塑造美国航天发射市场：延续美国优势

Shaping the U.S. Space Launch Market Extending America’s Advantage Authors Michael O’Connor Kathleen Curlee Executive Summary While rocketry may be centuries old, orbital space launch began with Sputnik in 1957.In the following decade, fueled by government funding and motivated by the“Sputniksurprise,”American space launch had a burst of activity, with more than half a dozencompanies attempting orbit.1In the decades since, however, the number of companiesresponsible for space launcheshasebbed and flowed. Following the early burst ofactivity,the number oflaunches and companies responsible for them decreased. By themid-2000s, a singlefirmdominatedthefield: the United Launch Alliance. ULA wasslowly displaced by then-upstart SpaceX, whose pace exploded starting around 2017.Recently, a handful of would-be competitors have shown the ability to achieve orbit,successfully launching commercial and government satellites. Today,the United States finds itself in the enviable yet challenging position of worldleader in launch, yet with a relatively consolidated market.Thecountryconducts 50percentmore launches than it did at the peak of the space race—but five of every sixU.S. launches come from a single provider,SpaceX. With a tranche of new companiesvying to challenge SpaceX’s dominance, it will be crucial for federalofficialstocarefully calibrate policiesthatshape the market. As with any national security-relevant market, concentration poses risks: supply chaindisruptions can threaten military capability, while government bargaining powershrinks. Likewise, a more competitive market comes withthebenefitsofincreasedinnovation incentives and improved resilience. Federal policies should pursue improvedcompetition, but must balance those policies with current national security needs toreliably and rapidly launch growing numbers of defense and intelligence spacecraft.Policymakers must also ensurethatdomestic launch companies retain the flexibilityand capacity to compete globally, outpacing their state-directed competitors. Initsevaluation ofthe American launch market’s ability to meet critical U.S. nationalsecurity and foreign policy needs, this paperfindsthe followingopportunities andchallenges: Opportunities:The United States leads the world in space launch by nearly everymeasure: number of launches, total mass to orbit, satellite count, and more. SpaceX’semergence has provided regular, reliable, and relatively affordable launches tocommercial and nationalsecurity customers. It has also had a role in seeding talent inother startups. Alongside SpaceX isa small group of technically viable alternatives.This variety offers the country a measure of resilience in the face of national securitythreats. Extending this advantage could include further investment in strategically important areassuch asresponsive launch, in-space transportation, or small launch toparticular orbits. Leveraging and expanding the U.S. advantage not only enhancesnational security but compounds market resilience by building a viable avenue for newmarket entrants. Challenges:Competitionis important for resilience and incentivizing innovation—buttoday’s market consolidationandthe capital requirements necessary to developrockets make it difficult for new competitors to break in. Simultaneously, the People’sRepublic of China (PRC) has shown the ability and willingness to invest the level ofcapital needed to create internationalcompetition for the United States.Navigatingthese dual challenges willinvolvecareful steering byU.S.policymakers. This paper makes the following recommendations to protect U.S. national securityinterests and ensure an enduring Americanadvantage in launch: 1.Congress should fund and theU.S.Department ofDefenseand NASA shouldconduct research and strategic investmentintransportation technologiesinspacethrough grants, government demonstration missions, and agreementstopurchase commercial transportation services. 2.TheDOD, intelligence community, and NASA should regularly execute smallsatellite missions and expand purchases of small launch vehicle services inorder to cheaply test technology and encourage a competitive future launchmarket. 3.Congress should fund, and theDODand NASA should implement, expandedlaunch infrastructure capacity, dispersion, and resilience to improve U.S.launch capacity in peacetime and safeguard it in case of conflict. 4.The federal government should promote competition in the commercialspace launch industry by continuing to allocate launches among multiplecompetitive vendors, thereby ensuringresilience and innovation. Table of Contents Executive Summary................................................................................................................................1Introduction...............................................................................................................................................4What Is Space Launch?................................................