ISRO's low-cost launch service irks US companies

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,869
Country flag
U.S. launch companies lobby to maintain ban on use of Indian rockets

India's PSLV rocket in September 2015 launched four commercial U.S. satellites in one of several waivers of the U.S. policy prohibiting such launches. U.S. launcher interests want to maintain the policy. Credit: ISRO

PARIS — The U.S. ambassador to India on Feb. 25 gave a speech celebrating the growing U.S.-India cooperation in space.

“In September 2015, for the first time India launched a U.S. satellite – well, actually four at once,” Ambassador Richard Verma said in prepared remarks to a space policy forum in New Delhi. “The satellites belonged to a U.S. company, and India launched them from its trusted workhorse – the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle, which has launched satellites for 20 different countries. Other U.S. companies have sought launches on India’s PSLV, including a Google satellite scheduled for launch in April.”

The next day, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) endorsed an advisory committee’s recommendation that commercial U.S. satellites continue to be barred from using the PSLV.
In its Feb. 26 decision, the FAA said it agreed with its Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) that Indian launch services, owned and controlled by the Indian government, threaten to “distort the conditions of competition” in the launch-services market.

The FAA assured COMSTAC that the agency’s opinion would be part of the current review of whether India’s refusal to sign a Commercial Space Launch Agreement (CSLA) on rocket pricing still justifies the ban. The review, led by the U.S. Trade Representative, is the reason COMSTAC had raised the issue.

The ambassador’s speech and the FAA’s decision would appear to come from two different governments, which industry officials on both sides said pretty much sums up the state of U.S. policy.

“There is a real dysfunction on the government side,” said one U.S. industry official whose company wants the government to maintain a no-license bias with respect to the PSLV. “On the one hand, you have the policy, which no agency wants to take responsibility for but which remains the policy. On the other, government agencies are practically falling over themselves to grant waivers.”

“Falling over themselves” may be an exaggeration, but as Ambassador Verma noted, several commercial U.S. satellite owners and at least one non-U.S. company – Airbus Defence and Space, whose Spot 6 and Spot 7 commercial Earth observation satellites have U.S. components – have succeeded in launching on the PSLV after obtaining waivers.

The CSLA, dating from 2005, is the U.S. government’s way of protecting the seemingly forever-nascent U.S. small-satellite launch industry from competing with government-controlled foreign launchers for U.S. business. It seeks to oblige non-U.S. rocket providers to sign a CSLA that, for all intents and purposes, sets U.S. commercial launch prices as the world minimum for government-owned non-U.S. launch providers.

The rationale is that these non-U.S. launchers, not bound by the constraints of profit and loss – but hungry for hard-currency export earnings – will undercut commercial U.S. companies’ launch prices and keep them from gaining market traction.

That is COMSTAC’s rationale, most recently reinforced at a Jan. 27 conference call of its International Space Policy Working Group in preparation of its FAA submission.

“[M]any dedicated small satellite launch vehicles are currently being developed with private investment. Most of these new launch vehicles are scheduled to be operational in 2016 and 2017,” COMSTAC said.

“[A]llowing India’s state-owned and controlled launch providers to compete with U.S. companies runs counter to many national policies and undermines the work that has been done by government and industry to ensure the health of the U.S. space launch industrial bases,” COMSTAC concluded.

Unlike its launcher counterpart, the U.S. small satellite industry has taken off in recent years, with several companies moving quickly from aspiration to execution. Spire Global and Planet Labs, both of San Francisco; and Google Skybox Imaging, now renamed Terra Bella, of Mountain View, California, have all started launching constellations.

Spaceflight Industries of Seattle, Washington, is doing likewise with its own constellation, set for launch starting this year on the PSLV. Through its sister company, Spaceflight Services, it is also brokering launch services for other satellite owners.

These companies have said options are limited for satellites whose size means they can never order, on their own, a full U.S. launch vehicle in today’s market. The small rockets are rare, of uncertain schedule reliability and are priced too high, they say. The larger rockets, which occasionally make room for secondary passengers, launch when their larger primary passengers are ready, not before.

None of these companies are members of COMSTAC, which advises FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation and as such has a membership focused more on rockets than on satellite payloads.

The CSLA was once known as the “SpaceX Agreement” because Hawthorne, California-based SpaceX was introducing a new rocket, called Falcon 1, which appealed directly to small satellite owners.

But Falcon 1 was discarded in 2009 as SpaceX moved to the Falcon 9 to launch heavier payloads for NASA and the commercial sector.

Falcon 1’s retirement left a hole in the U.S. small-satellite launch market that has yet to be filled by anyone else, although several companies have announced plans to enter the business.

But the policy has not changed, despite the contrast between the rapid development of a U.S. small satellite market and a corresponding launch sector. The gap is understandable: Up to now, it has proved easier to make a profit operating commercial satellites than operating commercial rockets.

At the recent Satellite 2016 conference in National Harbor, Maryland, a U.S. State Department official said the ban on commercial use of Indian rockets, except for civil, noncommercial satellites, remains in place despite the fact that it no longer bears much relevance to SpaceX.

