Iac-09-B4.1.3 the Evolution of Satellite Programs In
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IAC-09-B4.1.3 THE EVOLUTION OF SATELLITE PROGRAMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Danielle Wood Doctoral Student, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA [email protected] Dr. Annalisa Weigel Assistant Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA [email protected] ABSTRACT This paper analyzes the historical paths of eight countries – from Africa, Asia and Latin America – as they pursued technical capability in the area of space technology. Through this analysis, the paper provides three major contributions. The first contribution is an original framework called the Space Technology Ladder. This Ladder framework proffers an idealized path through four major technology categories, as follows: 1) establishing a national space agency; 2) owning and operating a satellite in Low Earth Orbit; 3) owning and operating a satellite in Geostationary Orbit; and 4) launch capability. The second contribution is a graphical timeline, created by mapping the historical achievements of the eight countries onto the Ladder framework. The results provide information about the similarities and differences in the technology strategies of the various countries. The third contribution is a discussion of the strategic decisions faced by the countries under study. By exploring their diverse strategies, we work toward developing prescriptive theory to guide developing country space programs. INTRODUCTION The international space community is the capabilities of their existing space growing. More countries are demonstrating programs to include new capabilities. interest and capability in space. In the beginning of the space era, the funding, This paper considers the policy choices expertise and accomplishments were made by countries as they pursue space dominated by the United States and Soviet activity. It uses historical summaries of Union. Gradually, however, many other developing country space programs to find countries have carved their own place in the models of technology procurement. It space faring society. The first mission of the explores how closely their progress follows US Vision for Space Exploration, the Lunar an idealized process based on progressive Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), technical complexity and increased demonstrates this point. This unmanned managerial autonomy. Countries are spacecraft, which represents the US return considered from Africa, Asia and Latin to the moon, was launched in June 2009i. America. The trajectories of each country’s The LRO mission closely follows the launch space achievements are mapped and of three other satellites that were sent into compared. The results highlight the various lunar orbit by India, China and Japan options that have been exercised in the past between 2007 and 2008. Currently, many for achieving increased national space developing countries are seeking to increase capability. their level of space activity. Some of these countries, such as South Africa, Nigeria and The paper is organized as follows. The next Malaysia, are investing in their second section outlines the theoretical framework generation of satellites. Others, such as that is the foundation for the analysis. This India and Brazil, plan to drastically extend framework is called the Space Technology Ladder. The third section explains the data - 1 - and analysis methods used in the study. The The Space Technology Ladder includes four data describes national space technology major levels of space technology milestones for countries from Asia, Africa achievements. At the lowest technical level and Latin America. The fourth section is establishing a national space agency or explains the results and summarizes the an office in charge of space policy at the stories of national space projects that are national level. A country reaches the second expressed in the results. The fifth section technology level by owning and operating a discuses the variety of models used by national satellite in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). countries for the procurement of new space Level three is achieved when a country technology. The final section summarizes owns and operates a satellite in the finding and offers conclusions. Geostationary Orbit (GEO). At level four, a country has independent capability to launch THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: THE a satellite. The four levels are ranked to SPACE TECHNOLOGY LADDER show an increase in technical complexity. These four technology milestones are There is very little literature that directly chosen because, historically, they reflect the studies the technology and procurement initial efforts of both developed and choices made by developing countries in the developing countries in space. Most area of space technology. This study builds developing countries are not currently on previous work by the authors, which involved in human space flight. Thus, the examined the space activities of countries in Space Technology Ladder focuses on Africaii,iii. These space activities were milestones in space policy, satellites and subsequently ranked on metaphorical launchers rather than human space flight. “ladders” that highlighted the different Table 1 shows the four major milestones of avenues through which countries accessed the Space Technology Ladder. remote sensing, communication and navigation services. Table 1: The Space Technology Ladder – Summary View. The present work examines the policy choices made by developing countries in their pursuit of increased space technology LAUNCH CAPABILITY capabilities. The analysis includes information about the order in which new technical milestones are achieved as well as the procurement model that is used to reach SATELLITE IN GEOSTATIONARY each new milestone. In order to make a ORBIT comparison across several countries, we begin by establishing an idealized technology path that a country could follow as it develops space capabilities. Note that SATELLITE IN LOW EARTH ORBIT the assumed technology path is not meant to serve as a prescriptive standard. It merely provides a convenient way to compare all the countries against a consistent, fictionalized example. The technology path NATIONAL SPACE AGENCY is summarized in the Space Technology Ladder. The ladder is developed by building a list of milestones that some countries The order of the colors in the Space achieve in space. These milestones are Technology Ladder is drawn from the ranked according technical complexity. For natural spectrum. The colors are used to each technical milestone, there are also distinguish the various levels of the Ladder. procurement milestones that represent an They also remind the reader that there is a increase in the level of autonomy of a broad spectrum of ways that countries country when executing a certain technical currently participate in the use of space feat. technology. Throughout the paper, red is - 2 - used to refer to actions taken with regard to reflect the diversity of ways that countries a national space agency. Yellow highlights might procure a low earth orbit satellite. projects for a satellite in low earth orbit. These sub-categories also represent Green represents projects with different levels of technical autonomy in a geostationary satellites, while blue is used country’s ability to gain access to a satellite. for launch capabilities. Table 3 shows the sub-categories within owning a satellite in Low Earth Orbit. As Table 1 shows the summary view of the before, the lowest level sub-category is on Space Technology Ladder. At this high level, the bottom, and the yellow color it has four categories of space activity that corresponds to level two of the Space are defined based on a technology Technology Ladder. milestone. Each of these four technology categories can be further divided into sub- Table 3: Five LEO Satellite Sub-Categories. categories. The sub-categories represent LOW EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE different options for procuring the relevant Build Locally technology or different levels within the Build Through Mutual International technology. The sub-categories of each Collaboration level in the ladder are described below. Build Locally with Outside Assistance Build with Support in Partner’s Facility Level one on the Space Technology Ladder Procure with Training Services is establishing a national space agency. For some countries, there are several Level three – in green on the Space milestones within this category. Some Technology Ladder – is to own and operate countries establish a national office in a satellite in Geostationary Orbit. As with the charge of space policy or research before LEO satellite, there are a variety of ways they later establish an official space agency. that countries procure a GEO satellite; these Therefore the expanded version of level one methods can also be ranked to show contains these two possible milestones, as increasing technical autonomy. Four options shown in Table 2 below. Following the for obtaining a GEO satellite are listed in example from Table 1, the lower level sub- Table 4. They range from straightforward category in Table 2 is on the bottom. Note procurement to building the satellite locally. that Table 2 is red because it is an expansion of the red level from Table 1. Table 4. Four GEO Satellite Sub-Categories. Table 2: Two National Space Agency Sub- GEOSTATIONARY SATELLITE Categories. Build Locally Build through Mutual International NATIONAL SPACE AGENCY Collaboration Build Locally with Outside Assistance Procure Establish Current National Space Agency Finally, consider the fourth level