- Asian powers open new chapter in space race
- SpaceX Falcon 9 first rocket to launch payload, return to Earth
- Space race 2.0 sucks in $US10b from private companies
- Mini-spacecraft spreads its solar sails
So you want to launch your own satellite made from off-the-shelf parts and send it into space? The technology is there. The costs are low and falling. The possibilities, expanding.
SpaceX rocket nails landing
Mars probe destroyed after plunging to surface
UN warns of war crimes while Russian warships head for Syria
The UN's new Wonder Woman
Trump: 'If the people come out, we're gonna win'
Islamic State attacks Kirkuk as Iraqi forces push on Mosul
Brexit, Russia: tough talk at EU summit
Homeland Security investigating massive US internet outage
SpaceX rocket nails landing
Entrepreneur Elon Musk's SpaceX company successfully lands a rocket on a commercial flight.
But the cost of the legalities around such space ventures remain prohibitive.
Consider this: under existing national and international laws, the cost of licensing and paying for the potential liabilities for launch operators requires taking out insurance covering up to $750 million in damages.
At that price, the cost of insurance can rival the few hundred thousand dollars needed to put a 10x10x10 centimetre cubesat in space.
It's enough to overwhelm a space entrepreneur.
In part to address the mismatch between today's technology and yesterday's regulation, and to unlock the innovative power of the sector in Australia, the government is undertaking a review of the "appropriateness and effectiveness" of the Space Activities Act 1998.
On Wednesday a group of space entrepreneurs and government figures are meeting in Canberra at an invitation-only event to take up the issue. In a sign of how important space is to the Turnbull government — which has staked a lot on the mantra of innovation — the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science Christopher Pyne is expected to deliver the opening speech.
Public consultation on the review kicks off this week, giving everyone with a stake in space, which is arguably everyone, a platform to be heard on how the industry can be fostered.
One area expected to be addressed by the review is the rules around cubesats, the new class of small, inexpensive satellites embraced by unis and research organisations. Whether the review will spark a full overhaul of Australia's space sector or make only changes at the margins remains to be seen.
Professor Andrew Dempster at the University of New South Wales warns that if changes to existing space law focus chiefly on cubesats and smaller satellites it would be "too modest and narrow."
Dempster, who is director of the Australian Centre for Space Engineering Research, says what's needed is a broader policy in Australia for space.
Australia doesn't "have any entity in the government that guides our activities in space, with a forward-looking strategy," he said.
The falling costs of some technologies usable in space could reshape the economics of the industry, a change from the historically high costs of programs in the past.
Currently there are about 1100 active satellites in orbit around Earth. Satellite industry research firm NSR forecasts the launch of more than 2500 sub-100 kg satellites over the next decade, generating revenues of nearly $US6 billion ($8.33 billion) by 2024.
"When you're talking about these cubesats, you can put these things in space cheaply so we're no longer talking about big dollars in space," said Dempster. And those high costs are one of the things that have made space anathema to many a politician in past years.
The expert adviser to the review, Western Sydney University professor of international law Steven Freeland, rejects the notion that the scope of the review will be narrow.
"I don't feel this review is particularly limited at all. It's only limited by the terms of reference," he said.
"It's really about looking at the best way for Australia to build upon its excellent research and science to further participate in space commercially.
"It's much more than just changing words in legislation."
According to the review's terms of reference, it seeks to learn whether existing law "supports innovation and the advancement of space technologies" and "promotes entrepreneurship and private investment in Australia".
To stakeholders in Australia's space industry, Freeland says: "Tell us what you want and how you envisage the implementation of our existing expertise into new and additional realistic commercial opportunities for the country."
Since the review of space law was announced in October 2015, interest has poured in from overseas, outpacing the local level of curiosity.
"Everybody is asking these same questions given that space technology is changing so quickly," Freeland said.
Much of the excitement around the space sector is being driven by the Big Data revolution on Earth, allowing for a depth of data-rich space-based ventures unthinkable in past years.
These include everything from providing internet for Earth from space, to more accurate weather forecasting and environmental and resources management.
The combination of such cheap and ubiquitous space technology with 3D printing may open up other possibilities, such as space mining, or the construction of space stations on a grand scale.
The possibility of structurally lower costs in the price of launch services has moved closer, too, with breakthroughs by Elon Musk's SpaceX and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin. The ability of businesses, governments and organisations to launch greater and more complex structures into orbit could create a bonanza in space-related services and products.
To give an idea of the scale of change at stake, the UK Space Agency projects the space-enabled market is likely to be worth £400 billion ($778 billion) by 2030.
For Australia to get a bite of that growth, however, changes are needed on the ground in terms of the industry, economic incentives and the path to production. To that end, a group of Australian space entrepreneurs and universities founded the delta-5 accelerator in early 2014 to try to foster start-ups that can grow into fully fledged companies independent of government programs.
But the quest for greater coordination remains. Despite the starry-eyed wishes by some advocates for an Australian equivalent to NASA or the European Space Agency, Dempster doesn't think organisations of that scale would be needed.
Rather, the UK Space Agency's may serve as a better example for Australia, he said.
The UK Space Agency has the goal of seeking to gain 10 per cent of the global space market by 2030. Moreover, the UK Space Agency's built on existing government operations that didn't require the huge expenditures politicians associate with space.
"I think [it is] a great example of what you can do with a modern approach to how you would set up a space agency."
The UK strategy has "vision" and is "quantifiable". Importantly, it gives the "industry the confidence to invest."
If there is any hope for a more proactive stance from the government, it's important that the government get accurate assessments for the needs and concerns of the industry, says Freeland from Western Sydney University.
The government wants "submissions that 'tell it like it is' but also 'what is possible' in a compelling and rational way, rather than submissions that simply focus on existing difficulties."