I no longer feel happy about new satellite launches. There are too many. Except ESA. All their satellites have a specific purpose.
This morning I listened to a Canada Space Agency webinar on how much money Canada just gave to ESA (it seems like they were a little shocked!) and how that will "proportionally" open up opportunities for Canadian companies with ESA.
Space agencies primarily launch science and public-good missions. Most of the rest launch satellites to generate profit.
ESA, in particular, has made a massive effort to kick-start a European space economy by de-risking satellite development: supporting manufacturing, platform design, launch access, and, crucially, downstream analytics and applications. That de-risking is exactly what allows private companies to exist (and scale) in the first place.
When countries like Canada contribute financially, they’re essentialy buying access to that ecosystem. This is what opens doors for Canadian companies, whether they operate upstream (instruments, platforms) or downstream (analytics and services).
You're right,that we've been seeing an exponential increase in missions. As launch costs dropped, many companies realised that constellation ownership alone was not a sustainable differentiator. Building in-house satellite and bus manufacturing capabilities became a second revenue stream. In some cases, this pivot happened after companies quietly abandoned their original constellation plans.
What’s particularly interesting is that the next-generation Sentinel(-2) mission will likely push the commercial sector beyond simply offering coverage and revisit. The real pressure point will be data quality.
We consistently see the same issue: insufficient or opaque Cal/Val for commercial instruments. This makes interoperability with public missions difficult, and, more often than not, even raises questions about consistency within a single commercial fleet.
I expect that some companies will likely step away from building and operating their own constellations as it becomes clear that not all business models are economically or technically sustainable in the long term.
I no longer feel happy about new satellite launches. There are too many. Except ESA. All their satellites have a specific purpose.
This morning I listened to a Canada Space Agency webinar on how much money Canada just gave to ESA (it seems like they were a little shocked!) and how that will "proportionally" open up opportunities for Canadian companies with ESA.
Space agencies primarily launch science and public-good missions. Most of the rest launch satellites to generate profit.
ESA, in particular, has made a massive effort to kick-start a European space economy by de-risking satellite development: supporting manufacturing, platform design, launch access, and, crucially, downstream analytics and applications. That de-risking is exactly what allows private companies to exist (and scale) in the first place.
When countries like Canada contribute financially, they’re essentialy buying access to that ecosystem. This is what opens doors for Canadian companies, whether they operate upstream (instruments, platforms) or downstream (analytics and services).
You're right,that we've been seeing an exponential increase in missions. As launch costs dropped, many companies realised that constellation ownership alone was not a sustainable differentiator. Building in-house satellite and bus manufacturing capabilities became a second revenue stream. In some cases, this pivot happened after companies quietly abandoned their original constellation plans.
What’s particularly interesting is that the next-generation Sentinel(-2) mission will likely push the commercial sector beyond simply offering coverage and revisit. The real pressure point will be data quality.
We consistently see the same issue: insufficient or opaque Cal/Val for commercial instruments. This makes interoperability with public missions difficult, and, more often than not, even raises questions about consistency within a single commercial fleet.
I expect that some companies will likely step away from building and operating their own constellations as it becomes clear that not all business models are economically or technically sustainable in the long term.
"this pivot happened after companies quietly abandoned their original constellation plans."
Oh, interesting! Do you have any examples of this?
Exclusive: Albedo Drops its Commercial Imagery Business https://share.google/w4OENP1U5MwwGSWQc