Please read the outline for the paper, only do the Part 6: Future Perspective Write about 4 pages for the Future Perspective The future perspective should be based on the "Final Collaborative Paper" c

Table of contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

Background of privatization of space exploration

The vision of exploring space has been around throughout human history. Like several other US technological breakthroughs, space exploration technology emerged as a consequence of military research and production. During World War II, the benefits of long-distance rockets as weapons were realized, which led both the United States and the Soviet Union to set up missile programs. The space race persisted during the Cold War with each nation outdoing the other to advance space exploration, from Sputnik to the Apollo moon landings. Since 1993, however, NASA's budget has never amounted to more than 1 percent of the federal budget, as opposed to the whopping 4.41 percent share of the federal budget it had in 1966. To fill the vacuum, NASA started to send orders to private companies.

After the legalization of privatized space exploration in 2004, growing numbers of corporations have entered in a new space race. Companies like SpaceX and Virgin Galactic have taken on a more prominent role in space exploration over the last years. The most-reported advantage of space transportation privatization is its cost-effectiveness. For example, while the old Space Shuttle plan costs about $4 billion a year, the current contracts for commercial resupply services cost only around $50 million a mission. Besides, with several private corporations now creating innovative space innovations, there is more rivalry for investment, which may also contribute to more rapid development in the space technology sector.

Privatized space exploration proponents often point out that the private sector also turns existing government technology into profitable or inexpensive innovations and goods for the public at large. The space industry is full of possibilities for both natural resource and travel industries. On the natural resources side, there is an endless abundance of precious metals, minerals, and carbon. Many companies have also begun low-Earth orbit technologies to allow humans to be sent into space for a small expedition. For instance, Virgin Galactic is now providing short trips into space to the public for a mere $250,000 dollars. However, the current costs for these short trips are high priced; private companies have room to improve government technology to be more cost-effective in the future. All in all, privatization of space has given these private companies an opportunity to take advantage of the current technologies and expand them to boost the economy and achieve goals that humanity has never achieved before.

New Space Industry Development

Historically, the space and aeronautical sectors have been inherently connected in the United States. This connection has largely been influenced by armed conflicts driving innovation. Peaks of innovation in aerospace industries are found in the periods of World War II and the Cold War. Following the Cold War, the 1990s experienced a major reduction in the private space sector, leaving only a handful of aerospace companies such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon left to compete (Gomes, Devezas, Beldarrain, Salgado, Melo). NASA and US policymakers have primarily focused on centralized control of the aerospace industry through government funds for defense contracts, creating private-public ties with the aforementioned Aerospace companies. With NASA’s budget being largely subject to government policy, inefficient allocation of resources and reduced competition has led to minute dramatic innovations of the space industry. As an example, in the 1960s, NASA’s budget amounted to over 0.7 percent of the GDP, but has continually fallen over the decades to less than 0.1% of the GDP (Weinzierl).

Private and Public Relations in the Space Industry

Major developments, spurring the creation of commercialized spaceflight in the 2000s and 2010s include the end of the Space Shuttle program and the increased development of satellite constellation programs. The first development is: following the space shuttle program’s end in 2011, steps toward space industry decentralization took place, with the primary goal of NASA to allow firms to be given freedom and responsibility to design specialized products at their own discretion. High risks and high barrier to entry make it seem as if privatized space companies would have a difficult time to develop, but the burden has been beared by successful entrepreneurial minds who have a personal or economic interest in commercializing space, by wealthy individuals such as Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin, Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic and Virgin Orbit, among other entrepreneurs. NASA’s formal steps toward decentralization can be illustrated by the signing of the NASA Transition and Authorization act, which cedes the direction of future action of space exploration to commercial space providers. This leaves the economic development of space to the private sector, while allowing NASA to focus on targeted space exploration goals (Weinzierl).

Despite the increasing influence of private companies such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, or Virgin Orbit, public efforts have played a major role in the development of New Space companies. NASA has awarded private companies over $6.8 billion between 2000 and 2018 to develop equipment that can serve public or political goals, such as sending astronauts to space with American made rockets. Since American taxpayers money is being allocated toward private space companies, it is important to note the opinions of Americans. Pew Research has found that 81% of Americans are confident in private space companies making profit, and 77% believe that private space companies can build safe and reliable rockets. Of those surveyed who are most attentive to space news, 95% have expressed confidence in the ability of private space companies to produce safe and reliable spacecraft (Kennedy, Strauss). The public level of confidence in 2018 can be seen in Figure x.

