Hot Times for Cryogenic Launchers

With all the fuss and bother around the Obama administration and the recent changes being made (or at least attempted) in the American space program, it's interesting to note that some of the most important changes are new capabilities being developed outside the US in countries with ongoing and strong Canadian connections.



For example, according to the NDTV news website article "GSLV failure: Work on cryogenic engine to continue," the Indian government will continue work on what they call the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) using an Indian developed cryogenic rocket engine which is generally considered as one of the keys to developing a heavy lift launch vehicle. According to the article:

"India has no choice but to master this technology in the long run as it is technology that has been denied to the country, the sources said.

It took the country more than 15 years to develop the cryogenic engine as technology for this was denied when, in the 1990s, America put pressure on Russia and forced the cancellation of an Indo-Russian technology transfer deal. The argument given was that India would use these engines to make missiles.

Of course, the Indian government ended up making missiles anyway and now has a comprehensive inventory developed through their Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP). It looks like they'll shortly master the core cryogenic technology as well.

Their goal is the large and lucrative global satellite market which has always been dependent on heavy lift launch vehicles using cryogenic rockets and is currently controlled by the United States, Russia, China, Ukraine and the European Space Agency.

Even the Voice of America, traditionally tied to the United States government (and certainly no friend of missile proliferation), is willing to accept that the present Indian activities are essentially commercial, at least according to their article "India's Efforts to Master Cryogenic Engine Tech Setback Commercial Space Program" which states:

India's dependence on Russian built cryogenic engines to launch heavy satellites has hampered growth, and prompted Indian scientists to develop the technology.

Indian space scientists hope to offer satellite launch services at much cheaper rates compared to Western countries, and expand the business to about $120 million a year.

The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and other organizations which already use facilities operated through the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) cannot help but benefit from the lower launch costs promised by this Indian initiative.

The Coming Robot Wars!!!

Beginning in September, the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (also known as DEXTRE), that remarkable Canadian built appendage to the International Space Station (ISS) will face stiff competition in the form of a robot designed by General Motors and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

Named Robonaut 2 and bearing more than a passing resemblance to The Stig, secretive race car driver in the BBC television program Top Gear, the new mechanism is rocketing into orbit this fall aboard the space shuttle Discovery, at least according to the recent press release "NASA to Launch Human-Like Robot to Join Space Station Crew" which also states:

Robonaut 2, or R2, was developed jointly by NASA and General Motors under a cooperative agreement to develop a robotic assistant that can work alongside humans, whether they are astronauts in space or workers at GM manufacturing plants on Earth.

The intent of this collaboration is obvious. NASA is keen on providing a potentially profitable and possibly job creating earthbound application of space technologies to placate angry congressmen and surly senators while GM is keen to inform people that it can do more than simply go bankrupt by building bad cars.

The effect this will have on Canadian contributions to future NASA initiatives is less clear since robotics has always been considered an acknowledged area of Canadian expertise. The development of a second area of space based robotic expertise tied to GM and funded by NASA could reasonably be considered direct competition to Canadian robotics projects like DEXTRE and the CanadArm.

The press release even goes so far as to state that NASA has dubbed R2 as the "next generation dexterous robot" which is probably not an intentional slight against our still functioning first generation dexterous robot and may even be a backhanded compliment on good old Canadian ingenuity.

Of course, NASA also seems to think that Robonaut 2 is more "human" looking than other dexterous robots and perhaps that's part of the point:

"The dexterous robot not only looks like a human but also is designed to work like one. With human-like hands and arms, R2 is able to use the same tools station crew members use. In the future, the greatest benefits of humanoid robots in space may be as assistants or stand-in for astronauts during spacewalks or for tasks too difficult or dangerous for humans. For now, R2 is still a prototype and does not have adequate protection needed to exist outside the space station in the extreme temperatures of space."

But for at least for the next little while our Canadian DEXTRE, which might be ugly but does at least have adequate protection to function in space as a stand in for astronauts, will continue to do so while Robonaut 2 remains within the safer and more comfortable interior accommodations of the ISS Destiny laboratory.

So what does the Canadian dexterous robot look like? Take a look for yourself.

Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

If you want to get a sense of where the largest Canadian space focused businesses are going you might want to take a look at the article "MDA Says New NASA Direction Plays to Company’s Strengths" published April 9th, 2010 on the Space News website.

The article, quoting extensively from a March 18th conference call between Macdonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA) executives and investors, states unequivocally that the company "which is facing a revenue loss of $20 million a year with the retirement of the U.S. space shuttle, nonetheless views NASA’s proposed new direction as “a dream made in heaven” and is urging the Canadian government to take advantage of it before other nations do."

But if you want to get a sense of where the smaller newspace focused companies are, you need to read "The Future of Venture Capital in Canada" a series published on the new media website The Mark, which bills  itself as as "Canada's daily online forum for news, commentary, and debate."

That's because smaller space focused Canadian companies generally don't have existing investors who get together with the management team for quarterly conference calls to discuss new opportunities. Most want too, but the investors with the capital to take advantage of new opportunities are very, very hard to come across.

Some of the comments in the Mark series of articles are fascinating. For example:

• In the article, "Low Times for VC" author Mark Skapinker, the co-founder of Brightspark Capital says "the Canadian VC industry has always lived in the shadow of the country’s natural resource industry. As the natural resource marketplace has continued its massive growth, technology has become an afterthought."
• In "Creating a Venture Culture" author, creative technologist and technical marketer David Crow thinks Canadians "need to stop relying on SR&ED, IRAP, and other tax credits that support an ecosystem of zombie startups."
• On the other hand, Start-up CFO author Mark MacLeod, in his article "Sustaining the Startup" reminds us that "a large portion of Canada's risk capital comes from government sources. Without this public support, we would have no industry at all."
• And "Startup Nation" author Mike Lee, the VP of New Ventures for Rogers Communications reminds us that "great individuals and great teams are the force behind successful entrepreneurial stories." However, "when you compare Canada to the rest of the world, we are underdeveloped with respect to experienced startup talent. The raw talent is here, but the conditions to help that talent gain invaluable experience managing and operating in startups are sorely lacking."  

