challenge to solve.
Q: Where are we at now in near future, based on some factors know now?
For sure this decade landing people on this month, mars hopefully this decade maybe next decade. 2030 going to have human begins on mars, lets go for that….
Q: Lets talk about STARLINK, starship, can you talk about sequence. Why you even think 2030 is timeframe. Trajectory and why that is important. Chinese stealing a lot but also innovating?
Sure. We have designed STARSHIP to be as much like aircraft operations as we can get it. Don’t want to talk about a launch every three to four days. Want to talk dozens launches a day if 100s. How do airplanes land.
This year shooting for a 100, that’s with Falcon. The vehicle design is not [designed to be mass produced]. Can’t build a falcon a day. Spent time with STARSHIP building a rocket a day…Why can’t we build a rocket every day? That’s what focusing on with STARSHIP to be able to build lots of these machines.
[End Session]
FAA AST Outlook
Moderator: Megan Mitchell, Blue Origin
Minh Nguyen FAA AST
Dan Murray, Director of Office and Commercial Space FAA AST
Sabrina Jawed, Regulations and Standards Branch FAA AST
Pam Underwood Director of Office of Spaceports FAA AST
Moderated Q and A:
Q: For those of us get regulated by you guys, talk to 450 implementations, especially launch providers?
Dan Murray:
Part 450 enormous undertaking. Delve rule and get it out and get it working. Working with it now for year and half or so. Learned some things, also encountered challenges…other [challenges] have not seen coming and have had to react to. Performance based nature of the rule…Haven’t had an opportunity to really exercise a lot of that flexibility…Seeing some innovation in some areas.
Rule set up to do was to look problematically, not just to look at first flight. But to look at the program the vehicle can undertake different configurations different mission types. People applying for very narrow scoped license, license that could have been scoped under [rule] 417. Seeing a lot of new vehicles a lot of vehicles…have responded to that, looked and found ways to apply to mission by mission basis. Looking to get away from mission-by-mission authorization. Haven’t been able to do that yet but anticipate having to do that soon as industry gets more applications. Haven’t seen a lot of companies express interest and more activity of that.
Benefits and challenges. A few that I would note, incremental review is a real challenge to us. When put into rule had some ideas how it might work, industry brought different ideas back and we were not ready for that. Realized 450 more independent than appears. A lot of parts that cannot stand a lot (hazard control strategy), have to be fairly well defined before looking at other parts of rule. Hope to put forth guidance of what integral approach to interval review….
Topic is flight safety analysis methodologies. This area put more into the rule to allow us to be able to regulate more process based more programmatically, not receiving applications that are scoped that way been a challenge to look for compliance. Incidents weeks or longer. Learned to get to level of detail, full scope of what methodologies are intended to put forward in application….8 primary areas look at fundamentally challenge, trying to address that. Flight safety analysis office hours.
[There is] Standing meeting every Friday…where we open doors invite anyone come in to participate listen and ask questions. Response faunistic turnout great in terms of number of companies and questions been getting have been very good. One of one advantage, group setting more efficient. All companies present get to benefit from questions asked and benefits given.
Look forward to benefits of 450. Overall positive, but also a work in progress.
Q: Note about challenges, potential modifications that AST might be considering Rule 450?
Sabrina Jawed
My perspective, trying to work implementation and modifications to 450 in as many different ways as can. One track advisory circular, making sure products strong, working with industry. When those are published, they are always published as final, have opportunity to provide us feedback. Take all of that feedback into account. Able to update advisory quicker than regulation.
On regulatory side, larger issues. And even smaller issues in rule making on that side. Updated 450 is regulator of ours…SPARC authority and ARC authority able to gather industry and get feedback from industry. Think part 450 updates great place to exercise that as well.
Q: Space port perspective, national security implications, general lives. What is the national security implication. How is that community thinking about industry?
Pam Underwood:
Also creates a security interest, because others might be very interested in technology being develop. What does office of space ports in partnership with office of strategy and hazardous materials. Partnership never been done before, never taken a look at it from a security perspective. FAA licensing specifics supposed to consider foreign policy, interest, in United States. To date have done six, last week did two.
Learning a lot about vulnerabilities that we have. Provided a lot of services that become viable. Need to understand vulnerabilities that come with…As launch tempo continues to increase, need to consider that security. Once we get vulnerabilities, then have to figure out what we want to do with these assessment. Done with various agencies.