[Figure x - fix later]

Market Response to a Growing Satellite Industry

The second development that set the stage for the development of private launch companies includes the projection of growth in the satellite market. Satellites are generally classified by weight size, with picosatellites weighing less than 1kg, nanosatellites weighing 1-10 kg, microsatellites weighing 10-100 kg, and small/medium satellites weighing 100-1000 kg. All satellite categories are expected to experience increased market growth in the coming years. A 10 year forecast and potential of nano and microsatellite can be observed in Figure y (Spaceworks).

[Figure y - fix later]

The New Space industry is a response to market forces and government incentives. Government incentives range from defense contracts to research challenges. For instance, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) has sponsored a DARPA Launch competition with participants including Virgin Orbit, Vector Launch, and Astra competing. NASA lunar lander challenges have promoted Masten Space Systems and Armadillo Aerospace In addition to projects being funded by the NASA Artemis program, which seeks to return humans to the moon by 2024. Crew capsules, lunar landers, launch vehicles, and more have been developed. “New Space” is not just for rocket development. It is largely composed of American companies pursuing reusable or expendable launch services, space tourism, mining in space, lunar vehicle development, and in-space satellite propulsion mechanism (Gomes, Devezas, Beldarrain, Salgado, Melo).

Development of New Space Companies

A plethora of companies have risen in the past decade in response to the incentives and market forces, with some of the most influential including SpaceX and Rocket Lab, with other companies such as Virgin Orbit, Firefly Aerospace, and Blue Origin focusing on developing launch vehicles. Of the New Space companies focusing on developing orbital launch vehicles, the primary goals seem to be developing launch vehicles that are reliable, inexpensive, versatile, and reproducible to keep up with an accelerated launch cadence (Niederstrasser).

One of the most important factors for New Space companies is price reduction per launch… Write traditional -> SpaceX -> Specialization by Rocketlab, Virgin Orbit, etc. Finish later (Jones).

SpaceX Contribution to Affordable and Accessible Space Transportation

Created in 2002, Space Exploration Technologies Corp., also known as SpaceX, has been at the forefront of maximizing the reusability and minimizing the cost of spacecraft since its inception. With the original goal of colonizing Mars, the company has been a pioneer in numerous facets of the privatized space industry with achievements such as being the first private liquid-propellant rocket to reach orbit and the first to send a spacecraft to the International Space Station among other feats. Their research in the field of reusability however has been paramount in their rise to being a leader in their field. SpaceX coordinated the first reuse of both a used, orbital rocket stage and the reuse of a payload fairing in 2017 and 2019 respectively (Davenport, Clark). Reusability of this scope has not truly been seen since the days of the Space Shuttle, though by comparison the modern Falcon 9 boasts a cost per launch of $2720/kg while the space shuttle carried a cost of $54,500/kg which represents a decrease by a factor of 20 (Jones).

The question then becomes what factors have driven the costs per launch to such lows in comparison to just 20 years ago. One answer is not entirely unique to SpaceX but to the commercial space industry as a whole. In an analysis conducted by NASA, several key factors that contributed to the cost efficiencies included less workers, in-house development, fewer management layers, and commercial development competition itself (Jones). On top of this, reliability and low cost through simplicity is an essential factor in the development of their rockets with founder and CEO, Elon Musk, presenting the company position in the form of the question, “Is a Ferrari more reliable than a Toyota Corolla or a Honda Civic?” (Chaikin). By bringing simplicity to the idea of rocket science, the company has already been able to substantially reduce the cost of reaching orbit.