The jury is still out on whether the new opportunities available for space focused businesses are going to lead to a Canadian space and technological renaissance or just benefit a few of the few largest and best positioned firms.

I personally believe that MDA Chief Executive Daniel E. Friedmann would rather appreciate having a couple of solid Canadian subcontractors to help him build those telecommunications satellite for the National Space Agency of Ukraine.

Canadian Long-Term Space Plan Pops Up and Looks Around.

Portions of the Canadian Long-Term Space Plan (LTSP) have finally surfaced, according to my colleague and sometime editor Marc Boucher over on SpaceRef.ca, as part of the recently released Canadian Space Agency (CSA) document titled 2010-2011 Report on Plans and Priorities which is available for download from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat website.

Under the title, Canadian Space Agency Reorganization Underway, Boucher states that, along with a series of government mandated policy changes (defined as part of the TBS Management Accountability Framework), the CSA is also:

".... undergoing organizational structure changes to reflect the new Long Term Space Plan. The most notable changes are in the categorization of the four Directors Generals.

According to the article, the Director General offices of the CSA, which report directly to CSA President Steve MacLean and were classified under the titles space utilization, space exploration, space science and technology/ corporate services have been reclassified under the new titles of space science, space technologies, space programs, and operations, effective as of April 1st, 2010.

Left unclear is how these reorganizations specifically reflect the LTSP, which still has not been publicly released.

For example, Section 1.1 of the 2010-2011 Report on Plans and Priorities states explicitly that the LTSP hasn't been implemented at all, but the CSA is instead governed by:

The Canadian Space Strategy (CSS) approved by the Government of Canada in February 2005 (which) guides the Canadian Space Agency in the management of its programs. The Strategy is instrumental in focusing decision-making at the CSA and aligning all space related program activities through its strategic outcome and long-term priorities.

Section 1.1 is, of course, referring to "The Canadian Space Strategy: Serving and Inspiring the Nation," a document much referenced on this blog and elsewhere only because it was quickly overwhelmed by the aborted sale of portions of space contractor MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA) to American-owned Alliant Techsystems (ATK) in April 2008 which highlighted national security issues and economic infrastructure components required for a comprehensive national space policy but lacking in the 2005 report.

These missing issues were supposed to be addressed by the upcoming LTSP, which was to supersede the earlier Canadian Space Strategy. Of course, Section 1.4 does mention the LTSP when it states:

In 2008-2009, the CSA undertook a Strategic Review to evaluate its programs and ensure that they continue to meet the needs and priorities of Canadians, are aligned with the Government's Science and Technology Strategy, and are effective and efficient. The evaluation revealed a number of areas where the CSA could make some adjustments...

...At the same time, the CSA carried out a series of consultations with its stakeholders and partners in order to move forward with renewed impetus to sustain and enhance Canada's space advantage, and contribute to a strong Science and Technology culture.

As a result, a Long Term Space Plan (LTSP) that charts a course for the next ten years has been drafted for presentation to Government for consideration. The Plan highlights the fact that responsibility for the use of space-based assets is diffused in Canada.

None of this seems to relate to economic infrastructure and national security or anything new since it's all about "adjustments" and "consultations" but at least now we know that the LTSP has been "drafted" for "presentation to government for consideration."

Which means, of course, that the LTSP hasn't been approved. I wonder what the government doesn't like about it? This is something the CSA has been attempting to do since February 2009 and you'd think they're have gotten it right by now.

It is also interesting to note that the document explicitly states that:

The overall coordination must rest with the Canadian Space Agency which under the Canadian Space Act has the mandate to assist the Minister of Industry in the coordination of space policies and programs of the Government of Canada.

I believe this means the CSA's future role in the coordination of space policies might be in doubt. This is what I mentioned could happen February 15th in my post Ottawa Citizen: "Where did that Long Term Space Plan Go?":

Essentially, if Canada does not define a long term space plan, private business and academia will soon go about creating their own... Mr. MacLean might need to respond to these rising calls for a long term space plan soon, or else risk becoming irrelevant to the debate.

Evidently, the future is arriving faster than expected.

Rumor and Innuendo Barreling Widely Out of Control



There are certainly enough silly news stories circulating in the world (and the recent BBC comedy skit presented above is a pretty good example of what to look for) but the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) doesn't often end up as a part of one. So thank goodness for RIA Novosti, the Russian news agency and it's amusing, but evidently clueless coverage of what began as a perfectly sensible Canadian space focused story.

It started with an original March 28th, 2010 Canadian Press (CP) story titled "Space Agency eyes Cape Breton and Fort Churchill for rocket launches," written by author Peter Rakobowchuk, who stated that:

"The Canadian Space Agency is looking at the Nova Scotia island as one of two possible sites to blast small satellites into orbit using an indigenous rocket launch system.

The other possible micro-satellite launch site is Fort Churchill in Manitoba, near Hudson Bay, where hundreds of small research rockets have been launched in the past."

According to Rakobowchuck, the article was based on a series of CSA requests for proposals (RFP's) which were issued beginning in 2008 and included assessments of both potential launch sites and possible Canadian built launchers.

But the simple "potential for" or "possibility of" didn't seem to be quite good enough for RIA Novosti which, while listing the Rakabowchuk piece as the primary source material for their March 30th, 2010 article titled "Canada to build bases for space tourism rocket launches," also seems to have added quite a bit of information not found in the original.

