Space Security Index

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Space Security 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 10 e research process for Space Security 2011 was directed by Cesar Jaramillo at Project Ploughshares. e researchers based at the McGill University Institute of Air and Space Law and at George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute were supervised on site by, respectively, Dr. Ram Jakhu and Dr. Peter Hays. e research team included: Timiebi Aganaba, McGill University Laura Delgado, George Washington University Catherine Doldirina, McGill University Diane Howard, McGill University David McArthur, George Washington University Brian Weeden, Technical Advisor, Secure World Foundation. e Governance Group for the Space Security Index would like to thank the research team and the many advisors and experts who have supported this project. Cesar Jaramillo has been responsible for overseeing the research process and logistics for the 2010-2011 project cycle. He provides the day-to-day guidance and coordination of the project and ensures that the myriad details of the publication come together. Cesar also supports the Governance Group and we want to thank him for the contribution he has made in managing the publication of this volume. We also want to thank Brian Weeden at Secure World Foundation for providing his time and technical expertise to the project, in addition to being part of the research team. anks to Wendy Stocker at Project Ploughshares for copyediting, to Creative Services at the University of Waterloo for design work, and to Pandora Press of Kitchener, Ontario for printing and binding. For comments on the draft research we are in debt to the international experts who provided feedback on each of the report’s chapters during the online consultation process, and to the participants in the Space Security Working Group. For helping to organize the Space Security Working Group meeting held on 8-9 April 2011 in Montreal, we are grateful to Ms. Maria D’Amico at the McGill University Institute of Air and Space Law, and Ms. Nancy Regehr at Project Ploughshares. is project would not be possible without the generous nancial and in-kind support of the following organizations: • Secure World Foundation • The Simons Foundation • International Security Research and Outreach Programme at Foreign Aairs and International Trade Canada • Erin J.C. Arsenault Trust Fund at McGill University. While we, as the Governance Group for the Space Security Index, have beneted immeasurably from the input of the many experts indicated, responsibility for any errors or omissions in this volume nally rests with us. Gérard Brachet Peter Hays Ram Jakhu William Marshall Paul Meyer John Siebert Dana Smith Ray Williamson
The Space Environment TREND 1.1: Amount of orbital debris continues to increase, particularly in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) — Space debris poses a signicant, constant, and indiscriminate threat to all spacecraft, regardless of the nation or entity to which they belong. Most space missions create some amount of space debris, mainly as rocket booster stages are expended and released to drift in space along with bits of hardware. More serious fragmentations are usually caused by energetic events such as explosions. ese can be both unintentional, as in the case of unused fuel exploding, or intentional, as in the testing of weapons in space that utilize kinetic energy interceptors. Traveling at speeds of up to 7.8 kilometers (km) per second, each piece of space debris may destroy or severely disable a satellite upon impact. e number of objects in Earth orbit has increased steadily; today, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) is using the Space Surveillance Network to catalog more than 15,000 objects approximately 10 centimeters (cm) in diameter or larger. It is estimated that there are over 300,000 objects with a diameter larger than one centimeter and several million that are smaller. e annual rate of new tracked debris began to decrease in the 1990s, largely due to national debris mitigation eorts, but has accelerated in recent years due to events such as the Chinese intentional destruction of one of its satellites in 2007. 2010 Developments: • Software failure leaves Galaxy 15 adrift in the Geostationary Orbit (GEO) belt, but it is eventually recovered • Cataloged debris field from the 2007 intentional destruction of a Chinese satellite passes 3,000 objects • Trackable space object population increases by 5.1 per cent • The U.S. military continues to track and predict atmospheric reentry of space debris Space Security Impact Although there were no major fragmentations in 2010, the number of cataloged objects increased by 800, mostly due to the continued discovery and cataloging of debris from major events in 2007 and 2009. Satellites in the critical 800-km Sun-synchronous region are making more maneuvers than ever to avoid collisions. Some debris in LEO will reenter the Earth’s atmosphere and disintegrate in a relatively