The next step in cost optimization comes in the innovations themselves. The average cost of a Falcon 9 rocket is currently in the range of $52 Million US Dollars, which compares similarly to the modern commercial aircraft while the fuel is roughly $200,000 per flight. What exponentially increases the costs of spaceflight is the fact that historically rockets have been used once while a commercial aircraft can fly multiple times in a day and thousands of times in its lifespan (Jones). It is with this in mind that SpaceX has focused their efforts in minimizing the cost of transporting an object into orbit. If a rocket were to be reused, the only cost would be that of the fuel which would be an overall decrease by a factor of 291. An argument to consider is while reusable, the Space Shuttle was still incredibly expensive to operate. By comparison, the Saturn V rocket in the late 1960s actually had a lower cost per flight (less than $10,000/kg) than that of the space shuttle. The main contributor of this was in complexity of the launch system itself as well as the astronomical costs of refurbishing the engines and shuttle itself to flight standards which negated any real “savings” in flight costs. By comparison, the cost of refurbishment of a Falcon 9 for reuse was “substantially less than half’ of the cost of a novel rocket according to SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell. In line with this, once reusability in the scope that the company hopes is achieved, Musk believes a reduction of costs to $10/pound is achievable by 2025 (Jones).

The technology that allows for both simplicity and reusability is vertical takeoff and landing. The space shuttle by comparison launched vertically with the shuttle attached to the body of the rocket cluster itself, creating an aerodynamic profile that was unfavorable to the overall drag when compared to a smooth, cylindrical rocket. Upon completion of its mission, the space shuttle would exit its orbit and return to the earth after a grueling trip through the atmosphere to then glide to the ground and land as any other airplane would. Where SpaceX’s method diverges is in the landing. By integrating the landing gear into the rocket itself, this allows for those negative drag effects to be avoided during flight, aiding in efficiency during that stage. Once the rocket has reached (research however many feet), the second stage disengages from the boosters, beginning the return trip. Using specialized fins for stabilization, the boosters then remote land vertically onto either the ground or remote drone retrieval barges with little to no safety risk attributed. On top of returning and reusing the boosters themselves, SpaceX has also successfully reused the payload fairings themselves, removing another sunk cost as historically, once deployed, the fairings were lost. Overall, this technology allows for the simplicity and benefits of a traditional, smooth rocket during the ascension phase while providing the reusability without detriment to overall drag or excessive refurbishment costs due to relatively complicated design such as the space shuttle.

Rocketlab’s Electron

The website of Rocketlab describes their newly revised and innovative launch vehicle by the following statement

Standing at 17 meters (55 feet and 9.3 inches) tall, with a diameter of 1.2 meters (3 feet 11.2 inches) and a lift off mass of 13,000 kg (28,600 lbs), Electron is optimized for launching 150 kg (330lbs) to a 500 km sun-synchronous orbit.

Here, giving its general outline, Rocketlab covers dimensions, load capacity, force and scope of the vehicle. From the information, Electron is only capable of carrying small payloads with a max weight of 330lbs or 250kgs, therefore, restricting the number of users and potential clients. However it has made multiple advancements and innovations, significantly changing the outlook of small payload drop offs. The following paragraphs and parts will include the considerable innovations and a brief analysis of them.

The Structure

The website emphasises its material science feat by stating that

Electron utilizes advanced carbon composite technologies throughout the launch vehicle structures, including all of Electron’s propellant tanks. The all carbon-composite construction of Electron decreases mass by as much as 40 percent, resulting in enhanced vehicle performance.

The use of carbon composites not only reduces an astonishing 40% of the weight but actually contributes to increasing the weight range for the payloads. Along with that, the researches made the fuel tanks, which consist of oxygen and kerosine, compatible with oxygen. On the other hand, the internal body went through specific advancements as well. Providing a sturdy base and adaption to the payload, Rocketlab’s plate is compatible to customer specifications with a lightweight honeycomb structure. For instance, the plate helped carry NASA’s ELANA mission. In the picture below it is visible that the plate is strong enough to carry multiple payloads and reliable enough for NASA to customize, having a complex five payload structure vested on the plate with adequate wiring and safety concealments.

The Thrusters

Rocket Labs, using their home rapid prototyping and precision lab, manufacture their own thrusters unit and define it a

kick stage that can execute multiple burns to place numerous payloads into different, circularized orbits

This kick stage, as mentioned by the website, is capable of producing multiple thrusts and burn allowing the rocket to maneuver payloads into their respective orbits. The company emphasise their precision by stating

The Kick Stage additionally is equipped with a cold gas reaction control system for precision pointing, as well as its own avionics, power, and communications systems.

Here, the website discusses range and precision of the cold gas reaction control system powered by a Curie engine which has the guile to make a unique orbit for a satellite. This contraption has its own basic control, power and communication systems, providing the control station a straightforward mission completion and resilience to problems like power loss.