For example, according to the revised article, the CSA had moved away from a simple assessment of the possibilities and was now:

"planning to build two bases for launching rockets carrying space tourists, the Russian Space Agency Roscosmos said citing the information agency Canadian Press."

The article also indicated that British billionaire Sir Richard Branson was actively backing the CSA project.

In fact, the only constant between the versions seemed  to be comments from a Manitoba government official who indicated being either "open to discussing the possibility," or else "keen on the idea" or perhaps even "welcoming the idea with enthusiasm."

By March 31st the well respected and American based Space Fellowship blog (which started out as the official forum for the Ansari X-prize) had jumped on the bandwagon by reprinting the original article, with minor corrections on their site under the same title.

These revisions are unfortunately not true, but this isn't the first time that Canada has seemed about to build new space facilities or even the first time that Cape Breton has been mentioned on the short list of potential Canadian sites. For example, here's the August 17th, 2006 post by David Shiga, in the New Scientist titled "Canada set to build its first spaceport" which states:

"The province of Nova Scotia has signed an agreement setting aside 300 acres of government-owned land for US-Canadian private space firm PlanetSpace to construct a rocket launching facility.

PlanetSpace hopes to develop a space tourism business, ferrying customers into space in suborbital and eventually orbital flights. It intends to start construction within a year to have the spaceport ready for its first suborbital launch by late 2008 or early 2009."

The stated dates have come and gone but as of today, PlanetSpace (which started out as the Canadian Arrow entry in the Ansari-X-Prize competition) has not begun construction on the facility and is unlikely to do so any time soon.

Of course, the CSA could publicly release the information collected through it's RFP's in order to clear up this seeming confusion between those who think the questions relating to Canadian launch sites and vehicles have only been asked or assessed and those who believe the questions have been decisively answered.

Then we'd  know a little bit more about what's really going on.

Space Swashbucklers on the High Accountant "Sea"!

Manned space flight has always been considered high risk and while insurance is traditionally considered boring, it's also a necessary component of high risk activities, at least according to the article "Viability of Commercial Crew Plan May Hinge on Risk-sharing Scheme" written by Brian Berger and published April 2nd, 2010 on the Space News website.

But how does this US focused article relate to Canadian space activities?

That's an easy question to answer. Although we have astronauts just as brave as the Americans and all those other nations with astronauts, we also have a history of hitching rides into space on other, mostly American, launch vehicles. In order to continue doing this, we need to know what our best and most consistent ride into space is planning to do and what other options are available just in case something high risk happens.

Some of the Americans are also concerned about risk, at least according to the article, which states:

"As NASA devises its strategy for fostering development of a commercial successor to the space shuttle, the nation’s primary rocket builder is cautioning the agency not to count on industry for a substantial upfront investment in an endeavor rife with uncertainty."

The article focuses on an interview with Andrew Aldrin, director of business development for Denver-based United Launch Alliance (ULA) who seems to have a strong preference for the sort of insurance provided only by a contract that "appropriately distributes risk between industry and government."

This is a shame, because the US government is not the only organization capable of providing insurance for space focused activities. There are quite a few others, most of them private and they even get together every two years at the biannual International Space Insurance Conference to talk about the financial, legal, scientific and risk management questions associated with these activities. At the last conference in Venice in 2009, keynote speaker Benito Pagnanelli, the President of Pagnanelli Risk Solutions went so far as to say that the global credit crisis was "hardly touching the space sector" and there was plenty of money available for further expansion. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was even listed as a sponsor of the 2009 event.

But if Mr. Aldrin is indeed asking specifically for government assistance, it's quite likely that he was not really looking for an insurance policy in the traditional sense, but was instead politely advocating for something called a cost plus, or cost reimbursement contract which Wikipedia defines as a contract where a contractor "is paid for all of its allowed expenses to a set limit plus additional payment to allow for a profit."

In essence, a cost plus contract provides a guaranteed profit on top of all the other expenses and this must makes quite a bit of sense for Mr. Aldrin when you consider that his very big employer is used to this sort of deal. ULA is a Boeing-Lockheed joint venture which today depends on hundreds of millions of dollars in US Air Force "sustainment" funding on top of it's regular fees in order to keep its doors open.

Of course, this likely doesn't make ULA a good business bet for the long-term, but the company does provide the only proven US launchers presently capable of delivering manned space capsules to orbit with their Atlas 5 and Delta 4 rockets. So if Mr. Aldrin is indeed in the midst of attempting to position itself as a major supplier for the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) emerging human spaceflight program, he needs to be taken seriously, at least for awhile.

But quite soon, ULA will face stiff competition from the Russians (with their existing Proton family of heavy launchers plus the coming Angara series), the French (with their Ariane 5) and from smaller, more nimble US based firms like Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (Space-X, with their Falcon rocket family) who are advocating fixed pricing contracts where the amount of payment does not depend on the amount of resources or time expended, but only on the service provided.

Mr. Aldrin needs to be asking himself just what type of "assurance" his very big American corporation needs in order to compete effectively with this inevitable multitude of growing American and foreign competitors slowly popping up along the horizon?



As for Canada, we might want to start comparing our space faring options. Our hitchhiking days could be ending.

Canadian Student Accepted at the NASA Academy

Canada doesn't have very many space focused contests, scholarships or prizes and the only obvious exception to this is the University of Toronto space design contest, focused on educational programming in science, engineering, and space exploration for secondary students. The "website of record" for this sort of activity is called Space Prizes and it contains absolutely no listing of Canadian based prizes so it seems reasonable to conclude that our exceptional individuals have to generally travel outside Canada in order to continue learning and being recognized as exceptional.

That's why it's so inspiring to hear about people like Laura Drudi, a McGill University student in the Faculty of Medicine, who has just received word of acceptance at the prestigious NASA Academy at the Ames Research Center.

