The satellite industry has changed drastically in the last decade with the introduction of small satellites that can be produced and launched quickly. This comes in direct contrast to a space economy that privileged unique, complex and expensive satellites for decades.

These “plug-and-play” satellites have multiple systems that can be added or removed quickly, and can be launched on tight deadlines, a necessity in an increasingly contested domain. Constellations spoke to Dr. David Hardy from TC Space Consulting about the industry-wide shift towards small, modular satellites. Dr. Hardy spent over 41 years at the Air Force as a senior space researcher and leader before serving as the Deputy Director at the Office of the Principal Department of Defense Space Advisor at the Pentagon.

Takeaway: Past space programs produced large, complex satellites with multiple interconnected systems and payloads.

Dr. Hardy began working in the space program in the eighties, when the approach to satellite launch was focused on producing complex GEO satellites that could hold as many payloads as possible. “Back then, satellites were basically gold watches,” he said. Every piece of a satellite was a unique technology that had? to be painstakingly built. “The tendency was to load everything you possible could onto a single launch, because the satellite was expensive,” said Dr. Hardy.

While there was interest in finding a less expensive option to produce space capabilities, there was also great resistance to the idea of small satellites until well into the early aughts. “At that time, the perception of the future for space was that… they would always cost a lot,” he said. “Small satellites made no sense, because you couldn’t put enough capabilities on them.”

Takeaway: Plug-and-play satellites make fast, efficient satellite production and launch possible.

“Plug and play is intrinsically attractive and has become more attractive,” said Dr. Hardy. Plug-and-play satellites are smaller, with multiple systems that can speak to each other but also be added or removed easily. “It took a while” to figure out the technology and make the shift, said Dr. Hardy. “You have to have common protocols; you need a lot more computational power. You need a lot of smart interfaces.”

“When you plug something in [to the satellite], it can analyze the interface and it can produce protocols to talk back and forth,” he said. And making this technology work in space is even more complicated; “space is a somewhat harsh environment, with radiational problems, single event upsets,” he said. But plug-and-play satellites also don’t need to live as long as satellites were expected to in the past, and modern satellites might be launched for a specific, short-term purpose, rather than for a long-term mission.

Takeaway: Space is a contested domain, and satellite capabilities must keep pace to remain competitive.

“Present and future warfare will take place not on months or days, they will take place on hours,” said Dr. Hardy. This change in speed means that the ability to respond to adversary actions will also require agility.

“We know how to do that in the air domain. The air guys have been doing that for 100 years,” said Dr. Hardy. Space launch and satellite management are more complicated but break down into a few distinct steps: preparing payloads, configuring the small satellite, preparing the rocket for launch, and setting the satellite up to semi-autonomously configure itself once it is on orbit.

While it might seem that Elon Musk has a monopoly on satellites launches, Dr. Hardy argues that there is a large gap in the market for fast and efficient smallsat launches. “There are a whole series of small companies who are looking at what one would call responsive small satellite launch, where within a day you can configure it, get it on the launch pad and launch it, and then it can check out an orbit within hours.”

Takeaway: Proliferation of commercial satellite production is good for everyone.

Competition in satellite production and management is becoming more varied. For a long time, competition only existed in the production and design of massive GEO satellites—and the most successful companies were the ones who could fit the most transponders onto it.

But that’s changed. “Now it’s quite clear that the GEO comm birds are being out-competed by these proliferations of huge constellations of lower earth,” he said. Other orbits are becoming more attractive to up-and-coming satellite companies. “GEO is cool, but it takes a while to get up to GEO and back down, and modern comms don’t want those huge latencies.” Companies that can take advantage of LEO’s lower latency, or who can successfully combine multiple orbits, will come out on top.

This competition produces better innovation and an overall more resilient economy. “It can allow for what we call path diversity,” said Dr. Hardy. “If you have 50 companies trying to build different ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) things for commercial products, that’s probably a deeper innovation web than we would have if we went to our three big aerospace companies and ask them to tell us what to do.”

For more on cubesats, reusable launch systems and satellite miniaturization, listen to the full podcast episode.

Explore More:

Modularity in Satellite: Time to Plug-and-Play?

VICTUS HAZE: USSF Partners with Industry for RPO on Tactically Relevant Timelines

Podcast: Dynamic Space Operations, Demand Signals and Smart Buyers

Executives Say the New Competitive Landscape is Spurring Innovation Among Longtime Satellite Operators