There is not one agency that has clear authority over space, when it comes to security perspective. Step 2 who wants to take the football and then what do we want to do about it. Is it just educational, is there something else?
Q: Money that AST got, also know resource constrained? How AST is responding with additional workload?
Minh Nguyen
AST thankful that white house and congress continues to support our office. Office with additional funding. Additional $5.3M above FY22 enacted level. Congress specifically tells us [what] to do with money. Out of $2M focus on hiring new positions to support development and progress of human space flight. At the same time congress also authorized us to hire up to 40 new positions. Working through numbers.
Q: Resource constraint piece, how is AST dealing with all of applications?
Dan Murray:
Currently have on plate 7 or 8 active applications. Beyond that 7 or 8 late phases pre-application compilation, start 180…Have another 30 companies early application….25% more work than last year, 50% more then had two years ago. Had capacity, have more people now, but not that many more people
Responsiveness is one of our core values. Not as responsive as like to be… Folks waiting to hear back from us… Don’t like to be in a position where waiting on us. That we need to do on our end. Most visible sign way things playing out.
COMSTAC, Calvin mentioned queuing. Pulling a ticket…don’t think will be that bad but at same time have to be prepared for that…If get to that point will implement as fairly and efficiently as possible.
Q: Demand and resource constraints. Industry standards, industry looks to AST to participate in. Balancing all work from industry and where need help us [Industry] to help you?
Sabrina Jawed:
What you should be doing…(while waiting)…participating in the ASTM F47 committees. Performance based rule making. Gives industry opportunity to participate what guides industry going forward. ASTM stood up committee focused on commercial space. Gives you the opportunity to shape the standards that not only go into how 450 implemented, but also those things that are important to you. Highly encourage all of you to participate in those industry standard building. Rough structure part 450 down means of compliance regulatory compliance.
Are approved and accepted used going forward. Early phases. As becomes more mature regulation, the ideas that many different ways to satisfy the same regulation, still hitting same safety standard, but develop best ways to comply. Software standard and also a human factor that stood up. A lot of opportunity there.
Q: Talk about the National Space Port Working Group (NSIWG)?
Look at nation’s spaceport capability. Federal ranges private sides, number very rich. Why is it still have people come to be? How can possibly not find? Have capability what does industry need?
NASA, DoD, Space Force, Commerce all looking at nation portfolio and what are space port capabilities. What are the challenges? Even though might have grown up differently, some of the challenges same [like] aging inadequate infrastructure hard to keep up, safety, timing/scheduling.
We government have challenges, what else are we missing? Trying to compile that? Now gets to so what. List of actual results that can adopt for federal, space ports, lets leverage the best we have. Continues to provide those capabilities, might be a national strategy. Another thread commonality, not trying to find location domestically, but also internationally. Like to have interoperable. What types of technologies, or even operational standards. That apply to space ports. Pulled in government stakeholders, government doesn’t always get it right. Government needs industry.
Q: On the international front, expanding finding other locations outside US. How does AST role apply for foreign launch operations?
Pam Underwood:
What are we seeing U.S. launch operators that want to conduct launches oversees. Bringing capabilities are portable can allow launches multiple locations. US law requires that to be licensed if US entity. Opportunity to engage internationally with government partners to try to provide global partnership with safety…Have that on aviation side. Consider that a model. Airlines fly country to country. Don’t have that for space. Our industry just starting to go there.
Dan Murray:
In many ways licensing process not all that different how it works with domestic. Sometimes working with entity in foreign nation. Sometimes relationship varies…Regulations are the same. Scope different, license starts and where ends. Look at case to case. Interesting challenges encountered in areas of agreements. Different entities some US/others that are not. Development of agreements can be challenging.
Audience Q and A:
Q: Commercial space nuclear? When releasing those guidelines?
Sabrina Jawed:
Recognize that companies that are interested in putting nuclear payloads on vehicles. It’s a complicated issues. Explored a number of ways to enable to facilities review of nuclear payload.
Q: Following part 450 rule making? Any plans to update parts 420 and 433?
Pam Underwood:
Message received. Updates to 420 are desired. Part 433 fall into that as well. So many rules.
Sabrina Jawed:
Another piece here, how prioritize rule making. Agency is limited, in terms capable of doing. 440 financial responsibility that interested in updated…Also watching human space flight…Laundry list, 420, 433 on list..