short period of time due to atmospheric drag, but debris in orbits above 600 km will remain a threat for decades and even centuries. us, despite growing awareness of the problem and some voluntary mitigation eorts, space debris continues to pose an increasing threat to operational satellites and the long-term sustainability of space activities. TREND 1.2: Increasing awareness of space debris threats and continued eorts to develop and implement international measures to tackle the problem — Signicant debris-generating events as well as improved tracking abilities have encouraged the recognition of space debris as a signicant threat. e 2007 Anti-Satellite Weapon (ASAT) test conducted by China, the 2008 U.S. destruction of the failed USA- 193 satellite, and the 2009 collision between a Russian and a U.S. satellite have served to underscore the need for eective measures to curb the creation of space debris. Spacefaring states, including China, Japan, Russia, and the U.S., as well as the European Union (EU) have developed debris mitigation standards, and the United Nations (UN) has adopted voluntary guidelines. Most states require residual propellants, batteries, ywheels, pressure vessels, and other instruments to be depleted or made passive at the end of their operational lifetime. All major national debris mitigation guidelines address the disposal of GEO satellites, typically in graveyard orbits 235 km above the GEO orbit, and most seek the removal of dead spacecraft from LEO within 25 years. However, these guidelines are not universally or regularly followed. Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11
Page 1: SPACE SECURITY 2011 www.spacesecuri
Page 4 and 5: Library and Archives Canada Catalog
Page 7 and 8: PAGE 1 Acronyms PAGE 7 Introduction
Page 9: PAGE 149 Chapter 8 - Space Systems
Page 12 and 13: Space Security 2011 2 EHF Extremely
Page 14 and 15: Space Security 2011 4 NTM National
Page 17 and 18: Space Security 2011 is the eighth a
Page 19: of the three preceding years, in al
Page 23 and 24: 2010 Developments: • Internationa
Page 25 and 26: 2010 Developments: • Shift in U.S
Page 27 and 28: Civil Space Programs TREND 4.1: Gro
Page 29 and 30: 2010 Developments: • Satellite na
Page 31 and 32: eyond the ISS partners, without sac
Page 33 and 34: 2010 Developments: • Japan launch
Page 35 and 36: Space Systems Negation TREND 8.1: I
Page 37 and 38: The Space Environment is chapter as
Page 39 and 40: of which fewer than 5 per cent are
Page 41 and 42: Table 1.3 below lists the Top 10 br
Page 43 and 44: Figure 1.5: Total cataloged on-orbi
Page 45 and 46: (German Aerospace Center), ESA, ISR
Page 47 and 48: approximately six weeks later. NASA
Page 49 and 50: Originally adopted in 1994, the ITU
Page 51 and 52: etransmits the programming to cable
Page 53 and 54: order of years or decades, there ar
Page 55 and 56: help increase the transparency and
Page 57 and 58: e 1,100-kg Block 10 satellite conta
Page 59 and 60: Trend 2.2: Global SSA capabilities
Page 61 and 62: Space surveillance is an area of gr
Page 63 and 64: Space Security Impact e European SS
Page 65 and 66: 2010 Development U.S. government co
Page 67 and 68: states can peacefully discuss, for
Page 69 and 70: Registration Convention The Convent
Page 71 and 72:
PAROS resolution Since 1981 the UNG
Page 73 and 74:
Space Security Proposals A number o
Page 75 and 76:
threat posed to the access to, and
Page 77 and 78:
on questions and issues put before
Page 79 and 80:
an impasse. Despite the difficultie
Page 81 and 82:
2010 Development Africa considers t
Page 83 and 84:
e EU/ESA European Space Policy adop
Page 85 and 86:
2010 Development U.S. export reform
Page 87 and 88:
space orbits and place great strain
Page 89 and 90:
2010 Development Various countries
Page 91 and 92:
Table 4.4: The 2010 space launch sc
Page 93 and 94:
itself, major contractors such as B
Page 95 and 96:
1. Transporting astronauts to LEO c
Page 97 and 98:
2010 Development Mix of successes a
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 4.7: NASA 2006-2010 budget (
Page 101 and 102:
Table 4.9: Flights to the Internati
Page 103 and 104:
GPS military applications include n
Page 105 and 106:
distribution system that provides a
Page 107 and 108:
Commercial Space is chapter assesse
Page 109 and 110:
espectively. 9 PanAmSat, New Skies,
Page 111 and 112:
in two ways: 1) by amending spectru
Page 113 and 114:
comprised of Boeing (U.S.), Aker Kv
Page 115 and 116:
of the rst two space tourists purc
Page 117 and 118:
At the Spaceport America runway ded
Page 119 and 120:
the U.S. National Geospatial-Intell
Page 121 and 122:
esources to address growing space s
Page 123 and 124:
satellite technology is that the sy
Page 125 and 126:
Space Support for Terrestrial Milit
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Figure 6.4: Russian dedicated milit
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
2010 Development Space Support for
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Space Systems Resiliency is chapter
Page 149 and 150:
Responding to such concerns, the U.