According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Academy website:

"The NASA Academy represents an immersive and integrated multidisciplinary exposure and training, for students with various backgrounds and career aspirations of critical importance to the National aerospace program.

The academic curriculum balances opportunities for direct contact with advanced science and engineering R&D and an awareness of the complex managerial, political, financial, social, and human issues faced by the current and future aerospace program.

Co-sponsorship of the Academy assures recruitment of meritorious students from previously under-represented areas of the country, into leadership positions for the aerospace programs of the future.

The Academy is cost effective, providing a richer program at a cost comparable to other, narrow-focus scholarships, internships, and fellowships."

But according to Drudi, the NASA Academy is the opportunity of a lifetime. 

"This is the third time I've applied and Canada wasn't sponsoring anyone last year" she said during a phone interview from her home in Montreal. "You can't give up on something like this or you'll never get it. I've never given up and I just wanted to tell everyone else never to give up on their dreams."

She credits her success to strong mentoring from professors and supervisors including Dr. Joan Saary at the University of Toronto (who is her supervisor on the Space Medicine Directory, a cross-referenced listing of space medicine and space life sciences training opportunities) and Dr. Marlene Grenon, at the University of California San Francisco Department of Vascular Surgery (who supervised her during a literature review on the effects of altered endothelial cell function, mechanisms and interactions at the cellular level).

Drudi is a member not only of the Canadian Medical Association, but also of the Aerospace Medical Association and the Aerospace Medical Student and Resident Organization. She hopes to one day bring health care to astronauts high above the sky.

"Canadian astronaut Robert Thirsk dealt with lots of major physical changes during his stay on the International Space Station including bone demineralization, cardiovascular changes and quite a few other things" states Drudi, who felt that the only real prevention was lots of exercise, including lengthy sessions on the Combined Operational Load Bearing External Resistance Treadmill, or COLBERT, named after comedian Stephen Colbert.

"I'm drawn to this whole new extreme environment where you need to apply all that you know in new and innovative ways" states Drudi. "Nothing is really out of bounds and everything is useful. It's an exciting challenge."

Last October, Drudi attended the 60th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Daejon, Korea where she participated (along with Canadian Space Society President Kevin Shortt) in a session titled "Entering the Workforce and Strengthening the Global Community" which talked about how young professionals in space-related fields contribute to the global space community.



According to the IAC website, "It is widely accepted that attracting young people into the aerospace workforce is vital to the industrial base of nations involved in space-related endeavors."

This message seems widely accepted outside Canada so it will be interesting to see if it ever becomes the general consensus within.

The Report From "Our Growing Canadian Commercial Space Sector"

Ask Arny Sokoloff, the President of the Canadian Space Commerce Association (CSCA) and he'll likely tell you in no uncertain terms that the CSCA is well positioned "at the intersection of space and business" with resources focused on legal, regulatory, financial and entrepreneurial issues of special concern to Canadian space focused firms.

This expertise was on display at the MaRS Development District in Toronto, Ontario at the 2010 CSCA conference and annual general meeting which wrapped up Tuesday, March 16th with presentations on a variety of topics including the need to embrace fixed pricing when bidding for Canadian, American or international contracts, making use of terrestrial markets as engines for ongoing growth, the uses and restrictions of intellectual property (IP) legislation when protecting stakeholders in space focused development projects and an overview of both the Canadian industrial and regional benefit (IRB) policy and scientific research experimental development (SH&ED) tax credits.

There was even some interesting back and forth discussion on how Canadian companies can benefit if the US fails to revoke the Strom Thurmond Defense Act. Suggestions were also made about creating a government-sponsored engineering firm with a mission to train young engineers and undertake public works projects.

Attendees and speakers included representatives from large firms like MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA), BMO Nesbitt Burns, law firm Blake, Cassels and Graydon LLP, smaller space focused companies such as Continuum Aerospace and Engineering Services Inc. (ESI), firms moving into space focused activities from other areas like Javelin Technologies and firms providing support services like SH&ED focused law firm StoneCracker Scientific and IRB experts WāVv Business Development.

Traditional media interest was also noted and I was interviewed on the conference for the final segment of the March 16th edition of the CBC Toronto radio program Here and Now.

As well, author David Pugliese in his March 22nd Ottawa Citizen article "$27M space program light on domestic benefits: critics" focused on inconsistencies in the application of the IRB credits in the Canadian Forces (CF) administered Joint Space Support Project.

The project, focused on developing remote sensing and space focused situational awareness capabilities for the CF, "seems designed to favour foreign companies over Canadian ones" according to Canadian Space Society (CSA) President Kevin Shortt who is quoted extensively for the article. Shortt (who also spoke on developing our future aerospace workforce at the March 16th CSCA conference) stated:

...one of the problems with government programs like IRB is that federal politicians and government bureaucrats have little knowledge of the actual capabilities of the country's space industry.

CSCA President Sokoloff thinks that this type of advocacy is one of the areas where the CSCA can benefit members most. "We're certainly not the advocate for large, established branch plant companies in aerospace; especially not the “aero” segment of the aerospace market” states Sokoloff. “We focus on Canadian space companies, entrepreneurs and start-ups looking for the expertise needed to survive and grow in our present business environment”

Suggestions were also made to arrange for future presentations by experts on Industry Canada (IC), the Strategic Aerospace & Defence Initiative (SADI), the National Research Council (NRC) Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP) plus the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) Space Technology Development Program (STDP) and Earth Observation Applications Development Program (EOADP).

For those interested in learning more about the presentations, the next CSCA meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 13th at 7:00 pm.

Telesat Hunting for Deals: Report on Business

According to the article, "Freed by the feds, Telesat begins the hunt for deals" written by Report on Business author Ian Marlow and published on March 14th:

"Canada's largest satellite company is mulling global acquisitions after the federal government said it would loosen foreign ownership restrictions in the telecom sector."

