Space companies specializing in satellite servicing and debris removal are actively pursuing commercial markets, aiming to demonstrate the economic feasibility of their services. A significant challenge lies in the interplay between the Pentagon, which seeks more mature technology before substantial investment, and commercial operators, who remain uncertain about the cost-effectiveness of extending satellite lifespans instead of replacement. “Satellite servicing is not a new concept, but it’s always been hard and expensive, not a scalable solution,” noted Michael Madrid, chief growth officer at Starfish Space.
Companies are shifting from grand sustainability visions to showcasing how in-orbit services enhance satellite operators’ profitability. While Northrop Grumman has established a geostationary orbit servicing business, the low Earth orbit (LEO) scenario presents complexities due to cheaper, disposable satellites. Growing concerns about orbital congestion, however, are driving demand for cleanup and maintenance. Madrid highlighted this, stating, “It’s hard to find people who are willing to pay to clean up the trash in the town square. But people do make an effort to take out the trash that’s in their backyard where they live,” emphasizing the incentive for large constellation operators to safeguard their investments.
Orbit Fab, focusing on in-space refueling, sees opportunities in servicing the servicing vehicles themselves. “You don’t want to buy a new tow truck, tow one or two satellites and throw away the tow truck,” explained Daniel Faber, Orbit Fab’s CEO. They are also making progress with fill and drain valves for both ground and orbital refueling. Current regulations, however, lack incentives for satellite life extension. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mandates LEO satellite disposal within five years, without recognizing active debris removal as an alternative.
The US military exhibits interest but remains cautious, as exemplified by the Space Force's limited funding requests for refueling, despite potential strategic benefits. Sean Lewis of the Air Force Research Laboratory highlighted previous costly experiments like Orbital Express, which failed to gain traction due to perceived lack of military utility. While AFRL continues supporting companies through Small Business Innovation Research funds, Lewis stressed the military’s inability to sustain these companies indefinitely.
Cameron Penny of Kall Morris Inc. emphasized the need to move beyond endless technology demonstrations. “We need to commit, and do the deal now, and work toward that. Otherwise, we’re going to be stuck in this perpetual de-risk cycle,” Penny stated. Success necessitates focusing on immediate, practical applications rather than solely on ambitious future projects. Madrid aptly summarized this, stating that while the industry might be full of “sci-fi nerds” excited about future possibilities, success hinges on “trying to be really focused on where we think we can close business cases in the near term.”
Adapting to existing, non-serviceable satellites is crucial. Madrid stressed the importance of servicing unprepared satellites, rather than imposing new requirements, acknowledging potential resistance from satellite manufacturers concerned about reduced sales. However, a thriving servicing market could ultimately benefit the industry by improving efficiency and profitability. “If we help satellite operators become better businesses delivering more value,” Madrid concluded, “then that grows the pie for everyone in the space industry.”