Memorandum 69
Submission from Surrey Satellite Technology
Limited (SSTL)
1. This is an independent submission to
the Committee from Surrey Satellite Technology Limited (SSTL).
SSTL has participated fully in preparation of the submission by
UKSpace, and strongly supports the UKSpace conclusions. Nevertheless,
SSTL would like to provide the Committee with observations from
its own unique perspective as a UK-owned SME acting as prime contractor
for ESA, UK and export missions. We will not reiterate points
made by UKSpace, but rather will concentrate on additional areas
we feel are important.
2. Our position can be summarised as follows:
whilst ESA is essential and successful for large multi-national
space missions, the UK needs a strong national space mission program
in order to retain an internationally competitive, independent
space industry, and in order to pressure ESA to provide the best
possible value-for-money.
3. While the UK makes very effective use
of technology investment, it is missions, not individual
technologies, which drive a competitive, value-adding space industry.
Missions and systems are where upstream technologies and downstream
applications meet. If the UK is to retain control over this critical
point in the value chain—capturing both downstream and upstream
value—it must invest in missions as well as technologies.
4. All of the major ESA nations use regular
nationally funded space missions to position their industry for
major roles in ESA programs. France, for example, has launched
or recently approved 18 small satellite missions and Germany is
supporting SAR-LUPE and TANDEM-X. Italy, Spain, Sweden, Belgium,
Denmark and Canada all have small satellite programmes under way.
5. As a result of these national programmes,
these industries are also positioned to out-compete the UK in
global and European export markets. In our experience, products
from France, Germany and Italy, developed through national missions,
are now eroding the UK market share overseas.
6. In the past, the UK has achieved outstanding
results through investment in national space missions. We refer
primarily to the Micro Satellite Applications in Collaboration
(MOSAIC) program initiated in 2000, which successfully positioned
UK industry to win both ESA and export contracts—achieving
a five times ROI.
7. The MOSAIC investment in the UK Disaster
Monitoring Constellation (UK-DMC) satellite catalysed the
formation of the world's first coordinated constellation of nationally
owned satellites. This directly resulted in orders for three similar
satellites (the most recent having been signed only this summer).
As a result of this success, a profitable remote sensing data
service company (DMC International Imaging Limited) has been formed
to exploit the constellation's data, and the BNSC has become a
member of the prestigious International Charter: Space and Major
Disasters. The DMC has now become an internationally-recognised
exemplar for modern EO systems—led by the UK.
8. The MOSAIC investment in TopSat
has placed the UK at the forefront of the new trend towards "responsive
space" for security users. In addition, it provided the technological
basis for SSTL to secure the £20 million RapidEye constellation
contract, the £10 million Beijing-1 contract and expected
£50 million in further export contracts to be signed before
the year end.
9. The MOSAIC investment in Gemini
has had a very significant impact, positioning the UK to win the
GIOVE-A contract. GIOVE-A, the only satellite thus far launched
for the Galileo program, was essential for Europe to meet the
requirements of the International Telecommunications Union to
secure the Galileo spectrum allocation. GIOVE-A has also demonstrated
conclusively that the UK-led move to smaller, faster, better-value
space missions can be used by ESA. If the lessons of GIOVE-A are
properly understood and reinforced, European taxpayers could save
tens (maybe hundreds) of millions of Euros on Galileo and other
large space systems. The GIOVE-A success for Europe was only possible
because of the UK expertise in small satellites.
10. In total, the £15 million of DTI
funds invested in MOSAIC have resulted in at least £80 million
of economic activity in the UK. On the basis of these results,
we strongly recommend that HMG plan a further MOSAIC initiative—where
modest government pump-priming funding is more than matched by
industry to enable advanced small satellite missions. Now is an
opportune time for such an initiative, which would stimulate specific
industrial, public-sector and economic benefits. The paragraphs
below highlight specific possibilities we feel would be of interest
to the Committee.
11. Small missions for Global Monitoring
for Environment and Security (GMES): Whilst the European GMES
programme is now entering its implementation phase, we are very
concerned that it will become a massive programme subject to the
associated delays, risks and political compromises. HMG might
seek to stimulate a more affordable and rapid implementation of
some GMES goals through small missions. This would also allow
the BNSC to take a leading role within the UK in promoting the
practical use of space by other government departments.
12. UK MoD Synthetic Aperture Radar Mission:
SSTL is presently working with Astrium and other UK space
companies to provide the UK with a highly responsive, UK-controlled,
all-weather remote sensing capability. Such a system involves
the very best of UK industry, exploiting decades of HMG technology
investment and bringing the UK on par with France and Germany.
