User login
Navigation
UK Space Links
- Airborne Engineering new
- AspireSpace
- ASTRA
- AstroEngine.com
- BNSC
- Bristol Spaceplanes
- British Interplanetary Society
- Cambridge University Spaceflight
- Excalibur Almaz Observer
- International Space Propulsion (ISP) Group
- LESEDS
- National Space Centre
- Orbiting Frog
- Project Icarus
- Purley Amateur Rocketry Society
- RAeS Space Links
- Reaction Engines Ltd.
- Rocket Corner
- Space.co.uk
- Spaceboosters.co.uk
- Space Newsfeed (Microcom Systems)
- Space Now
- SpacePod (RAL)
- Space Research Centre, Leicester
- SSTL Space Blog
- Starchaser Ltd.
- Stuart Clark
- UK Astronomers
- UK High Altitude Society
- United Kingdom Rocketry Association
- UK Rocket Man
- UKSEDS
- UK Space Directory
- Virgin Galactic
- Worldview Spaceflight
britishblogs.co.uk
Brabazon: An Opportunity Missed?
Rocketeer — Sat, 05/12/2009 - 4:25pm
The Brabazon Lecture at the Royal Aeronautical Society was a pleasant evening spent in civilised company. Many thanks to the organisers, and to my fellow space advocates including Andy Janes, Stephen Ashworth and Richard Osborne.
I must confess to having been somewhat disappointed by the content of the Brabazon Lecture by Alan Bond of Reaction Engines, "Can the United Kingdom become the Vanguard of a New Space Age?". To be brutally honest, I felt it would have been more properly entitled "Skylon Is Really Cool, Please Fund It!".
Bond was very much keeping to home territory -- there was a good deal of detail on the development of the Skylon vehicle, the SABRE engines, and spacecraft operations, much of which I have to say I've heard before at other conferences. There was very little discussion of the broader policy issues which need to be addressed for the UK to have a rejuvenated space programme. I don't necessarily fault Bond for this -- he is an engineer, and not a politician or economist, and he talks about what he knows, with confidence and authority.
However, one programme (no matter how praiseworthy) is NOT a policy, and these policy issues simply won't go away for lack of discussion. I refer to such things as a properly founded UK legal and regulatory framework for space launchers, insurance reform and liability waivers, direct government support for UK NewSpace via an agency analogous to FAA/AST, identification and support for key UK technology developments, possibly via prizes etc. This is something I intend to write about at greater length in my "Cheat's Guide to UK Space Policy" ;-)
The applications for Skylon discussed in the lecture gave most emphasis to those which would inevitably require large-scale government funding, such as the Spacedock and the "Troy" manned mission to Mars. I find it difficult to escape the conclusion that what I'm hearing isn't NewSpace, it's OldSpace Done Better. There was brief mention of the fact that Skylons would be purchased and operated by commercial spacelines, but little or no consideration of what would result from that. What would cislunar space *look like* once we have commercial airline-like transport to space? I'm less interested in the "top down" imposition of space development by multibillion dollar/euro government programmes, and more interested in "bottom up" developments which would result from thousands of smart and highly motivated individuals having neat ideas, and new opportunities to try them out. THAT is where the true Space Revolution lies.
Once again, I think Charles Lurio is right. Collectively, the UK doesn't quite "get it" yet with regards to NewSpace… but we're working on it.
- Rocketeer's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Search
BNSC Review comments
My comments on the BNSC Space Exploration Review (31 Jan 2009)
New British Space Age
Alt.Space News
- Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe
- Discover space in National Science and Engineering week 12 – 21 March
- Station Crew Works with Robotics, Prepares for Spaceflight Transports
- Kepler Mission Manager Update
- Briefs: A suggestion for the space summit; More policy talk
- More about Jeff Greason's remarks at Goddard symposium
- Goddard Symposium - Wed. afternoon
- VTVL Airlaunched
- A pause for a long drive...
- Briefs: Falcon in the bright lights; Shuttle extension
- UK Skynet military satellite system extended
- Goddard Memorial Symposium
- Picture of the Day - Snapshot of the ISS
- China's fourth space center to be completed by 2015
- Inaugural Falcon 9 / Dragon Flight Hardware Update
Recent comments
- Agreed!
