A Study of Emerging Space Nation and Commercial Satellite Operator Stakeholder Preferences for Space Traffic Management by Miles Lifson B.A., Physics and Government, Claremont McKenna College (2013) Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics and Master of Science in Technology and Policy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 2020 ○c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2020. All rights reserved. Author Aeronautics and Astronautics and Technology and Policy Program August 18, 2020 Certified by Danielle Wood Benesse Corp. Career Development Assistant Professor of Research in Education Media Arts and Sciences and Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Certified by Richard Linares Charles Stark Draper Assistant Professor, Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Accepted by Zoltan Spakovszky Professor, Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Graduate Program Committee Accepted by Noelle Eckley Selin Associate Professor, Institute for Data, Systems, and Society and Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Director, Technology and Policy Program A Study of Emerging Space Nation and Commercial Satellite Operator Stakeholder Preferences for Space Traffic Management by Miles Lifson Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society on August 18, 2020, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics and Master of Science in Technology and Policy Abstract The near-Earth space environment is a finite, shared resource. Trends including reduced launch costs, electronics miniaturization, and preference for resilient, disaggregated archi- tectures are driving significant growth in the orbital population. Existing systems tocoor- dinate and manage space traffic do not scale to this higher level of utilization orpromote the efficient and equitable use of space. There is growing need for both new technical space traffic management (STM) systems and policy regimes to coordinate activities goingto, in, and returning from space. This thesis describes several contributions to developing this integrated corpus. A literature review of proposed STM architectures highlights gaps in un- derstandings of emerging space nation STM perspectives and commercial operator attitudes on data sharing. Based on United Nations documents and interviews with emerging space nation representatives, a set of four recommendations is developed for future international STM development efforts. These recommendations stress affordability, achievable technical requirements for participation, inclusive system design, and careful consideration of satellite control allocation. Through a review of operator U.S. regulatory filings and new interviews with operators and experts, operator attitudes are traced successively through 1) potential STM domains and functions; 2) per function data requirements; 3) concerns about data sharing; 4) attitudes towards data protection mechanisms; and 5) influence on potential STM system design. Key insights include the importance of operator perceived self-benefit from data sharing, and significant heterogeneity in operator data sharing attitudes. Thesis Supervisor: Danielle Wood Title: Benesse Corp. Career Development Assistant Professor of Research in Education Media Arts and Sciences and Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor: Richard Linares Title: Charles Stark Draper Assistant Professor, Aeronautics and Astronautics 2 Acknowledgments Thank you to Professor Danielle Wood, for believing in me and supporting me in the process of this work over the last three years with your wisdom, personal connections, encouragement, and resources. The connection between sustainability on Earth and in space is deep and informs both domains. Exploring it with you has been an absolute pleasure. Professor Richard Linares, thank you for letting me share in your work exploring future technical systems for space traffic management. Much of the work in this thesis predates my joining your team, but it informs the work I do every day. I am excited for what we will build together. Thank you to Sreeja Nag for offering me a summer researcher position at theNASA Ames Research Center and exposing me to the fascinating challenge that is space traffic management, as well as your feedback and insights on the work in this thesis. Thank you to Thomas Roberts for being the first person to read this thesis cover to cover. Your countless suggestions and insightful questions were immeasurably helpful. Chapter 2 includes a description of work I contributed to during the summer of 2018 and 2019 as a contractor to the NASA Ames Research Center. During that time, I supported efforts to adapt work on Unmanned Aircraft System Traffic Management to architect and develop a concept for operational space traffic management autonomy. I gratefully ac- knowledge my co-authors on several publications relating to that work, Sreeja Nag, David