In addition, it gives the UK a state-of-the-art quid pro quo
in the security relationship with the USA.
13. UK-Led Lunar Exploration: With
Europe, the U.S.A., China and even India planning extensive solar-system
exploration for the coming decades, now is the time for the UK
to stake its claim to a substantial industrial role in these programs.
Using existing UK technology and knowledge in robotic space missions,
demonstrated through a national or bi-national lunar exploration
mission, UK industry can position itself for future roles both
in international scientific exploration and in the provision of
critical communications and navigation services at the Moon and
Mars. SSTL is aware of strong support within NASA for a UK led
bi-lateral lunar mission with the USA based on Surrey's small
satellite expertise, and this could become a centrepiece for a
UK national initiative. Such an initiative would enable the UK
to develop and enhance its expertise in robotic space exploration
and allow the UK to "punch above its weight" in support
of international exploration projects by providing essential infrastructure
elements and addressing key scientific or technological issues.
14. We are aware that our promotion of a
UK national small satellite mission initiative may be seen as
parochial and self-serving. We believe, however, that such an
initiative would benefit HMG and the entire UK space industry—from
instrument suppliers to value adding operators. SSTL's mission
is to "Change the Economics of Space", not simply to
benefit our own Company, but because we believe that this brings
better value-for-money from all space endeavours and creates more
opportunities for the exploitation of space by UK stakeholders
across the government, scientific, industrial and commercial sectors.
15. Because the preponderance of UK government
funding for space is spent through ESA, we are aware that a national
initiative alone is insufficient to substantially improve value-for-money
for UK taxpayers. In addition to a national initiative, we recommend
that HMG place the utmost pressure on ESA to reform its procurement
and technical approaches, including the management of the science
programme.
16. The GIOVE-A mission demonstrated that
the pragmatic value-for-money approach to space engineering pioneered
by SSTL in the UK can be effectively applied to critical European
programs. We believe that this success should lead ESA to adopt
a more flexible approach to procurement, reserving the more traditional
and expensive processes for launch vehicles and the largest missions,
and following cost-effective commercial processes elsewhere. Not
surprisingly, there are substantial conservative pressures within
the industrial and institutional structure of European space.
Without pressure from the member states, ESA will naturally retain
its existing processes.
17. Finally, we have come to take space
for granted—so much so that we do not realise how deeply
embedded it has become in our everyday lives. Most people would
recognise that space provides us with satellite TV, weather pictures,
images of far galaxies from Hubble, the rovers on Mars, but all
too few outside the space community realise that their personal
in-car navigation system is using transmissions received directly
from a constellation of US military satellites. Indeed, as a nation,
we have become fundamentally reliant on space to underpin our
lifestyle and security. Fortunately the UK possesses a vibrant
and capable space industry—both manufacturing large &
small satellites and exploiting their use once in orbit contributing
billions into the UK economy and creating a world-class technical
workforce. However, space does not at present command significant
attention at the top levels of UK government—and this represents
a substantial risk to the UK.
If, hypothetically, space were to be "switched
off", the UK would experience major infrastructure problems.
— Disruption to telecommunications
to remote locations around the world; to ships or aircraft
in flight; no live news feeds from many parts of the world; no
ability to support disaster relief operations; no satellite TV
and consequential loss of revenues to the UK.
— Loss of accurate weather forecasts—with
a £1.5 billion/year impact to the economy of the UK alone.
We would be blind to the progress of global warming.
— Loss of SatNav—most
vehicle fleets could not operate efficiently; our military campaigns
would falter—or increase collateral damage and civilian
losses.
— Loss of universal timing—used
to synchronise power and telecoms networks; banking and share
trading; the mobile phone networks—most of these would stop
operating.
Very rapidly the UK economy would falter—we
would experience severe problems with food distribution, availability
of cash, communications and our national security would be vulnerable.
These considerations are not lost on other nations—such
as the US, France, Germany, Italy, India and China—and developing
countries have been quick to realise the importance of space in
providing the tools for development and improved economic security
(for example, Algeria, Nigeria, Turkey now have their own Earth
observation satellites ...).
In this context, the UK government would be
wise to place space further up its agenda—not because it
is exotic, but for the benefit, well-being and security of the
country without dependence on the assets of other nations.
18. The UK currently enjoys a world-leading
position in modern small satellites that now enables the UK to
access space affordably and exploit its use for the benefit of
the nation. We should not miss this opportunity.
November 2006
| 