Q: Continue to work with NASA and other parts of DoD?
Dan Murray:
Work closely with Space Force and NASA. Common standards working group. Safety partners. Always working with them to improve way implementing ranges and federal range. Should choose to do so, allow us to accept certain services. Still may be some review required for input that go into those processes. Way forward, working with all three of the federal ranges.
Iterations hands down slows down license application process more than anything. Reconvenes is challenge, not for lack of challenge. Industry, looking a little closer to guidance put out there. Tell us why guidance isn’t working for you. Why rule isn’t working for you? Carefully review materials send to us. Best work, highest quality, eliminating reducing number of iterations. Space Force, NASA, anyone else would say a lot of the same things.
Minh Nguyen
AST focus a lot on interagency, mostly on policy regulation, continue to stay engaged other movements that other agencies. Also stay engaged with white house National Space Council.
[End Session]
Airspace Integration and International Coordination Panel
Moderator: Isiah Wonnenberg, CSF
Brian Bruckbauer, ATCA
Gregory Hebert, FAA ATO
Patrick Butler, Blue Origin
Duane Freer, FAA ATO
Moderated Q and A:
Q: Continuing to integrate safely and efficiently, concern FAA and other stakeholders, each of you bring unique perspective of discussion. Current thoughts state of Space integration, industry challenges see in full integration?
Duane Freer:
We’ve made really significant gains in last few years…Shaving hours of what was previous and low airspace. We see roughly 75 and 95 percent impacts. Dove further into that. Small, limited set of operations at launch facility. Key air way structure called the Atlantic roots. Two agency priority time based launches and procedures and dynamic re-entry. Attacking the biggest hurdle…Dyanmaic launch/reentry windows, shaved minutes off of every launch. Have other initiatives use of hotline. Releasing airspace dynamically. Significant step forward. Critical decision windows. Spring scrub launches, how do we mitigate impacts associated with scrub launches, encouraged scrub operative when they can prior to implementation.
Patrick Butler:
Knee of curve. Hot mistake. We need to be smart about how we can manage and utilize and share the limited resource that the NAS is, within space collaboration working group, really focused on operations. AST difficult to fully. Within constraints of currently regulatory environment. Clear areas how do we do better? Leaps and bounds. Having more streamlined procedures more air space. Everyone coming to table. Industry…, every single meeting have more and more people coming to the table voluntary work.
Gregory Hebert:
Space global rights…international air space. Pacific and most of Atlantic. The space operators going well beyond that sensing impacts. Indian ocean example, coordinate states with India initiatives. Increasingly unable to coordinate real-time on-Air Space. Flight regions being impacted, who to call. My office has through contacts. As industry continues to grow. Will be able to collaborate and establish standards that we the united states want to see and Counter those that may not have best interests at heart.
Brian Bruckbauer:
What doing, all things talked about a lot of that is with no increase in funding. Team of smart folks…where my association comes is, to bring some of these challenges to light. Right now re-authorization. Where are funds needed? To be able to advance decision support tools beyond where we are right now. Proliferation space ports, launches, domestically, internationally. All becomes much more complicated…See increased funding, so able to take this to next level.
Q: Space collaborative decision making group…give insight on how the group is going?
Patrick Butler:
National space operating committee that includes some interval, FAA CSS. Another few others. Some of the true value seen come out of these meeting. Having conversations of the friction points and own operations. Commercial aviation not understanding constraints of space launch. Launch windows constrained specifics of other mission. LEO, GEO, Lunar, each of those has different constraints. Inter planetary. Also operations, takes a long times in hours to load vehicles. Not a quick a turn.
Duane Freer:
Three groups sub teams…international, mission planning (toughest components as increase cadence) just laborious part of mission planning process, working on how streamline that process), and focus on space data integrator. Foundational system, took different path, put out operationally prototype. Did some out of box thinking, into field and moving the needle, space data integrator. Program managing next steps. Folks wearing headsets, have real time info that they can act on and manage flows tactically. Next steps keep irritating towards the future. Look like 2025 and 2040.
Q: What can be done to support air traffic controllers, improvements efficiency?
Brian Bruckbauer:
Real time use of air space that he or she has responsibility for. If that can become a reality in very near future that would be huge step forward. With all industry partners that we work with, not solely commercial space, but also with UAS. There are some significant strides in AI and ML, as support tools that can really help the controller with making safe, timely decisions. Faster than ever made before.
