Flexibility is the greatest driver in the satellite industry. As technology across the value chain has improved, barriers to entry have come down in both manufacturing and launch. In turn, a growing diversity of solutions has, and continues to, come to market, finding new ground by providing customers with more options, through flexibility.
This was the trend which inspired constellations, providing coverage and cost-efficient flexibilities not seen previously in GEO offers, and this is the trend which has inspired small GEOs, in-orbit servicing, and new launch options.
The latest evolution of this trend is in software-defined satellites. While much conversation has been had in recent years on revolutionizing the ground network through 5G and similar networking solutions, software-defined satellites have risen as a means of providing more flexibility on orbit.
For a satellite to be fully software-defined for the communications market, satellite market research and consultancy firm, Northern Sky Research (NSR), deems the satellite must have the following capabilities:
- Steerable beams – to redirect capacity as required
- Digital channelizer – to split, recombine, and redistribute capacity
- Power/spectrum configuration – to change the beam characteristics
For communications, software-defined satellites rise from a need to redirect capacity and reshape throughput. Customer demand and data usage are changing, given growing capacity needs in established regions via more devices and data-driven applications, and growing technology and demand are establishing access needs in under-developed regions. Additionally, while video has long been the main application for broadband, much of the market is aiming to transition to data, and software-defined satellites are seen, more and more, as a potential way to bridge this gap and handle this transition. Such has been the motivation behind Intelsat’s orders from Airbus, SES’ orders from Boeing, and the development of the Anuvu fleet, among others.
In non-GEO, most constellations feature some level of flexibility, as most require steerable beams. However, fewer players are willing to commit to full flexibility, given the need to replenish their constellations over a 5-9 year lifespan. Notably, OneWeb’s second generation constellation, and Amazon’s Kuiper are set to be fully-flexible, likely as a means to stand apart and better compete in future markets.
Back in GEO, manufacturers have been pursuing software-defined satellites, mostly from a similar competitive perspective, but also a cost-cutting one. When investigating contract awards between traditional bent pipe satellite orders, and comparing with more recent partial and fully-flexible deals, NSR found that fully-flexible satellites were often cheaper than their partially-flexible counterparts. Even accounting for inflation, and standardizing by region, mass, and application, full seemed cheaper than partial.
On further analysis, the reason was two-fold. First, in GEO, key manufacturers have had much of their software-defined satellite development subsidized by government effort, such as the case with Airbus and ESA. The other reason was that software-defined satellites require a shift in design approach, transitioning the complexity away from hardware and toward software. Simply put, the standardization of hardware required has produced cost-efficiencies which outpace the rising costs driven by the complexity of onboard software.
Will the future be entirely software-defined? Not entirely. While software-defined satellites offer flexibility and new capabilities, there are still advantages to a more traditional approach. Shorter lead times, and less expensive approaches offer primary advantages, but another is integration. Flexible satellites may find integration with ground networks more risky, costly, and challenging, especially if the preferred modulation technology changes or improves. In this case, the market can only move as fast as the more flexible asset, and coordinating the communication between space and ground will become more challenging. Additionally, operators are still uncertain if flexible satellites will be necessary, as innovation on the ground itself may offset this need. Finally, while customer demand is changing, many operators are choosing to defer decisions or choose less risky strategies in delivering capacity.
As a result, out of the nearly 18,000 HTS communications satellites NSR has forecast to be ordered between 2020-2030, while 95% of them are expected to feature partial or full flexibility, this same flexibility will only account for 77% of manufacturing revenues. Non-GEO constellations drive volumes, mostly through partially-flexible systems from the likes of SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb, among many more, however, hesitance in GEO, and in consideration of these more expensive assets, keeps revenues less dominated by flexibility.
Flexibility is driving innovation on ground infrastructures, networking architectures, and now in-orbit via software-defined satellites. How each operator chooses to establish their network is driven by a multitude of technological and marketing concerns, with cost, timeline, and capability being weighed against customer growth and changing demand. In the end, flexibility is the name of the game, but how it’s played is entirely up to each player.
Did you find this article interesting? Get NSR’s recent report on software-defined satellites here.