Virgin Orbit’s Commercial Launch Services

Virgin Orbit was formed in 2017 and this company focuses on small satellite launch, advanced aerospace design, manufacturing and testing.The objective of the company is to open space for everyone and provide access to explode the space. For the past free year, small satellite industries had been experiencing tremendous growth, and they play an essential role to improve global connectivity. Small satellites help us broaden our horizons in space that benefit our planet.In order to satisfy the needs of customers, Virgin Orbit developed LauncherOne to provide affordable launch service. LauncherOne is a simple, expendable, launch vehicle designed to place small satellites of up to 500n kg into a wide range of Low Earth Orbits (LEO). It was carried to an altitude of approximately 35,000 feet by the 747-400 carrier aircraft.

Figure #; LauncherOne System Expanded View

Shows the Expanded View of the LauncherOne System. The LauncherOne is attached to an aircraft which can provide 327 KN vacuum thrust. Once the aircraft reaches a suitable height, LauncherOne will be released and launched in the first stage with a 1.8m diameter composite structure. On the second stage, the composite structure will be released after it burns out of power, and it will be continuously launched by 59 in 1.5 m diameter composite structure which can provide 22 KN vacuum thrust. This simple design of LauncherOne increases reliability but also keeps the cost low.

Future Perspective

Reference

Leo

Gomes, J., Devezas, T., Belderrain, M., Salgado, M., Melo, F. (2013) The road to privatization of

space exploration: What is missing? Institute for Aeronautics and Space

Weinzierl, M. (2018) Space, the Final Economic Frontier Journal of Economic Perspectives

Kennedy, B., Strauss, M. (2018) Many in U.S. have confidence in what private space companies

will accomplish Pew Research Center

Zimčík, P. (2017) Growth of a New Market: Innovation in Space Industry Proceedings of the

International Scientific Conference of Business Economics, Management and Marketing

Niederstrasser, C. (2018) Small Launch Vehicles A 2018 State of the Industry Survey Utah State

University Research Foundation

Jones, H. (2018) The Recent Large Reduction in Space Launch Cost 48th International

Conference on Environmental Systems

SpaceWorks (2019) Nano/Microsatellite Market Forecast, 9th Edition Spaceworks Enterprise

DePasquale, D., Charania, A.C., Kanayama, H., Matsuda, S., Analysis of the Earth-to-Orbit

Launch Market for Nano and Microsatellites American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Matt

Chaikin, A. (2012, January 1). Is SpaceX Changing the Rocket Equation? Retrieved from https://www.airspacemag.com/space/is-spacex-changing-the-rocket-equation-132285884/

Clark, S. (2019, November 5). SpaceX to reuse payload fairing for first time on Nov. 11 launch. Retrieved from https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/11/05/spacex-to-reuse-payload-fairing-for-first-time-on-nov-11-launch/

Davenport, C. (2017, March 30). Elon Musk's SpaceX makes history by launching a 'flight-proven' rocket. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/03/30/elon-musks-spacex-makes-history-by-launching-a-flight-proven-rocket/

Jones, H. W. (2018). The Recent Large Reduction in Space Launch Cost. 48th International Conference on Environmental Systems. Retrieved from https://ttu-ir.tdl.org/bitstream/handle/2346/74082/ICES_2018_81.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Shanklin, E. (2013, March 23). Reusability. Retrieved from https://www.spacex.com/reusability-key-making-human-life-multi-planetary

Madhav

Education. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.rocketlabusa.com/education/

Electron - satellite launch vehicle. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.rocketlabusa.com/electron/

Rocket Lab: Liberating the Small Satellite Market. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3622&context=smallsat

Jeffery

Virgin Orbit. (2020, April 12). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Orbit

SERVICE GUIDE - Virgin Orbit. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://virginorbit.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ServiceGuide_Sept2019.pdf

Fuller, J., Foreman, V., Bandla, S., Jan, M., McElroy, W., & Vaughn, M. (n.d.). Modularized Air-Launch with Virgin Orbit's LauncherOne System: Responsive SmallSat Constellation

Construction Measured in Hours, Not Months. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/smallsat/2019/all2019/143/

LauncherOne: Virgin Orbits Dedicated Launch Vehicle for ... (n.d.). Retrieved from https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017amos.confE.121V/abstract