Further into the future, systems being able to deconflict from each other. Just a matter of how be able to integrate in today’s systems. FAA authorization. Advocacy from my association, from industry or others. What is possible. Then to get to that reality is going to take some additional funding. Maintain legacy systems at the same time invest in future systems. Budget sometimes doesn’t allow investment in future systems. Not only commercial space, drone, air traffic management, how can work together to advance some of these automation tools to help air traffic controller, that I think is very important. What is in the realm of the possible? Data companies, cloud companies…
Q: Streamlining processes?
Gregory Hebert:
Domestic air space systems some transference to international system. Internationally not seeing as much activity in those areas. Debris areas where dropping thing…Collaborating more routinely regular contact with, notice to air information request. Some success some areas, easier in others…Some countries are very easy to work with especially those that expect, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, Singapore, and New Zealand.
Others have been a challenge, one comes to mind is polar launches off of cape, tend to impact Cuba. Requires slightly more coordination. That’s where CDM part comes in through CDM process convey where these challenges are. Can work and refine what impacting make it easier to coordinate with group like Cuba. Another example is India. Variously impacted flight information, 10 days’ notice. Would like to see timeline shrink. Why ten days? Arbitrary. Trying to work with them. Working to establish tabletop exercise, show how flexible, fast coordinate to shrink timelines.
Q: What do you envision as being full integration commercial space launch and reentry, positive developments towards that goal?
Brian Bruckbauer:
If through wise investments, coordination amongst all air space users. Can have seamless integrated air space between all users in future. Data being done, protected, cyberspace environment. Collaboration tools are there. I really feel can get there short amount of time, going to require defining what that future looks like and then advocating for funding to make that a reality. Big data. Technology is the key. Commercial space transportation, long term visions on in. Getting information to controllers glass and providing them the tools. How do we integrate more that segregate? When do we move to not protecting for a potential anomaly. Really. Adaptive risk envelope. Other vehicles no longer separation standard, Vehicle performance. Vehicle weight standard. Regime of adaptive risk envelopes. Controller has system to ingest that and provide information that they need to keep vehicle safe and keep that integrating.
Patrick Butler,
Shift away assume that there is going to be a failure. Today improvements with debris response scenarios. Need to take next step, integrating into national space system. Data of our air. Voluntary program…CDM committee, trying on industry side to brief the benefits of that. Blue Origin dedicated to reusability. Our operating costs is fuel in rocket and labor takes to launch, so don’t necessarily need to have human in loop. Continuously updating. Aspect, bring everyone to table. Space super proprietary, launch providers do not share information do not talk…other side already talking for operational issues. Regulatory friction points. Seeing that in action. Seeing beneficial to everyone. Only way going to get to true integration.
Gregory Hebert:
Communicating that vision internationally, [so they] understand what trying to do and accept what trying to do.
Q and A from Audience:
Q: Launching re-entry aerospace, FAA flight coordinates mach operations?
Brian Bruckbauer:
Thought provoking work, everything above 60000 ft to common line. Working on every rudimentary ways to separate operations through flight corridors. ETM concept, ETM CONOPS (may 2020/ 2021). CONOPS ETM. Collaborative group next-gen working conjunction with NASA AMS
Q: Airspace priorities, invest real time space vehicle hazard infusion? Atrium or any similar tools.
Brian Bruckbauer:
There’s more R & D work that needs to be done on that. Waiting for R & D to play out, and then move out wherever that R&D leads us.
[End Session]
Building a LEO Economy Panel
Moderator: Dr. Addie Dove, UCF
Sirisha Bandla, Virgin Galactic
Sven Eenmaa, ISS National Lab
Mike Gold, RedWire
Sandra Connelly, NASA
Robyn Gatens, NASA
Moderated Q&A
Q: Highlight range of capabilities currently available in LEO, orbit, microgravity, enable science and innovation or work together to develop facilities and products that industry might be interested in?
Robyn Gatens:
Capable platform. Updating solar arrays. Full utilization with seven crew. Crew and cargo transportation…publications keep compounding on each other coming out of ISS.NASA doing research enabling future beyond LEO, human Research technology development. ISS national lab, 50 % resource non-NASA use. Also bringing in private astronaut missions. Even as prepare for what comes after ISS.