The article goes on to state that the federal government has indicated that this is being done as a preliminary to doing the same for the broader telecommunications industry.

Canada's largest satellite company is, of course, Telesat which originated as a Canadian Crown corporation mandated to develop communications services in the far north, according to the document "The Creation of Telesat: Canadian Communications Policy, Bell Canada and the Creation of Myth" by Howard Fremeth.

With headquarters in Ottawa, the firm still maintains deep Canadian cultural, commercial and technical roots, although the cultural component might not be immediately apparent from a casual perusal of the Telesat corporate history page, which indicates that "Telesat is a newly formed company, but our industry leadership actually spans more than 40 years through the commercial and technical achievements of Loral Skynet and Telesat Canada."

But the cultural component is still there, at least according to activist and author Fred Wilson in his article "The fight is on for Canadian communications and culture:"

"Telesat was the single greatest Canadian telecom accomplishment since Alexander Graham Bell. When Anik I went up in 1972 we were the first country in the world to use satellites for domestic communications. Its first customer was the CBC, which used the satellite to broadcast to Canada's north."

While Telesat publicly promotes the possibility of new acquisitions to grow the company, Wilson quite reasonably points out that the proposed rule changes also make it easier for other companies to buy Telesat. He states that, while the majority of Telesat shares are still owned by the Public Pension Investment Board of Canada, "this is something that Telesat executives hope to change real soon."

A close look at issues surrounding a potential Telesat sale will likely turn up quite a bit of overlap with an actual failed 2008 bit for Macdonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA) from US based ATK so it will be interesting to see how things play out should a buyer for Telesat ever come forward.

Space Firms "Big Success" but CSA Plan "MIA!"

If Borat were Canadian, he'd certainly be impressed with MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. (MDA) and COM DEV International who each had a pretty good week announcing  formal approval and funding for new space focused projects.

It's a shame these Canadian successes weren't matched by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) which publicly admitted for the first time on Monday that their long awaited and long-term space plan (LTSP) hasn't yet been even presented to the Canadian government.

But first the good news.

COM DEV's success arrived with a contract from EADS Astrium worth $2.8M CDN for a series of four communications satellites, according to the March 16th, 2010 CNW Group article "COM DEV Wins Work on Multiple Satellites" which stated:

"COM DEV will supply switches, filters and multiplexers for use on the satellites which EADS Astrium is building for SES S.A. The satellites will deliver next generation broadcast, VSAT and broadband services in Europe and Africa."

The initial contract is expected to lead to further contracts valued in excess of CDV$14 million, with work scheduled to be completed by early 2012 at the COM DEV facility in Cambridge, Ontario.

MDA's success, expected since the federal government unveiled their budget two weeks ago, officially occurred a day or so later with the formal announcement of Canadian Space Agency (CSA) authorization for MDA to begin the design phase of the RADARSAT Constellation mission. This contract is valued to $11.8 million and is expected to be completed by June 11, 2010 according to the SpaceRef.ca article "MDA Gets Next Contract in RADARSAT Constellation Mission."

There is however, no word on whether these successes are related to the missing CSA long-term space plan (LTSP) which, according to the article "Canadian Space Policy Idles or Does it?" on the SpaceRef.ca website has not yet even been submitted to cabinet for consideration.

According to a quote attributed to Paul Engel, the CSA Director of Communications and Public Affairs:

"In the near future, the Agency will be fine tuning the input received from stakeholders and presenting the Plan to the Minister of Industry and Cabinet for consideration."

So after working on the LTSP for almost two years as part of a request by then Industry Minister Jim Prentice in late summer of 2008 and being told that "time is of the essence," the document still has not been submitted by CSA president Steve MacLean to cabinet as of March 2010.

Amazing....

The Canadian LTSP is essentially missing in action by the admission of the CSA Director of Communication and Public Affairs but at least he attached his name to the admission so now we know who should be fired first.

On the plus side, this development might not be totally unexpected. For example, there are small  but growing indications that COM DEV, MDA and others are beginning to set their own course, irrespective of the CSA and it's LTSP (although MDA has obvious support from the Canadian government for the Radarsat Constellation project on the basis of arctic sovereignty).

I went so far as to state outright that this could happen in my February 11th, 2010 edition of This Week in Space for Canada when I said:

"...we have private citizens, individual organizations and Canadian corporations each acting independently and without the CSA to build their own unique international relationships and space focused opportunities. It's gone so far that our future in space may no longer be tied to our national space agency, as of this week in space for Canada."

I then followed my comments up with a February 15th, 2010 post on this blog under the title "Ottawa Citizen: "Where did that Long Term Space Plan Go?" by commenting that "if Canada does not define a long term space plan, private business and academia will soon go about creating their own."

Welcome to our Canadian future in space. Does anyone see the CSA anywhere?

Stars Aligning Themselves Nicely

American politicians like Bob Bennett, Orrin Hatch and Rob Bishop (all three who are teaming up to save the Constellation and Ares programs according the space news site Galaxy Wire) and military commentators like the US Air Force Times ( which warns that "The Air Force and National Reconnaissance Office could face major increases in the cost of launching satellites") are obviously concerned over the emerging commercial space landscape.

