While the concept of standardized space components promises to revolutionize the industry, we're still far from achieving true COTS status for most space hardware.
The challenge is not technical. We've proven time and again that standardization is possible, but the complexity of commercial, regulatory, and innovative forces that pull the industry in different directions.
”We talk about commercial off-the-shelf as though, if I need a reaction wheel, or a thruster, or a battery, I can go and pick it off the shelf and it's there. And yet the reality is that it’s aspirational,” explains Kartik Kumar, CEO at satsearch, a trading platform for space tech.
This gap between aspiration and reality creates a paradox: while standardization could dramatically reduce costs and accelerate development cycles, the path to achieving it remains stubbornly complex.
Competing Business Interests Hinder Space Standardization
At the heart of this challenge lies a fundamental tension between competing business interests. Established players, having invested heavily in proprietary technologies, naturally resist standardization that could commoditize their offerings, Kumar says.
Yet, these same companies recognize the potential benefits of standardization within their own operations.
"Companies are very happy to standardize inside their own organization," explains Kumar, "because then they can build process efficiencies, cost efficiencies, time efficiencies."
However, this internal standardization often leads to what he calls "walled gardens", or proprietary standards that don't extend beyond company boundaries. This creates a fragmented landscape where different organizations maintain their own standards, effectively working against the industry's broader need for interoperability and scale.
HEAR THE FULL PODCAST EPISODE: "The Space Economy: Commercialization Through Partnerships"
Space Needs Standardization
The space industry stands at a critical cross-roads. Traditional space agencies like ESA and NASA have established comprehensive standards, but these were largely designed for flagship missions and large institutional projects.
"Space urgently has to look into standardization, into a platform-based approach, and into software-defined solutions like the software-defined satellite, standardized platform, and standardized payload,” says Manfred Otto, Senior Director at Terma.
The emergence of software-defined radios and satellites and standardized platforms truly represents a promising direction that allows for modular designs that maintain the necessary room for customization—a delicate balance in an industry where both standardization and innovation are essential.
With a platform-based approach, companies can keep their competitive advantages and at the same time benefit from standardization where it makes sense, Otto says. The key lies in identifying which elements can be standardized without compromising innovation, IP rights, or market position.
Image: SpaceX
Future of Space Development
Looking ahead, the space industry's approach to standardization will likely determine its growth trajectory. Successful standardization could dramatically reduce costs, accelerate development cycles, and open the industry to new players and innovations.
However, the path forward requires careful navigation. Companies must balance the benefits of standardization against the need to maintain competitive advantages and return on investments. Industry leaders must work together to establish standards that promote growth while protecting innovation.
CLICK HERE AND FIND THE FULL EPISODE ON THE SPACE INDUSTRY COLLABORATIONS.
If we get it right, we could see an unprecedented expansion of space capabilities and applications. If we get it wrong, we risk fragmenting the industry further, potentially slowing progress just when space technology is becoming more interesting than ever.
Featured image credits: NASA Johnson