“It’s not State Department policy, it’s a U.S. Trade Representative policy,” said Anthony M. Dearth, director of licensing at the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls.

“I don’t know how much impact SpaceX has on it,” Dearth said March 9. “They entered the market with the Falcon 1 for small objects. Now they’re chasing U.S. government assets. We’ve heard from small satellite manufacturers that SpaceX isn’t interested in small satellites.”

COMSTAC declined to respond to requests for comment on what it meant when it told the FAA that several new commercial rockets “are scheduled to be operational in 2016 and 2017.”

One small satellite owner said his company would go out of business if it had to wait for a reliable and cost-effective U.S. small satellite launch industry to be created.

An official with a commercial launch service provider had another view. It goes beyond launch services, this official said. India has not fully opened its satellite telecommunications market to non-Indian satellite service providers, funneling all satellite bandwidth contracts through the Indian Space Research Organisation.

“This is a country that is basically closed to us, and that’s an understatement,” this official said. “Why are we unilaterally allowing access to the U.S. market?”
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
That's alright, that's what being an independent civilizations entails. Up until now they were using Russian engines for their launch rockets. They moved to ban that too, probably because they figured out that they would be in a sticky situation if Russia bans the sale of engines to the US, which it seems they were actively considering. That news isn't too old.



It's one of those times when a civilization has to make hard choices for themselves. This launch rocket ban is to them what 'DRDO-Make in India' project is to us : an exercise in strategic sovereignty. When push comes to shove, no one wants to be caught on the backfoot because of lack of sovereign control of strategic assets. I'm just sitting here and imagining the amusing situation when there is another Kargil like situation, this time it would be India which places an arms embargo on the US instead of the other way round, if we are supplying them launch platforms. Just imagine the kind of tectonic paradigm shift that would be. Obviously, the US doesn't want to be vulnerable and hence the measure.

Chalo theek hai, koi baat nahi, this isn't exactly the most Indophobic thing the US has done. If you compare this to all the other things they have done against India, which had no strategic value, this doesn't even come close. We aren't exactly going to go bankrupt if the US bans us. In this era of competition, cost effective solutions will always have more suitors anyday. We have launched satellites of Israel, France, Britain, Singapore and so many other nations. We'll be fine. India wont die of hunger if the US blacklists India from providing launch services to their companies. It will be their own companies who would find themselves at a disadvantage in the competitive global market. In that context, it's not a ban on India, it's a ban on their own companies.

When they realize that their nation's strategic interests don't coincide with their economic interests there will be pressure from within American businesses to revoke the ban on India in order to stay competitive. As long as their economic interests and strategic interests of the American empire coincided, they had a merry ride. They could use their comprehensive power to bully and bulldoze others, now with the advent of new powers, their strategic and economic interests diverge and they will increasingly find themselves in a sticky position where they will have to pick one over the other. They tried to ban our cryo engine program, we all know how that worked out. They tried to ban our missiles program, we all know how that worked out. They tried to ban our ballistic missile defense program, we all know how that worked out. They tried to ban Indian professionals from migrating to the US by imposing visa restrictions, we all know how that worked out. That is what India is, you can't ignore us.

When the US banned alcohol during prohibition days, people simply made alcohol in their bathtubs. If we've learnt anything from prohibition, if they try to ban Indians, people will simply start making Indians in their bathtubs.

With that, I rest my case milord.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,797
Likes
48,276
Country flag
It seems US companies cannot compete so the are asking for help from government. Nobody can beat India in space launches. India has a major cost advantage. The space cooperation may have been a ploy? India has manpower and technology and cost advantages to be the premier space power. If USA or Europe is upset too bad. The world is much bigger than these two places.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,573
Likes
21,017
Country flag
US is a capitalist country and if we can launch their satellite at low cost than their govt can not stop their companies. We should reduce the cost further of launch so that we can destroy American commercial satellite establishment.
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
5,594
Likes
14,927
Country flag
It seems US companies cannot compete so the are asking for help from government. Nobody can beat India in space launches. India has a major cost advantage. The space cooperation may have been a ploy? India has manpower and technology and cost advantages to be the premier space power. If USA or Europe is upset too bad. The world is much bigger than these two places.
We are launching few US sats this year. http://spacenews.com/spaceflight-wa...-business-to-larger-satellites-and-geo-orbit/. Its just another GOTUS way of extracting moolahs/favors from US companies. Just American version of License Raj. :

From Article said:
There is a real dysfunction on the government side,” said one U.S. industry official whose company wants the government to maintain a no-license bias with respect to the PSLV. “On the one hand, you have the policy, which no agency wants to take responsibility for but which remains the policy. On the other, government agencies are practically falling over themselves to grant waivers.”
 
