The United States of Australia - A collaborative approach to the Australian space domain - Part I

By Dharshun Sridharan Co-Founder, Piston Labs and Nipuni Silva People Stream, Piston Labs

To define the future, means understanding the past. Records indicate that as of 2008, Australia was one of two countries falling under the scope of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that did not have a standing committee or governance body for the Space Domain. Since then, Australia's stance has changed. The escalation of space activities across the globe in the preceding years has rightfully emphasized the need to establish an organization to formally oversee Australia's space activities. This culminated in the announcement of such an organization at the 2017 International Astronautical Congress in Adelaide, South Australia. Within 12 months of that announcement, the Australian Space Agency was formally established in Adelaide, at Lot Fourteen. With it came Australia's reentry into the global Space Domain.

What followed was a series of space strategies, industry profiles, capability assessments, and more. However, they were developed at both a national and state level with arguably an ineffective nexus. While having individual statebased approaches to the Space Domain is not necessarily a bad thing, the analysis suggests that there is an undefined overlap or underlap across these approaches.

Analyzing, at a high level, the vision, aims, objectives, and intended outcomes of individual states (where artifacts exist) provides an interesting picture of the Space Domain for Australia. Looking into aspects of how and where potential capability overlaps exist, where each state could potentially be Australia's Centre of Excellence (CoE), and where each state could be a fast follower instead, forms another interesting perspective. Together, these highlight opportunities for collaboration, with an underpinning Australian Space Domain Operating Model that sees the Australian Space Agency taking ownership of the national strategy, coordination, and direction setting, and each state fitting into the bigger picture to achieve economies of scale (this is Part 1 of this article series) and to distinguish a fit-forpurpose sovereign Space Supply Chain (this is Part 2 of this article series).

Where are we now?

Each state and territory within the Australian governmental hierarchy has its own goals, policies, and approaches to governance, including in the space domain. The development of jurisdictional space strategies has been the current approach to outline and govern the space industry and its participants. While this may be a well-thought-out approach in isolation, developing un-interoperable and duplicative strategies among different jurisdictions can be more harmful than helpful.

Although there may be sovereignty concerns, competition within a nation in the long term could be detrimental to the national industry. A high-level review shows both an overlap or duplicative capability set and a lack of focus on developing a sustainable space industry. It also alludes to the fact that, some areas of Australia's civil space priorities may be misaligned.

Queensland

Queensland aims to be a top hub for earth observation, launch activities, ground systems, niche manufacturing, and autonomous systems. The state's strengths include communication technologies, robotics, space operations, R&D in advanced technologies, and a broad range of manufacturing capabilities. Queensland is unique in offering radio-free zones and access to equatorial orbits, which are beneficial for launch and observation of both hemispheres. The state is investing in niche manufacturing, such as biomanufacturing and precision tooling, to strengthen its industry. Its strategic location, combined with its capabilities, makes Queensland an attractive destination for investors seeking to capitalize on Australia's growing space industry.

New South Wales (NSW)

NSW aims to foster an innovative and competitive space industry by promoting industry growth, supporting startups, encouraging collaboration, expanding the application of space technologies, and growing industry precincts. The state's capabilities include education, R&D, communication technologies, ground systems, quantum science, robotics, and manufacturing. Its geographic position also enables capabilities in communications and satellite positioning technology.

Australian Capital Territory (ACT)

The ACT does not have any documented objectives or strategic plans for the Space Domain. However, it has capabilities in communication technologies (such as NASA's Deep Space Network), earth observation, ground systems, Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT), end-to-end Space operations, Space Situational Awareness (SSA) and debris monitoring, education, and R&D. As the capital of Australia, it also provides access to government stakeholders and participants, making it an ideal location for international collaboration.

Victoria

Victoria does not have any objectives or strategic plans documented for the space industry that could be identified. However, the state acknowledges that the growth of the space industry and its workforce can bring opportunities for

Victorian businesses. Additionally, Victoria has capabilities in artificial intelligence (AI), Earth observation, advanced manufacturing, PNT, robotics and autonomous systems, and digital games.

