Has the small satellite wave crested? Despite many predictions of industry trending to smaller, lighter, cheaper, more standardized, off-the-shelf space segment components, both fixed satellite service (FSS) and mobile satellite service (MSS) operators continue to opt for large, at least partially custom-built, geostationary (GEO) space stations at roughly the same rates as in recent history. Manufacturers have remained in their niches, with the leading prime contractors continuing to carve up a global GEO market ranging between 15 to 25 commercial orders a year, bolstered by government orders. In the meantime, small satellite (smallsat) manufacturers and several smallsat joint ventures between bus and payload specialists have stuck to their knitting as well.

Smallsats generally are classified as those that weigh less than 500 kilograms, including on-board fuel. The peak period for smallsats was the 1997-2001 era, when more than 100 were launched, mainly low-Earth orbit (LEO) and mid-Earth orbit (MEO) constellations designed to provide telecommunications and navigation applications. Heavy-lift launch vehicles and improved compression, caching and ground station antenna technologies have diminished some of the advantages that smallsat LEO and MEO constellations were said to provide in the 1990s, but others remain valid. Smallsats bound for LEO or MEO are less expensive to build, launch (either by use of smaller launch vehicles or through multiple launches on large vehicles) and insure; a loss is not apt to be as catastrophic, either in expense or in network operations; and they need less fuel for station-keeping, attitude correction and orbital transfer owing to their smaller mass. They can carry the most sophisticated data processing capabilities, as the technical success of Globalstar, Iridium and ICO have shown even during the period when business success was elusive. Although the gap may narrow according to some MSS ancillary terrestrial component (ATC) business plans, smallsats in LEO or MEO still can take advantage of smaller, and therefore mobile, Earth stations than can their GEO counterparts. The potential disadvantages, however, still are there: shorter expected lifespan due to lower station-keeping fuel capacity (notwithstanding lower mass), orbital friction and battery life; smaller ground coverage footprints; and obviously, less payload capacity, meaning less transponder throughput and fewer digital or analog channels carried.

One of the highest profile smallsat projects today is the Galileo navigation system, intended by its sponsor, the European Space Agency, to complement or compete with (depending on whom you ask and at what time of day you do the asking) the U.S. Department of Defense’s Global Positioning System and Russia’s Glonass. The Galileo system of 27 active satellites in three orbital planes and three spares is intended to provide 1-meter localizing to civilian users.

Earth imaging services also have taken advantage of smallsat capabilities. Smallsats have particular advantages in Earth imaging not only because of a lower, closer orbit, but because large satellite buses and payloads contain power sources, mechanical and other moving parts and generate energy fields that may cause vibration, blurring the images that are the mission objective and diminishing resolution.

Of course, smallsat telecommunications is back as well. One of the more interesting things to watch in the next few years will be the competition between smallsats and large GEO platforms in providing satellite telecommunications, both through ATC and otherwise. One of the ATC licensees has committed to a next-generation massive GEO platform of three satellites. Another ATC licensee is studying the issue.

But the GEO model is not going anywhere. In particular, GEOs appear unlikely to relinquish their place for carrying sheer throughput of transponders aloft. Larger and mixed- band and mixed-use payloads demand size and power. HDTV and IPTV also will demand large satellite capacity and power profiles.

In sum, it seems that the satellite industry is segmenting into use and application-driven spheres of large satellites and smallsats appropriate for different satellite services, with certain overlapping areas such as satellite telecommunications in which each may be appropriate and either complement each other or compete. It appears that while the demise of the large satellite platform predictions were wrong, the smallsat option is fully operational as well.

Owen D. Kurtin is a partner in the New York office of law firm Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner LLP and a member of the firm’s Technology, Media & Communications and Corporate Departments. He may be reached at +1.212.895.2000 or by e-mail at [email protected].