Last edited:

Screambowl

Ghanta Senior Member?
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
7,950
Likes
7,908
Country flag
Well this is business.... India is doing good. And they cannot force people to buy costly things. India can attract better ;)
 

Bahamut

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
2,740
Likes
2,258
And they cannot force people to buy costly things. India can attract better
The problem is that u cannot use unfair means,if a country has a very good technology,US then instead of competing with them ,put sanction on the export ,reduce credit availability for the country,bully the partner of the country .A former CIA agent accept in Cuba that US ran a operation to put cement and other impurities in children so that they cannot get proper food.This is not acceptable.
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,869
Country flag
@Navnit Kundu Anyway, I have quoted my a month old post in thread of ISRO.
There's a facility which can be used as weather based weapon in long term.
It is pretty cool. :peace:
First LASTEC lasers, then, DEWs, and then, Weather based weapons.
Would anybody like to discuss?
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,869
Country flag
Yeah, sure, is there a link for the thread?
Sure.
Here's, Idea of weather. :p
http://www.defenceforumindia.com/forum/posts/1147774
Still a long way to go.
Giving only one link for laser and DEW currently
http://m.ibtimes.co.in/drdo-develop...ns-project-likely-be-completed-by-2017-672317
but I have an entire collection of links and photos.
I will create an entire thread over that when I will have time. :)

Kudos, you made me excited again, I'm looking for posting it after dinner. :D
 

Indx TechStyle

Kitty mod
Mod
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
18,240
Likes
55,869
Country flag
US' private space industry opposes use of ISRO launch vehicles
PTI
Indian launches are subsidised by the government.

Amid the US' push to expand cooperation with India in the space sector, the country's nascent private space industry has expressed its opposition to the large scale use of low cost ISRO launch vehicles for putting American satellites into orbits.
Washington: Amid the US' push to expand cooperation with India in the space sector, the country's nascent private space industry has expressed its opposition to the large scale use of low cost ISRO launch vehicles for putting American satellites into orbits. Such a move, corporate leaders and officials of the fast- emerging American private space industry told lawmakers this week would be detrimental to the future health of the private sector US space companies as it would be tough for them to compete against low-cost Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) launch vehicles, which they alleged are subsidised by the Indian government.

"I think the concern about using Indian boosters is not so much the transfer of sensitive technology to a nation that is a fellow democracy, but rather whether the Indian launches are subsidised by the government to a degree that other market actors would be priced out of the market," Elliot Holokauahi Pulham, CEO of Space Foundation, said. Testifying before a Congressional committee, Pulham said there has been some discussion about allowing US built satellites to fly on boosters such as the Indian PSLV. Eric Stallmer, president Commercial Spaceflight Federation, opposed efforts to facilitate a government- subsidised foreign launch company.

"In this case, India, to compete with US companies. Such policy runs counter to many national priorities and undermines the work and investment that has been made by the government and industry to ensure the health of the US commercial space launch industrial base," Stallmer said. He said the challenge right now is that the satellite manufacturers are making satellites at a quicker rate right now than the US has the launch capability. So a satellite is not making money while it's sitting on the ground, he said. "Currently, the Indian launch vehicle PSLV has a sweet spot and has the capability of launching some of these satellites right now in a timely manner. We don't want to see US launches going overseas by any means, whether it's to India, Russia or whomever else. But right now, from the satellite, you know, producers and manufacturers, they need to get their assets up in the sky as quick as possible," Stallmer said.

Noting that the current policy with the waivers and the review is a sound policy, he said the US should stringently look at every launch that is taking place in every vehicle or every payload that the US are putting up on an Indian vehicle. "I think it really needs to be evaluated. We hope to phase this out as a new generation of launched vehicles come online," Stallmer said. "I've heard from a number of companies that build and operate small satellites that there isn't enough capacity in the (US) market at a price they can afford to meet their needs," said Congressman Brian Babin, Chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Space. "India has stepped in and offered to fill, in part, this demand and is launching smaller satellites on their PSLV vehicle.

The administration has provided a number of export waivers on a case-by-case basis for these launches, in part, because India is becoming a strategic ally in South Asia," Babin said. "Unfortunately, the administration seems to lack a clear long-term policy to guide access to PSLV launches. What should US policy be with regard to Indian and other foreign launch vehicles?" the Republican Congressman from Texas said. He asserted that if it can be shown that there is no viable US launch opportunities in the given time-frame to a required orbit, launches on Indian vehicles should continue to be considered on a case-by-case waiver review for US payloads, as been the practice for the last several years. "This practice should continue while still relevant, but with the knowledge that this is definitely a temporary solution," Stallmer said.
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
India has a natural advantage in launching LEO payloads.

It is natural that more business will come to India.

The American reaction is also natural and such things happen.

The government subsidy is hogwash as such subsidy is present in all space programs.

Space program is one way for India to build bridges with other countries. It is soft power in play.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,573
Likes
21,017
Country flag
India has a natural advantage in launching LEO payloads.

It is natural that more business will come to India.

The American reaction is also natural and such things happen.

The government subsidy is hogwash as such subsidy is present in all space programs.

Space program is one way for India to build bridges with other countries. It is soft power in play.
Now US follows protectionism. When we opened Economy, people used to tell that foreign companies will eat indian industries. Actually what happened was reverse. Indian company ate foreign companies. Nice to see US on back foot.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top