But the changes outlined by the Obama administration's recent embrace of both commercial and cooperative international space activities are slowly gaining steam, even in Canada. For example:

• Commercial rocket company SpaceX successfully completed the latest test firing of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle on March 13th according to this article on the Commercial Space Watch website. The company's goal is commercial crew transport to the International Space Station (ISS).
• David Lenard, a technology and science correspondent for MS-NBC writes about how "Suborbital Spaceships Spark Scientific Frenzy." He states that "Anticipation is on the rise for a new crop of commercial suborbital spaceships that can serve the scientific and educational market" Funding for these craft (expected to compete with Virgin Galactic Space Ship II) is expected to come from the $75 million allocated to the NASA Commercial Reusable Suborbital Research (CRuSR) program in the FY2011 budget. 
• Radio Sweden International, under the title "Four Swedes Waiting to Travel to Space" discussed Ann Klefbom from Umeå who has reserved her ticket on Space Ship II and hopes to become the first Swedish woman in space. According to the article, she still needs to raise approximately $200,000USD to pay for her ticket.
• According to the article "Space Agency Heads Discuss Extending Space Station Lifespan to 2028" on the SpaceRef.ca website "the leaders of the space agencies from Canada, Europe, Japan, Russia and the United States" are meeting to discuss extending the life of the International Space Station (ISS) until 2028. This seems to indicate that the US is no longer the primary driver behind the ISS, especially given that the March 11th press release promoting the event specifically stated that "the ISS will also allow the partnership to experiment with more integrated international operations and research, paving the way for enhanced collaboration on future international missions."

In Canada, even the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC) is acting supportive of private space industry by revising their March 4th, 2010 press release (which praised additional funding for the Canadian Space Agency to complete the Radarsat Constellation mission) with this March 11th press release titled "The Canadian Aerospace Industry praises the federal government for recognizing Space as a strategic capability for Canada." The latest press release says pretty much the same thing as the earlier one but drops statements included in the March 4th document on defense cuts impacting "the procurement and sustainment of aircraft" and AIAC disappointment "that no mention of Canada’s aerospace industry – a clear leader in innovation – was made in the federal budget."

It's likely that the second statement was dropped because the "space" part of aerospace was indeed mentioned in the federal government documents, even though the "aero" part wasn't.

Lastly, the Canadian Space Commerce Association Annual conference and general meeting is Tuesday, March 16th at the MaRS Development District. The theme of the conference is "The Growing Canadian Commercial Space Sector" which likely isn't directly related to aircraft either although we promise to mention them, once or twice.

Newspapers "Not Good Enough for this Blog!"

Traditional mass media has difficulty covering complex science and technology stories, at least according to organizations like the Science Media Centre of Canada and this is part of the reason why daily newspapers like the National Post, Le Journal de Montréal and the Vancouver Sun are seldom used as primary source materials when putting together this blog.

My normal writing pattern is to begin based on primary documentation provided through personal connections, news feeds, press releases, blogosphere comments or url links passed along from readers. I then follow-up with requests for clarification from the primary source and attempt to second source the material utilizing some fancy data-mining techniques learned from my marketing acquaintances. I also create multiple search engine queries to assist with independently validating the core material. Only then do I create the article for posting.

Where once this would have taken quite a bit of time, effort, snail mail and phone calls, the net has built a universe where this can be done quickly and efficiently by anyone with a computer, the correct methodology and a modicum of common sense in a way that simply can't be reproduced by what used to be called "the mass media."

That's why it's so amusing to read the article "Papers blew it online: Torstar" written by Jason Magder for the March 13th issue of the Montreal Gazette. In it, Magder quotes Canadian media icon John Honderich as stating that he believes his industry made a fatal error when it offered all its content free online. According to the article:

"I think we did make a big mistake," said John Honderich, who serves as chairman of the board and of the voting trust for Torstar Corporation, which owns The Toronto Star. "The whole model doesn't work. Everyone is saying now that we have to back up and absolutely rethink where we're going on this whole debate."

According to the article, Hondrich states flatly that no newspaper appears to have been able to profit from offering content free online and believes the industry will move toward readers paying for content, an idea attempted previously by the New York Times, the Globe and Mail and several others but eventually abandoned.

The general consensus regarding paid content was outlined by Mark Glaser in his article "Your Guide to Alternative Business Models for Newspapers" published on MediaShift: Your Guide to the Media Revolution, which as a part of the US based Public Broadcasting System (PBS). Glaser states:

Charging for content has perhaps been the most challenging monetization strategy for online newspapers . While some newspapers initially charged for access to all of their news articles online, most of those pay walls have been dropped. The New York Times started a TimesSelect product to charge for Op-Ed columnists and other features, while the Los Angeles Times tried to charge for its CalendarLive site. Both publications gave up on those paid content initiatives

There are only a few exceptions where people will consider paying for online content, according to Glasser:

... most newspaper sites continue to charge for archives and other premium content in an attempt to diversify their revenue streams online.
 
People want everything for free online, but in some cases, they will pay for very specialized information that they can't get anywhere else. When Rupert Murdoch took over the Wall Street Journal, he had hoped to bring down the pay wall, only to realize just how profitable it was. Some pay walls will work.

Here we have the core problem with Mr. Hondrich's thesis that newspapers (especially his) should charge for their content. Since people will only pay for very specialized content they can't get anywhere else and there is very little specialized content in a mass market, generalized focus publication (except for the archives), Mr. Hondrich will find very few people willing to pay money for the content from his specific mass market, generalized focus publication.

For example, this blog is focused on specialized content of interest to commercial space entrepreneurs and relies heavily on primary source material not normally available in print publications. The lack of useful content plus the lack of references to primary source material is why daily newspaper content (like the Toronto Star's) is generally "not good enough for this blog."

So Mr. Hondrich, while it's certainly possible that newspapers blew it when they failed to react appropriately to the rise of the internet, in order to survive now they need to provide better news, easy access to primary source materials and specialized content that people can't get anywhere else.

You've got quite the challenge on your hands, sir. I wish you luck.

Happy Days Are Here Again!

Why are so many newspace focused companies (for example, Odyssey Moon, founded by Canadian Bob Richards or PlanetSpace Corporation, which started out as the Canadian Arrow team competing for the Ansari X-Prize) possessors of such strong Canadian pedigrees but not officially Canadian based?