Tasmania

Tasmania's objective is to position itself as having a crucial role in Australia's R&D ambitions and as the centre of Space Domain Awareness (SDA) in Australia. As part of its growth strategy, Tasmania aims to strengthen its research infrastructure and grow its commercial Space industry, leveraging capabilities such as the Manufacturing CoE.

The state also has a nationally recognized capability in SDA, with ground systems that allow for the analysis and interpretation of received data. Tasmania's geographical location (polar and Southern Ocean geolocation) and frequent clear skies contribute to this capability. In addition, Tasmania's excellence in the field of Space medicine and life sciences is reflected in the Southern Hemisphere's only hyperbaric and hypobaric recompression chamber, as well as its association with the Australian Antarctic Division.

South Australia (SA)

SA aims to develop a strong space ecosystem and support the national space strategy by enhancing their capabilities in AI, machine learning, space intelligence, launch, and small satellites. They also focus on food production in space due to the Moon to Mars initiative. The state has a dynamic start-up ecosystem and an expanding workforce. It offers global competitive industry, international partnerships, and attracts investors. SA’s additional capabilities include space operations, launch activities, small satellites, ground systems, and AI and machine learning.

Western Australia (WA)

WA aims to develop and promote its priority areas, though they were not specified. However, it has set objectives to enhance its space operations capacity, foster R&D collaboration, and improve relevant educational programs. The state possesses capabilities in astronomy, communication technologies, Earth observation, ground systems, launch activities, PNT, manufacturing, robotics and autonomous systems, defense operational capability, and application of space-derived R&D across various industries. It also excels in satellite development, SSA, and debris monitoring. Its geographical location provides natural advantages for SSA.

Northern Territory (NT)

The NT’s goal is to grow the space industry and connect its supply chain globally. Its objectives include developing capabilities in earth observation, ground systems, and launch activities, leveraging its geographic location, and being the global hub for high-altitude pseudo-satellites (HAPS). The territory is also leveraging the Charles Darwin University's Advanced Manufacturing Alliance. Its capabilities are in earth observation, ground systems, space launch, and HAPS.

Where should we go?

The analysis presents a view of individual states and territories above. Bringing it all together, the state-by-state approaches have overlaps (and occasional gaps) across their objectives and strategies.

Given the rich history of expertise, it is understandable that each state would become a Centre of Excellence (CoE) for a specific capability (or capabilities). Drawing on the above analysis and industrial sovereignty towards each state or territory, the following hypothesis has been identified. The end outcome mimics that of NASA’s operational jurisdictions across the United States of America (USA), where it is more facility focused. Each facility serves as the CoE for a different capability, with the other facilities in the NASA ecosystem existing to support one another and create a country-wide collaborative model.

The following is an example of the utilization of a 'hub-and-spoke' model, whereby a Capability Hub ('Leader') will remain within a single state or territory with Capability Spokes ('Followers') in multiple locations, depending on the circumstances. This modelled depiction was determined on the following principles:

• workforce

• geography

• industry presence

• existing infrastructure

• supply chain.

The requirement to retain Space Supply Chain sovereignty, and the ubiquitous nature of some capabilities, the following are decentralized across Australia and not represented explicitly:

• ground stations

• advanced manufacturing

• satellite manufacturing

• astronomy and astrophysics

• safety and security

• AI and machine learning

Operationalizing this arrangement would require each Capability Hub to set the strategic direction and objective for that specific capability. In essence, they are required to align to the requirements set by the Australian Space Agency.

The Capability Spoke becomes the tactical response to achieving the required goals. The Capability Hub itself can be both strategic and tactical in nature. The Capability Hub is allocated this responsibility of the ‘nation-leading’ capability and has been designated this way to ensure ‘one voice’ per capability.

From a governance perspective, this would ensure all of Australia’s capabilities are looked after and implemented by a dedicated Capability Hub, radically improving the coordination of and investment towards these capabilities as they are today. Only then will efforts be placed in a large enough capacity – whether it is time, money or resources – to actually achieve Australia’s ultimate Space goals.

This is what the Australian Space Ecosystem requires to rocket off the launch pad set in motion from the International Astronautical Congress in 2017.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of this article next issue.