Dear readers,
Welcome to Quartz’s newsletter on the economic possibilities of the extraterrestrial sphere. Please forward widely, and let me know what you think. This week: Super-secret space weapons, Rocket Lab goes public, and the BE-4 goes missing.
🚀 🚀 🚀
As Western military space honchos gathered in Colorado this week, a tantalizing report was published by journalist Theresa Hitchens: The Pentagon was debating whether or not to reveal a top secret space weapon, but the process was put on hold by the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The leak and the weapon itself make for fascinating speculation. Brian Weeden, an expert at the Secure World Foundation, says perhaps a few dozen people would know the full picture of such a device, which Hitchens reports is considered a Special Access Program, the highest level of secrecy the US government uses.
The debate within the government comes in response to big changes taking place in earth orbit. As space tech gets cheaper and more capable, the US faces more competition from rivals like Russia and China. In recent decades, multiple powers have demonstrated anti-satellite weapons. Russia has launched tracker satellites that shadow US government spacecraft and presumably surveil them.
One response to these trends was the creation of the US Space Force as an independent military service. But the US wants to do more to show that it shouldn’t be messed with in space. Right now, the US only acknowledges one space weapon—a ground-based communications jammer to interfere with signals sent from satellites.
(A brief note: Acknowledgment aside, the US also has missiles that could shoot down satellites—they demo’d this in 2008!—but maintains that these were modified weapons and not in regular service. I guess? Also, who knows how many top secret space weapons there are hiding behind the curtain?)
Faced with other countries blowing up and shadowing satellites, US military commanders want to give rivals a reason to think twice about taking offensive action. But deterring these rivals is tricky because they don’t rely as much on space surveillance, communications, and control as the US does. Even if the US could credibly threaten enemy satellites, rivals might still attack American spacecraft because that would hurt the US more. That’s a reason why the top general at US Space Command told reporters trying to tease out hints about the weapon that he believes in “integrated deterrence” across multiple domains. (For the real wonks, consider this your deterrence homework.)
There’s a historical precedent for this, Weeden says—in the late 1970s, the US debated whether it needed to develop anti-satellite weapons to deter the Soviet Union from attacking US satellites. Ultimately, they decided there wasn’t much deterrent value in space weapons, but did design a missile to be launched from an F-15 that would destroy a satellite for use during a potential conflict. (This is what happens in the 1986 Tom Clancy novel Red Storm Rising. “Clancy had great sources,” Weeden notes.)
What could today’s new weapon be? Because of the emphasis on deterrence, and international condemnation of the debris created by anti-satellite weapons tests, Weeden suspects it won’t be a kinetic weapon. “My sense is this is something that could interfere with the targeting system of an attacking satellite or space weapon,” he says, perhaps by jamming its communications or using lasers to dazzle its radar and optical sensors.
But more broadly, he thinks the US military will favor resilience over deterrence—rather than threatening rivals’ space systems, the idea would be making US systems far harder to destroy. In the 20th century, this meant going to super high orbits that are difficult to reach. Today, this might mean using constellations of thousands of replaceable, low-flying satellites.
Another issue: There won’t be secrets in space left for very long. Private companies are developing their own space radar and spinning around imaging satellites to take pictures of other spacecraft. “I’m sure there are things going on in space we’re not aware of, [but] it’s getting harder and harder to do that,” Weeden says.
And whether or not the US reveals this weapon, it’s going to become a geopolitical issue because everyone agrees new rules of behavior are necessary in orbit. The United Nations is in the middle of a process that aims to develop those norms. As that debate proceeds, Russia and China are likely to accuse the US of weaponizing space. That could make it more difficult to find a global consensus.
For Weeden, what’s minimally necessary is an agreement between the US and its rivals on how to handle incidents in space, akin to the Incidents at Sea Agreement negotiated by the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. “We’re going to be doing close approaches, they’re going to be doing close approaches, people may be doing, unfortunately, anti-satellite [weapons] testing,” Weeden says, stressing the need for countries to “distinguish between routine stuff and potential hostile threats.”
🌘 🌘 🌘
Imagery interlude
What did that 1970s US anti-satellite missile look like? Well, like this:
That’s an F-15 Eagle fighter jet launching the ASM-135 missile, which was only tested five times, according to public sources, and canceled in 1988.
📩 📩 📩
Quartz has a new set of weekly emails for our members. We think they’ll do a better job of getting our best work in front of you with minimal fuss. Each week, we profile an interesting company—I already wrote up perennial Space Biz subject Planet. And, speaking of global intrigue, check out last week’s edition:
The phones have spies.
In July, 37 journalists, human rights activists, and lawyers found out their phones had allegedly been hacked by authoritarian governments. The governments were allegedly using software from Israeli technology firm NSO Group. And it’s not the first time NSO Group has been in the news for something that sounds like it’s straight out of an action movie.
✦ It’s the latest subject of The Company, a member-exclusive email sent out every Thursday. Become a member today to get them straight to your inbox.
🛰🛰🛰
Space debris
Out of the lab. Rocket Lab is now a publicly traded company after, yes, the investors in a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) voted to complete the acquisition of the US-New Zealand firm. While the share price of RKLB fell during initial trading, it closed the day at $10.45—and because that’s above the $10-opt out price for SPAC investors, it’s something of a victory. Rocket Lab is one of the most vertically integrated new space companies, building rockets, but also satellites and other spacecraft. For now, it’s the only publicly traded launch company with a functioning rocket. That could change tomorrow if Astra (ASTR) successfully launches its first satellite. Then we’ll have two publicly traded rocket makers, and won’t that be fun?
Make that three.Virgin Orbit, the satellite-launching spin-out of space tourism firm Virgin Galactic, announced its own plans to go public through a SPAC transaction this week. The company has developed a small rocket, launched from a specially modified airliner, that has put satellites on orbit in two launches this year. The company is expected to close the deal and trade on public markets around the end of 2021.
Covid-19 is delaying rocket launches.With infections rising in the US, hospitals need liquid oxygen, a commonly used rocket propellant, and the pressure on the commodity has forced SpaceX to delay launches. Yet another good reason to get vaccinated.
Where is the BE-4? United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno acknowledged earlier in August that the BE-4 engines being developed by Jeff Bezos’ space company Blue Origin are late due to delays in testing. This week US Air Force secretary Frank Kendall (the top rocket-buying official at the Pentagon) also fielded questions about the long-delayed rocket motors after meeting with reps from both companies. “They still hope to be able to execute,” he said. “But there’s obviously risk in that schedule.”
Starlink Ups and Downs: 🔼Users of the satellite internet network, with Elon Musk saying that 100,000 terminals have been delivered to customers in 14 countries. 🔽 The service itself, which appeared to suffer widespread outages yesterday. 🔼Satellites, with a total of 1,740 launched, per dedicated tracker of space objects Jonathan McDowell. 🔽 Also satellites, with 98 of the spacecraft having burned up in earth’s atmosphere and 50 more heading for that fate.
Your pal,
Tim
This was issue 105 of our newsletter. Hope your week is out of this world! Please send your space SPAC power rankings, theories on BE-4 delays, tips, and informed opinions to tim@qz.com.