Page 151 and 152:
Space Security Impact e establishme
Page 153 and 154:
industry rsts — notably, the rst
Page 155 and 156:
involved; modest shields in GEO can
Page 157 and 158:
X-37A (NASA/DARPA). 77 A successor
Page 159 and 160:
Space Systems Negation is chapter a
Page 161 and 162:
equipment during Operation Iraqi Fr
Page 163 and 164:
satellites in LEO. 43 Japan is an i
Page 165 and 166:
under the Advanced Weapons Technolo
Page 167 and 168:
Table 8.2: History of ground-based
Page 169 and 170:
e MDA Near-Field Infrared Experimen
Page 171 and 172:
Space Security Working Group Meetin
Page 173 and 174:
Types of Earth Orbits* Low Earth Or
Page 175 and 176:
Article II Outer space, including t
Page 177 and 178:
Article XI In order to promote inte
Page 179 and 180:
Spacecraft Launched in 2010 COSPAR
Page 181 and 182:
COSPAR Launch Date 2010- 041B 2010-
Page 183 and 184:
Chapter One Endnotes 1 D. Wright,
Page 185 and 186:
51 Council of the European Union, d
Page 187 and 188:
97 Joel D. Scheraga, “Establishin
Page 189 and 190:
21 Vandenberg Air Force Base, “Va
Page 191 and 192:
69 Ibid. 70 Ibid. 71 European Space
Page 193 and 194:
13 United Nations Oce for Outer Spa
Page 195 and 196:
54 William J. Broad and Kenneth Cha
Page 197 and 198:
93 Saira Abbasi, “FMCT: An Unnish
Page 199 and 200:
135 K.K. Nair, Space, the Frontiers
Page 201 and 202:
3 Data from Gunter Krebs, Gunter’
Page 203 and 204:
50 Antonio Regalado, “Mexico Gets
Page 205 and 206:
88 Frank Morring Jr., “India Gear
Page 207 and 208:
131 Prime Minister of Russia. “Pr
Page 209 and 210:
170 e Voice of Russia, “Russia, K
Page 211 and 212:
generation GPS bird,” Russian Spa
Page 213 and 214:
13 Jim Yardley, “Snubbed by U.S.,
Page 215 and 216:
55 Daniel J. Marcus, “Commerce Pr
Page 217 and 218:
99 Ibid. 100 Space News, “Virgin
Page 219 and 220:
136 Richard DalBello, interview wit
Page 221 and 222:
Chapter Six Endnotes 1 Union of Con
Page 223 and 224:
43 William Graham, “ULA Atlas V l
Page 225 and 226:
AW_04_19_2010_p35-219773.xml&headli
Page 227 and 228:
138 China State Council Information
Page 229 and 230:
176 Frank Morring, Jr. and Neelam M
Page 231 and 232:
221 Spot Image, “Kompsat 2: e Alt
Page 233 and 234:
265 Andrew Willis, “Galileo contr
Page 235 and 236:
Subcommittee on Investigations, Com
Page 237 and 238:
Programs of Interest,” Center for
Page 239 and 240:
87 John Cummings, “Army nanosatel
Page 241 and 242:
36 Steven Kosiak, “Arming the Hea
Page 243 and 244:
krypton-uoride, helium-argon-xenon,
Page 245 and 246:
101 e Advanced Video Guidance Senso
show all

Space Security Index

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?