Murakami, Parimal Kopardekar, and Nimesh A. Marker, as well as research collaborators Jannuel Cabrera and Nolan Johnson. More than 35 individuals at commercial satellite operators, think tanks, non-governmental organizations, international inter-governmental organizations, embassies, and various na- tional governments graciously shared their thoughts with me in support of the work de- scribed in Chapters 2, 3, and 4. Their patience, insights, and generosity with their time are acknowledged with the utmost gratitude. With this thesis, I seek to distill and organize the collective wisdom and experience they kindly shared with me. I hope I have succeeded. Any errors are my own. The work in this thesis was funded in part via support from the Media Lab Consortium of Member Organizations: https://www:media:mit:edu/posts/member-companies/. 3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4 Contents 1 Introduction 13 1.1 Introduction and Background . 14 1.1.1 Orbits . 15 1.1.2 Orbital Debris . 17 1.1.3 Conceptualizing Earth Orbit as a Common Pool Resource Problem . 20 1.1.4 Defining SSA and STM . 21 1.1.5 SSA . 22 1.1.6 Collision Avoidance . 23 1.1.7 Existing International Law . 24 1.2 Research Questions, Methods, and Organization . 25 1.3 Contributions . 27 2 Review of Proposed Systems Architectures for STM 29 2.1 Introduction . 29 2.2 Overview of the Systems Architecture Analysis Framework . 31 2.3 Review of Relevant Literature . 36 2.3.1 International Space University 2007 Space Traffic Management Final Report (ISU 2007) . 36 2.3.2 The Need for an Integrated Regulatory Regime for Aviation and Space: ICAO for Space? (Jakhu et al. 2011) . 38 2.3.3 Evaluating Options for Civil Space Situational Awareness (SSA) (STPI 2016) . 41 2.3.4 Report on Space Traffic Management Assessments, Frameworks and Recommendations (SAIC 2016) . 42 2.3.5 On the Implementation of a European Space Traffic Management System (Tüllmann et al. 2017) . 45 5 2.3.6 Space Traffic Management (STM): Balancing Safety, Innovation, and Growth (AIAA 2017) . 47 2.3.7 The “We” Approach to Space Traffic Management (Oltrogge 2018) . 49 2.3.8 Conceptual Development of a Civil Space Traffic Management System Capability (Skinner 2018) . 52 2.3.9 Space Traffic Management with a NASA UAS Traffic Management (UTM) Inspired Architecture (NASA Ames Research Center 2018-2019) 54 2.3.10 Space Traffic Management - Towards a Roadmap for Implementation (Eds. Kai-Uwe Schrogl et al. 2018) . 58 2.3.11 International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety STM Working Group Summary (IAASS 2019) . 60 2.3.12 CNES STM Considerations (Bonnal et al. 2020) . 62 2.3.13 Summary of Frameworks . 65 2.4 Gap Analysis and Motivation for Subsequent Chapters . 66 3 Emerging Space Nation Stakeholder Perspectives on STM 69 3.1 Introduction . 69 3.1.1 Motivation and Research Questions . 70 3.1.2 Literature Review . 72 3.2 Methods . 76 3.2.1 Interview Protocol Development . 78 3.2.2 Interview Administration . 81 3.2.3 Countries and Interviewee Selection Methodology . 82 3.2.4 Factors Potentially Affecting Validity . 82 3.3 Results . 83 3.3.1 Per-Question Results . 84 3.4 Discussion . 91 3.4.1 What are the perspectives of representatives of emerging space na- tions on the design of a potential internationalized STM system, and what shapes these opinions? . 91 3.4.2 What are preferred forms of engagement to determine the design of future international STM systems? . 91 3.4.3 What forms of STM/SSA capability-building are most needed? . 93 3.4.4 What capabilities should be provided by an international STM system? 93 3.4.5 What kinds of STM requirements would constitute ‘undue’ cost? . 94 6 3.4.6 How do these opinions differ across interviewees and countries, and what shapes them? . 95 3.4.7 Preliminary Recommendations . 96 3.4.8 Validation of Preliminary Recommendations with Stakeholders . 97 3.5 Conclusions . 99 4 Commercial Satellite Operator Data Sharing Stakeholder Perspectives 105 4.1 Introduction . 105 4.2 Motivation and Research Questions . 106 4.3 Methods . 106 4.3.1 Interview Protocol Development . 107 4.3.2 Interview Administration . 108 4.3.3 Factors Potentially Affecting Validity . 109 4.4 Review of Public Practices, Opinions, and Relevant Organizations . 111 4.4.1 Types of SSA Information . 111 4.4.2 Existing SSA Data-Sharing Organizations and Practices . 112 4.4.3 Anomaly Sharing . 114 4.4.4 Threat Information Sharing . 116 4.4.5 Operator Viewpoints in the FCC Record . 117 4.4.6 Status of Available Information on Commercial Operator Data Sharing125 4.5 Results, Analysis, and Synthesis . 126 4.5.1 Domains and Relevant Functions . 126 4.5.2 Concerns . 135 4.5.3 Protection Mechanisms . 144 4.6 Discussion . 149 4.6.1 Radio Frequency . 149 4.6.2 Safety of Flight/Collision Avoidance . 151 4.6.3 Launch and Re-entry . 154 4.6.4 Space Weather . 155 4.6.5 Near-Earth Objects . 155 4.6.6 Laser Emissions . 155 4.6.7 Cyber and Other Threat Information Sharing .