One of the reasons might be described in this recent post on the MaRS Blog by John McCulloch, under the headline "Open access for international investors" which states flatly that the culprit is a series of Canadian tax requirements known collectively as Section 116:

To shed further light on Kerri Golden’s excellent recent post, the stumbling block that has been removed in this case is the Section 116 – a series of tax requirements that imposed onerous restrictions on foreign investors in Canadian firms.

Of course, this post will not devolve into an argument that tax credits are the only key to building a knowledge economy. I've argued the exact opposite position as recently as my post Building a Competitive Business Environment Calls for More than Just Tax Credits.

However, the section 116 requirements do indeed seem onerous:

Under Section 116, a US venture capital company that wished to exit from an investment in a Canadian firm had to gather as many as 900 signatures from its limited partners, have each of them file income tax returns in Canada (even though no tax was due in Canada) and undergo a holding period that could have greatly undercut returns from a successful IPO.  Little wonder that the best funded and best managed VC firms on Earth decided that Canada was a no-go zone.  Incidentally, there is no such red tape for Canadian investors regarding US companies.

As part of their budget outline, the Conservative government has indicated the intention to remove the section 116 "tax barrier" by changing the definition of “taxable Canadian property” to exclude shares of Canadian private companies where not more than 50% of their value is derived from real property in Canada, Canadian resource property or timber resource property.

Essentially, this means that Canadian knowledge focused companies and start-ups can now solicit investors outside of Canada and no longer need to move to the US to utilize American or other foreign venture funds, just so long as the business is not too heavily focused on resources or property.

German Field Marshall Helmuth Carl Bernard von Moltke is supposed to have once said that "No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy" and I supposed the same is true about budgets and budget promises made under a minority government. However, it is good to see the Canadian government finally beginning to address some of the tax and structural issues preventing Canadian knowledge industries such as the commercial space sector from growing into world class organizations providing Canadian jobs.

Now if only they'd listen to some of the ideas floating around regarding super flow-through tax credits being used to fund space commercialization activities.

Feedback on the Throne Speech and Budget

The consensus of space entrepreneurs, activists, and researchers is positive (more or less) when it comes to our Canadian throne speech last Wednesday and the follow-on Thursday conservative budget.

For example, the Aerospace Industry Association of Canada (AIAC) reacted by issuing a March 4th press release titled "The Canadian Aerospace Industry Reacts to the 2010 Federal Budget." In it they state:

Although the budget makes no mention of the long awaited Long-Term Space Plan, the additional funding provided to the Canadian Space Agency to complete the Radarsat Constellation Mission is good news for the space industry.

The Spaceref.ca article titled "Budget 2010 - The News is not all bad for the Canadian Space Agency" goes into quite a bit of useful detail on the CSA budget and concludes:

The governments Economic Action Plan provided the Canadian Space Agency with $110 million over three years in last years budget. Of that, it was reported that $10 million had been committed while another $36 million will be committed this year. The $36 million for this year is lower than the original $60 million allocated last year. While the committed stimulus money is lower this year than expected it appears other parts of the CSA budget were left intact. This does not come as surprise. At the end of this month the government will release the 2010-2011 Report on Plans and Priorities for the CSA which will include the revised estimates for budgets in 2011-2012 and 2012-2013.

This last comment would seem to suggest that perhaps there will be something close to a long-term space plan reasonably soon only we'll end up calling it a "report on plans and priorities."

But, of course, others have a different spin. For example, over at Macleans magazine, Paul Wells in his column "Peering into tomorrow, blind as a bat" claims that:

There’s nearly $400 million over five years to develop new RADARSAT remote sensing satellites. That’s like buying a new laptop: it replaces off-the-shelf technology from a few years ago with new off-the-shelf technology that has benefited, automatically, like falling off a log, from Moore’s Law in the interim. Let other countries support the cutting edge of science; Flaherty will put his bets on the dull edge of technology.

Over on the R&D side, the Researcher Forum Blog, under the headline "Budget 2010: A Qualified Success" states:

Last year's cuts to the research granting councils, though relatively small, were magnified by their inclusion in a so-called "stimulus budget" full of spending increases in other areas. This year, the opposite is true. Funding increases, though relatively small, are made more significant by the context of spending restraint evidenced elsewhere in the budget.

According to the budget breakdown as provided in the article "more than $1.1-billion in new research-related spending" is expected to be allocated over the next five years. In essence, "the research community is receiving more than 20% of new spending measures in this budget" and some of this money will end up funding space focused research.

So maybe the news is good. Some people over on the commerce and commercial side of the table might even go so far as to call the news great.

For example, the Techvibes Technology Blog called last week "As good as a week can get for Canadian tech startups." Although the article also mentioned Mantella Venture Partners and their launch of a $20 Million early stage technology fund and the Quebec Government commitment of $50 Million to three technology company seed funds the article states:

...on March 4th, Canada's Budget 2010 announced that non-residents will no longer need to pay withholding tax on the sale of shares in a Canadian corporation. This change to Section 116 of the Income Tax Act is particularly beneficial to the high tech sector which has lobbied for years to obtain relief.

The Canadian Venture Capital Association blog (titled Capital Rants) also approves of the budget changes. In the blog post "Change in tax law sends a strong signal to international investors that Canada is "open for business" they state:

The CVCA Applauds Budget Decision to Remove Foreign Investment Barrier (CVCA release Link). The CVCA has long requested the elimination of Section 116 as it pertains to the venture capital and private equity industry and we wish to congratulate the federal government for taking action," said Gregory Smith, President of the CVCA. "Many CVCA members, as well as a large number of individuals and organizations, have been actively encouraging the federal government to eliminate this section of the Income Tax Act which has had a dampening effect on cross-border venture capital and private equity transactions. Its removal provides an important signal to foreign investors that Canada welcomes their contributions to growing companies and employment."