3 weeks 2 days ago - MHD AerobrAKING
3 weeks 3 days ago - UK superconductor companies
3 weeks 4 days ago - Sorry to hear you've been ill
5 weeks 2 days ago - Space.co.uk has already been
9 weeks 2 days ago - "the Space.co.uk website is looking for a new owner"
9 weeks 2 days ago - Fantastic News!
12 weeks 2 days ago - Its all go for the UK
12 weeks 2 days ago - Thanks for your replies - I
13 weeks 1 day ago - Thank you for a thoughtful
13 weeks 2 days ago







Hello Rocketeer, Yes, I have
RedMars — Sun, 06/12/2009 - 5:03pmHello Rocketeer,
Yes, I have some sympathy with your feelings following the lecture; much of the same and Skylon focused.
I am also fond of the New Space activities that are under way - Blue Origin, Masten etc and the X prizes and it is a real shame that the UK seems to lack incentives to stimulate private ventures of this type. (Someone at the RAF was thinking horizontally and found a couple of EJ2000's for a land speed record, hopefully similar people can think vertically and help to organise some airspace to ease the development of sub orbital commercial services.)
But, after some further thought I do hesitate to criticise Bond's approach and I wonder whether the comment 'Old Space done better' is correct. The end goal for commercial/new space is something similar to the commercial airliner industry. The engineering is necessarily large, complex and mutli billion dollar, but provides the return on investment that is required by virtue of reuseability acting on an elastic market. Surely Bond is steering in that direction and ignoring the incremental steps some people claim the sub orbital ventures will provide.
A UK/European thrust to mirror the embryonic stage of NewSpace under way in the US would prove to be a distraction from the real end goal of the New Space age. I don't for a moment suggest that this embryonic NewSpace should be ignored; if it is going to profitable then support it, but it should not be a policy focus but a policy by product. The real future and money lies in reusable access to orbit and that is where the focus should lie, lest European launchers succumb to Asian development and a funded SpaceX.
Whilst a successful NewSpace suborbital service may improve a lay investors confidence, it does not provide the technologies needed for reusable spaceplanes. For that the structural concepts and materials proposed for the skylon are needed, as well as advanced propulsion.
If the UK (well, Europe) is to take the lead in space it should work to take the launch market lead, and that means developing Skylon, or a two stage launcher. This will cost but it will steal the market, probably stun it.
Is Bond's approach therefore a policy and NewSpace as it should be, with the sub orbital legal wranglings being pushed to the second order where they belong, the introduction of the requirement for government investment in space launchers to be repaid and the ability to do that being a trigger for full development of a space launcher? Maybe the concept of Skylon demonstrates policy through its commercial approach. It overrides sub orbital distractions and quite possibly will cement Europe's space industry for the century. It pushes the space industry to where it needs to be, both commercially and technically.
The international legal frameworks needed to allow a spaceliner to function may provide the backbone for future space policy i.e. to support development and regulation of the new space industry. New markets post introduction of a spaceliner would be left for the markets to decide and are less of a concern to policy makers who are there to ensure the correct regulation and support is available for wherever the markets choose to go.
Perhaps a project like Skylon is too large or risky to ever be given full support, in which case let's have fun with focusing on growing NewSpace from the bottom up and see what happens because the end result will no doubt be the same, it just may take a little longer, be a little more dangerous, and give a different level of UK involvement in future space activities. I do think that if Virgin, Masten, Blue Origin et al start to look like they are making cash, the UK government will open up the market this side of the Atlantic pretty sharpish, and UK engineers can catch up with that level of technology.
The technology program at Reaction Engines will be over in 2 - 3 years so I guess that will be decision time and we can see what happens. If the European investors go for it, it could floor the American and Asian space launch industries, and bring about some very exciting decades of developments.
Looking forward to your 'cheats guide'. I really do wish we had groups of engineers dotted around the country competing and drumming up people's interest and business models!
Regards,
Thank you for a thoughtful
Rocketeer — Tue, 08/12/2009 - 12:02amThank you for a thoughtful and provocative post ;-) I'm drafting a reply which I'll post as an article as soon as I get a chance.