Sandra Connelly:
LEO is super important for science. All of our divisions….all biologic programs utilize LEO. ISS been bedrock foundational facticity for us to accomplish our science. Also have Eclipse program. Leveraging commercial services…
Sven Eenmma:
ISS National Lab managed, flown over 600 payloads. Over ISS across broad range of scientific, ranging from academic and ACOs. Across diverse ranges of maturities of research.
Mike Gold:
New power systems, beautiful RedWire solar arrays micro-gravity. Same arrays used on DART mission. Self-licking ice cream cone, generate power use it for microgravity. Companies and that excel micro-gravity not only economic but national security of the future. Well over 600 experiments. 9 active payloads. Combine heritage space…Organ treatments…Truly amazing microgravity can do to transfer here on earth. Feed hungry, agriculture. Existential threats. RedWire other private sector companies leading the way thanks to partnership. We take ISS for granted, incredible accomplishment of countries coming together…
Sirisha Bandla:
Sub orbital company, every single one of space flights, have had customers flying research payloads for microgravity access. Some testing technology for ISS or for long missions. Building economy doesn’t’ start on LEO starts on Earth. Building pipeline to LEO economy. One being interoperability for the future. Really does start here on earth.
Q: That pipeline, talking about LEO now. A lot of talk about today. What does that all look like today in terms of space operations? What are timelines?
Sirisha Bandla:
Payload itself while successful awarded grant to fly another suborbital mission. Suborbital multiple opportunities, going to grow with multiple providers, iterate quickly then send to LEO destinations for more permanent. Access one of those areas will help build that confidence faster. Space based labs.
Q: National lab perspective?
Sven Eenmma:
In terms of pipeline activity, solicitations, development, market, with national science foundation. Many any other entities put in more of their own funding towards budgets of flying things in space…track very closely grant and what is their budgets. Part of equation as transition from current to commercial, can be quite expensive…
Robyn Gatens:
Your user, seeing coming through national labs a number of pretty good mix of new users and repeat users. On top of NASA demand. More of users coming in order to fund those research. Matching implementation partners. That can turn project into flight project and bring hardware. Important part is implementation partners.
Michael Gold:
Road to LEO, does not begin in LEO, begins on Earth. Drop towers, then suborbital. Fly at relativity lower costs. Test and then take to LEO. Virgin and others are enabling it.
Need laboratory in space to mirror laboratory in earth. Technology in systems going to use. Direction do better in. Scientist on earth don’t care developed in space, care that its there…more similar the better going to be. Not operating in vacuum. China is very active in this area. They see the advantage here. No question microgravity going to happen. Question happen here or in China.
Sandra Connelly:
Look at how create facilities in space to accomplish science do on earth. Orders of magnitude to accomplish science. Compete competition, want to leverage them all.
Q: Laboratory environment, sent scientist to do the work?
Michael Gold
Research and development that cannot be automated. In end going to be a mix. Dedicated personnel. Cannot just be NASA astronauts. Need to be dedicated to science and research, not to be keeping the ISS going…Very excited commercial space station. ISS not designed to support commercial operations. New commercial space stations can tailor it.
Sandra Connelly:
Being able to do more hands on research transform ability to produce science in orders of magnitude today. RFI on street, soliciting input from science perspective, what could commercial LEO destinations enable? From industry perspective, what capabilities are you all creating?
Robyn Gatens:
Trying to do. Another RFI come out very soon. NASA updated forecast and national labs updated forecast. What kinds of projects crew times. Resources going to want. Collaborative capabilities we are going to need.
Sirisha Bandla:
Sub orbital flights, looking forward to having researchers abroad. My flight Unit 22, attempting experiments of flight. That capability is using vehicle for training purposes. Partnership with Axiom. Space based with research in space-based lab before going to ISS or supporting other missions. Do see pipeline already building.
Q: how do SMD and other aspects of NASA envision using capabilities to carry out mission and collaborating other entities as well, needs in LEO?
Sandra Connelly:
Opening up doors and removing barriers for us in ways that weren’t possible for. It’s not government job to do what industry can do. Once industry taking over, want to look at how to leverage that. Looking at doing that from commercial services payload program. (to moon). We are just buying the services not responsible procuring investiture and all of that…industry responsible for that.
