UK Space Agency

Memorandum submitted by Professor Colin Pillinger (UKSA 07)

For many years I have advocated formation of Space Agency with an International profile sufficient to give the UK our rightful place among space faring nations. This should however be adequately funded to compete on a level playing field with other Nations of comparable GDP. A Space Agency should be what ‘it says on the tin’ not a sign over a door. Its Director should be an individual with the reputation to command respect of other Nations.  I hope that our Industry will be supported by the UKSA in a way fitting to the enterprise and commercial success that the sector continues to demonstrate. 

I believe that plans are in place to coordinate and build on the educational value of space for our school children and to target space careers advice for students of all ages.  Unfortunately I see little evidence that the UKSA is engaging with and inspiring the general public, those very people who are being asked to pay for it. Neither do I see an activity to motive young people, the potential lifeblood of our economy in a highly competitive area to take up careers in the space sector. Many will disagree and say this is happening however the young and the public in general think on (and so should Governments who wish to be re-elected) on timescales shorter than currently considered. Too many Space missions are on the timescale of dinosaurs and take place on the same scale. Good examples of public thinking are the Olympics and World Cups. Like the World Cup and Olympics, the public should be thinking "the next space mission should be as successful as the last or we should do better in four years time". The reason why Beagle 2 was so successful in the public’s eyes was because it happened on a timescale that was happening soon. Beagle 2 did not fail; it wasn’t helped in realising its ambitions because a large unwieldy organisation (ESA) was not compelled by the urgency which the public need Neither did it show the commitment that private enterprise need to provide commercial sponsorship.

And if Spring Watch, for example, can bring new audiences to understanding wildlife, why not a monthly broadcast behind the scenes of a space mission? What price Space Craft Watch?

Within the next five, preferably four, I believe that the UKSA should be leading a major space endeavour to the Moon or Mars. The project should be coming to fruition within two years and another project already started as the next high profile activity. It would be very easy to dismiss this suggestion as too fast, too soon, two expensive. In fact space missions are expensive because the salaries of the marching army of engineers and scientists which govern project costs especially when delays are not in weeks or months but in years because of the constraints of celestial mechanics. Commercial sponsors want to receive a return for their money especially the Managers who make the commitment for whom achievement of goals reaps them rewards for the risks taken. Thus I believe the mission, whatever it is, should be UKSA supported from the outset, but with a balance of funding could come from sponsorship when it is realised that it will happen at the time announced not ‘it may happen next year or in a few years or may not’. 

Just as everybody not just sports fans anticipate the 2012 Olympics and the possibility of a World Cup in Britain in 2018 so should the Nation’s scientists and engineers and the public should be thinking about a new Big Idea for the country to rally behind especially if it is one of tremendous economic opportunity and technological advance. Space exploration has transformed our lives. It is more important even than people are currently thinking. It genuinely is the Frontier and by nature Humans are Explorers.

Professor Colin Pillinger

August 2010