New filing system could deter satellite operators from saving space

As aerospace companies engage in Earth orbit with thousands of new satellites over the next decade, industry experts believe it is time to categorize these operators in their efforts to preserve the Earth's orbit. security and sustainability of space. A classification system could keep companies honest and keep Earth's orbit open to business and not get bogged down with excess satellites and debris.

According to the European Space Agency, nearly 2,000 operational satellites are currently in orbit. Agencies detect more than 22,000 debris. But companies like SpaceX, OneWeb and Amazon have proposed adding new giant satellite constellations in space, numbering hundreds or thousands. As the number of satellites orbiting the Earth increases, the collision risk of these vehicles will invariably increase as well. These impacts could create hundreds of debris that threaten other functioning spacecraft.

Satellite operators can take certain steps during the construction and launch of spacecraft to reduce the risk of collision. Changes to the design, the position above the Earth or the definition of a satellite's mission plan may affect its chances of threatening other spacecraft and creating more debris in orbit. From now on, two teams of experts, led by MIT and the European Space Agency, plan to set up an independent process evaluating the decisions made by the operators during the creation of their constellations. The concept, known as the Space Sustainability Rating or SSR, is intended to provide an added layer of accountability to companies that are sending vehicles in space. "It's really about encouraging companies to fight each other to build a brand," says Danielle Wood, assistant professor of media arts and sciences at MIT and head of the MIT team. The edge.

There are already regulations designed to maintain the cleanliness of the Earth's orbit. US government agencies regulating launches, such as the FCC, are examining how a satellite can affect the space environment before allowing it to fly. And in the 1990s, the US government developed guidelines and recommended practices to be followed by operators to reduce the risk of space debris. The United Nations has adopted standards similar to those of the United States, while other countries have developed their own guidelines.

But the World Economic Forum, an international non-profit organization that aims to improve "the state of the world," said it was necessary to set up a parallel system to control space societies. This system, driven by the sector and requiring voluntary action. This prompted the World Economic Forum to select the MIT and ESA teams responsible for developing SSR. The teams have not yet provided specific details for the score, but will spend the next few years determining the basics.

An important aspect of the rating will be a company's compliance with applicable standards. "Part of the question we are going to ask is this: Does this satellite operator choose to comply with any of these rules or guidelines ?," states Wood. Many of these standards are built around the lifespan of a satellite, forcing operators to remove their satellites from their orbit. The United States demands that satellites be safely disposed of within 25 years. That is, we must bring the satellite closer to the Earth, where it is gravitational and burned into the atmosphere, or place it in a "cemetery orbit" – a region of space that no active satellite uses.

The SSR will look at how a company gets rid of its satellites, but it will also consider all the physical characteristics of a spacecraft likely to make the vehicle more dangerous. It is a concept that one of the partners of the MIT team, Moriba Jah, calls the spatial footprint – a concept similar to that of the carbon footprint on Earth. "It's the burden that every object, dead or alive, poses on the security and sustainability of everything in space," says Jah, professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Texas. The edge.

The spatial footprint will take into account things like the orbit of a satellite, for example. "Some orbits are extremely rare and there is nothing else," says Jah. "And other orbital regions have many other objects that share the same type of space highway." There is an orbit 22,000 miles above the equator, called the geostationary belt, very popular for communication satellites, while kilometers at altitude are also cluttered with Earth observation satellites. A satellite in one of these more congested orbits will have a larger footprint than a satellite in a more isolated orbit.

Image: Airbus

The maneuverability of a spacecraft is also important: does it have thrusters to prevent collisions? And can he get out of the way quickly? The answers to these questions will all be taken into account in the footprint, says Jah. The way a satellite is built will also be taken into account. If it is designed to withstand extreme temperatures and vibrations, it will be less likely to disintegrate and create debris. This could mean a reduced footprint.

MIT and ESA teams will need to determine the weight to be assigned to each of the characteristics of these satellites. To get all the information they need, teams plan to use publicly available data that companies share on license applications for their spacecraft. These include the orbits visited by a satellite, for example, as well as disposal plans. Wood adds that teams could also develop questionnaires that operators could fill out about their spaceship. "They can choose what to share and what not to share," she says. "They will have to make a choice: would I prefer to get a better score or hide information, basically."

Once the ranking system is defined, teams will propose an algorithm to evaluate the impact of a satellite or constellation on other vehicles in space. And it is possible that when all this is finished, a new entity, perhaps a non-profit organization, will be responsible for overseeing these scores. "We are here to help design the operations and we will have to decide the design process which entity will actually execute," Wood says.

Wood considers this tool as a way for companies and operators to improve their image, by getting a good RSS score. It is also something that could be useful for space insurance companies because the SSR could be a good guide for assessing the liability of a satellite.

But above all, the goal is to find another way to keep the Earth in operational orbit. If too many collisions and debris take up space, some orbits may become unusable. And that means we could potentially lose some satellite capabilities, from satellite television to communications to Earth observations and space research. This is one of the main reasons why Jah and Wood are working on SSR, as this would provide another way to protect the space as if it were an ecosystem.

"Near-Earth space requires environmental protection," says Jah. "It's not necessarily like [the] climate change, but it is a global commons that could be tragedy if we do nothing. "