The only real downside to the budget was this statement, taken directly from the budget which claims that: 

Despite the high level of federal support, we continue to lag behind other advanced economies with respect to overall innovation performance, private sector investment in R&D, and the commercialization of research.

To ensure that federal funding is yielding maximum benefits for Canadians, the Government, in close consultation with business leaders from all sectors and our provincial partners, will conduct a comprehensive review of all federal support for R&D to improve its contribution to innovation and to economic opportunities for business. This review will inform future decisions regarding federal support for R&D. The Government is currently developing the terms of reference for the review.

It will be interesting to see the final form that this review of innovation performance takes. It sounds like something the Canadian Space Commerce Association should be discussing next week at their Toronto conference.

A Short History of Akjuit Aerospace

That there are no new things under the sun has got to have been a platitude at least as far back as biblical times when a variation of the phrase was incorporated into Ecclesiastes 1:9, but it's often surprising how accurate the phrase remains even today.

For example, those of us watching the growth of a variety of private suborbital spaceports (such as the Mojave Air and Space Port, Spaceport America, Spaceport Sweden and others) might be forgiven for forgetting that private spaceports have been around for quite a long time. One of the earliest was Spaceport Canada operated by Akjuit Aerospace just outside of Churchill, Manitoba in the middle 1990's.

Akjuit was initially backed by the well heeled Richardson Family of Manitoba (named after their patriarch, James Armstrong Richardson) but also included partnerships with Raytheon, investment firm Smith Barney who acted as underwriters for the project and STC Complex, a Russian organization contracted to provide surplus Soviet-era SS-25 ICBMs re-purposed as small polar orbiting launchers called START-1's (so named as they were made surplus by the 1991 Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty).

Located on the old Fort Churchill rocket launching site (initially built in the mid-1950s for sub-orbital sounding rocket launches) the plans called for a $300 million dollar investment which never materialized and Akjuit shut down in 1998.

I wonder if our present day spaceport developers have the business sense and enough money to avoid the fate of Spaceport Canada and Akjuit Aerospace?

Only time will tell if our space future is really "All About the Benjamins."

Puff Daddy - It's All About The benjamin
Uploaded by jekyllah. - Music videos, artist interviews, concerts and more.

 Who's On First! What's on Second!

If we add the American fuss over the recent National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) changes, as epitomized in articles like "We Must Not Discard Greatest Innovator in History" from the February 27th edition of the Houston Chronicle to our homegrown Canadian fuss over the lack of an updated Canadian Space Agency (CSA) long term space plan, it's easy to forget that government space agencies with their funny acronyms and initial-isms aren't the only (or even the most important) players in the high frontier.

Keeping track of them is almost like Bud Abbott asking Lou Costello about the players on the baseball team.

For example, in Canada the list of government agencies with space focused activities isn't just limited to the CSA. It also includes the Department of National Defense (DND) which focuses on military space activities through its Directory of Space Development (DSpaceD) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) which focuses on activities related to international cooperation and technology transfer.

Of course we can't forget the role of Industry Canada, which provides background information and documents on Canadian science and technological development strategy including Mobilizing Science and Technology to Canada's Advantage (May 2007) and the Mobilizing Science and Technology to Canada's Advantage Progress Report (June 2009) which is the closest thing Canada has had to a long term space strategy since the 2003 publication of the document titled "The Canadian Space Strategy."

And if you want government funding then you can't just hang around the CSA and hope for the best. You need to head to the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) which is the leading Canadian resource for R&D funding and technology-based innovation and has far more money to give away than the CSA, at least according to their website.

Unless of course, you're an engineer, in which case you need to make friends at the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) or a social scientist who needs to go to the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), or a health researcher who needs to go to the Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR).

There are, of course, plenty of others and it's also worth noting that the CSA didn't even exist until March 1989 when it was formed through the Canadian Space Agency Act. Most early Canadian space successes and satellite launches were organized through the Communications Research Centre (CRC) and even the original Canadian astronaut program was part of the NRC in 1984 when the first Canadian went into space.

Of course, the above comments are not intended to diminish CSA contributions and activities which are substantial and impressive given the limited CSA budget and short period of existence.

But the CSA is not and never has been the only Canadian, or even the only Canadian government player in this area. Often the mandate for these organizations overlap and while they might work together on specific projects, they also often end up duplicating each others work.

This sort of thing also happens in other countries which brings us (finally) to the point of today's post. According to the February 25th, 2010 post on the Spaceflight Now website titled "Air Force X-37B spaceplane arrives in Florida for launch":

A secretive military spacecraft resembling a small space shuttle orbiter flew to Florida in the belly of a cargo plane this week to undergo final processing for launch on April 19. 

This "secretive military spacecraft" is, of course, the X-37B orbital test vehicle, the US Air Force follow-on craft to the Boeing X-37 advanced technology demonstrator, an unpiloted demonstration spaceplane intended to test future launch technologies while in orbit and during atmospheric reentry.

Although originally scheduled for launch as part of a space shuttle mission according to the June 2nd, 2009 article on Space.com titled "U.S. Air Force Aims to Launch Space Plane Next Year" the X-37B is now being launched atop an Atlas V rocket. It was last seen back in 2006 being test dropped from Scaled Composites White Knight.

America's future in space is likely assured through various public and private programs like the X-37 and the White Knight because NASA was never the only American agency engaged in space activities.

As for us, it will be interesting to see what programs surface over the next little while to move forward Canadian space activities should the present conservative government decide that the Canadian Long Term Space Plan should not be disclosed as part of the upcoming budget.

Such an act will hobble the CSA's ability to develop, plan and influence their own future space activities but likely will not significantly alter other Canadian space focused activities which, much like their American counterparts, were never really dependent on any single government agency.