Robyn Gatens:
Building collaborations…really trying to approach this future as a whole of government. Yes, have other government agencies doing research today, ISS National lab, want to keep expanding that and approach government demand going forward on LEO destinations. What could they be doing as far as having space research program and portfolio. More conversations around what are the capabilities these commercial destinations are going to be providing. What kind of research are we going to do those capabilities.
Sandra Connelly:
All missions, achieving science, global activity. Together be able to achieve more science with more cost.
Michael Gold:
Stronger together…seeing markets and wall street come forward and support innovation commercial spa…not [just] microgravity, best is yet to come.
Q: Economic benefits coming out of technology research doing now in LEO?
Sven Eenmma:
Seeing wave of companies emerge not just in launch and space services, 39 industry partners, 24 commercial providers. Many of them generic revenues. Users start to monetize start to see results from the research. Seeing startups raise $1.9B dollars of capital. Clear economic impact. Products being developed. Very good publications. Tangible third party validation.
Q: ISS doing today, next step in LEO economy. Current providers doing to enable that?
Sven Eenmma:
US spends on R&D $600B a year. If you go and speak with research in various organizations, there is a lot of interest. There is more to be had. For that purpose, not just going out there and marketing. Finding ways and increasing frequency. Creating opportunities to our commercial partners. Look to optimize look to find better solutions. Position both users and partners to transition from ISS to commercial.
Michael Gold:
Dedicated researchers and dedicated sciences. Enhancing system…commercial platforms. Transformative for the world. That will happen with microgravity, commercial space. Broader activity. Need entrepreneurs to build systems and utilize them. Other next step is diversity. Critical for innovation, for scientific discovery. Free, diverse country is always going to be able to innovate better than autocrat...I hope not only to have more private sector more researchers…embracing that diversity important not just in LEO but in space in general.
Sirisha Bandla:
Collaboration between platform providers and operates. So, researchers do not have to rebuild experiments before go onto orbital platform. Having some sort of standard. Interoperability brings in more partners and more developments.
Robyn Gatens:
ISS perspective can demonstrate feasibility. Can help commercial providers bring facilities, can we enable private astronaut missions?
Q: What are NASA and other partners doing to enable transition. Look like to avoid disruptions.
Robyn Gatens:
Agree to extend ISS to 2030. That is our plan, international partners are also signing up to extension. Looking forward to upgrade, while commercial LEO destinations get ready. Plan is to have an overlap so don’t have a gap…committed to not having a gap in LEO.
Q: Additional partners sub orbital?
Sirisha Bandla:
This is pipeline. Allows for testbed. Access creating allowing test, fix, fly again, and then go to ISS. Provides a few additional capabilities. Creating database and pool of knowledge.
Q: Biggest potential hurdles that currently have, making fully fledge sustainable economy?
Michael Gold and Sirisha Bandla:
Export control continue to be a substantial issue. Need to make sure take those benefits that NASA enjoys and transition. Need more common sense in that regime. When company has info. If foreign national gives us same info…regulatory issues. Article 6 authorization continuing supervision of private sector and, don’t have clarity of how the regulatory will be? FDA? All questions dealt with now, so not a drag on innovation later on.
Sandra Connelly:
Not just regulations, but even policies and processes need to evolve to take advantage of new and evolving partnerships. Environment is changing ecosystem is change. Have to be able to adapt. So not constrained.
Sven Eenmma:
Cost component. Move from platform to the next one. Some of cost needs to be supporting outside of commercial, if want to maintain continuity…commercial stations have sufficient scale.
Robyn Gatens:
Cost of transportation, additional support of government going to be needed. What trying to figure out in some of these end space manufacturing? How much support should we [included]? Where is that threshold where government support pulls back and private comes in.
Sirisha Bandla:
How is the perception? Still perception that space-based capabilities are for space things especially in countries and institutions that don’t have a strong space presence. Falsely thinking no use of presence in space, because don’t have grand vision of going off and doing things in space. Another lab to be utilized. Not only space-based applications, but for earth.
Michael Gold:
In a past interview. How do you justify cost of space program, when dealing with climate change? My Response wouldn’t even know about climate change without space and research. Done a terrible job at explaining space to the public. Many nations recognize space going to benefit them, because already laid all wire. For countries that don’t have infrastructure [need to tell story]…Need to get out of conference where talking to each other, talking more about agriculture to the world, medical to the world.
[End Session]
Comments