Race to Space

The two authors attest that the USA has a lead in both rocket construction and satellite operations that will be difficult for Europe to catch up with. Europe's latest rocket model, Ariane 6 (first flight on 9 July 2024), lags ‘at least a generation’ behind its counterpart, Falcon 9 from the US company SpaceX (first flight on 4 June 2010). The reason: Ariane 6 is a single-use rocket with no reusable parts, while the first stage and parts of the Falcon 9's payload fairing return to Earth and can be reused on the next flight. Reusability is considered a decisive cost factor, for example when launching satellites into space. SpaceX's Starship (first orbital flight on 5 May 2021) is around twice the size of Ariane 6 and can carry around five times the payload into space. Just like Ariane 6, Starship is currently still struggling with technical difficulties, resulting in test flights being postponed or even explosions. ‘But once the teething problems have been ironed out, the USA will have a rocket in the Starship that is two generations ahead of the Ariane 6,’ said Andreas Dripke.

The reason for the USA's lead lies in a fundamentally different economic concept in the “space race,” according to the book. Europe continues to rely on the cost-plus method previously practised by NASA. In this model, government space agencies spend years developing a detailed plan for a rocket or satellite with precise technical specifications and then commission traditional aerospace companies such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin (formerly Martin Marietta), Northrop Grumman, Airbus or ArianeSpace to build the rocket or satellite according to the plans. The companies are allowed to add a mark-up of eight to ten percent to the costs they incur as profit (‘cost-plus’). The result: the more expensive the project and the longer it takes, the higher the companies' profits. As a result of this business model, there is therefore no reason whatsoever to build a rocket as cheaply as possible – quite the contrary. “As long as Europe sticks to this absurd system, it will continue to fall behind in the battle for space,” fears Dr Heinrich Kreft, who calls for ’much more market economy in space travel!’

The former German ambassador looks back on history: ‘In 1984, then US President Ronald Reagan set the course for market-driven space travel in his country with the Commercial Space Launch Act. In 2015, President Barack Obama paved the way for the commercialisation of space with the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, laying the foundation for a trillion-dollar market. Entrepreneurs such as Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are seizing this historic opportunity and have secured a place in the front row of the space race with SpaceX and Blue Origin, respectively.’

Co-author Andreas Dripke explains how the shift from ‘competition instead of cost-plus’ works: ‘SpaceX also receives government contracts, but at a fixed price, so the company is motivated to keep costs as low as possible. Thanks to the space industry's shift to market economy principles, the cost of a rocket launch in 2025 will be only about one-fifth of what it was 15 years ago.’ He predicts further drastic cost reductions as competition intensifies among the new generation of space companies. Andreas Dripke explains: ’This is comparable to the shift from single-unit production to series production and then to mass production. SpaceX, for example, builds around six to eight first stages per year, around 120 to 140 second stages and around 230 engines, as used in the Falcon 9 rocket. By comparison, in its heyday, the European ArianeGroup built just seven rocket engines per year.’

The situation in Europe is further complicated by the so-called georeturn model. This requires that each European country receive a share of the contracts for new rockets in proportion to its financial contribution. As a result of this political proportionality, more than 600 companies from 13 countries had to be coordinated for the construction of the Ariane 6. ‘This makes no sense, either technically or economically,‘ Dr Heinrich Kreft makes clear. He is convinced that “only if European space travel manages to throw off its political shackles and unleash the forces of the market economy will Europe play a role in the space race.” According to the authors’ calculations, just under 20 companies in Europe are involved in the development or construction of rockets. If you add satellite manufacturers and other space companies, the figure rises to almost 500 companies, around 80 per cent of which are start-ups. ‘This is where the future of European space travel lies,’ said Dr Heinrich Kreft, citing German companies Isar Aerospace, Rocket Factory Augsburg and HyImpulse as examples of those particularly well ahead in the space race.

‘The new EU Commissioner Andrius Kubilius has it in his power to give European space travel a new boost by setting the course for a market economy,’ said Dr Heinrich Kreft, addressing the EU Commissioner for Defence and Space, who has been in office since the end of last year. The former German ambassador clearly rejects the planned European Space Law: ‘Regulating the legal framework for the EU's space activities will not advance Europe one step forward in international competition,’ he warned against setting the wrong course. ‘We need more market and less regulation, not the other way around,’ Dr. Heinrich Kreft is convinced.

The space race is not just about rockets, but just as much about satellites. In the book, the authors highlight the connection: reusable rockets that can carry high payloads reduce the cost of satellite launches. The fact that three-quarters of the approximately 10,000 satellites currently orbiting the Earth belong to SpaceX's Starlink network is largely due to the company's rocket technology lead.

‘It will be difficult for Europe to catch up with Starlink's lead,’ analysed Dr Heinrich Kreft. Although the EU gave the green light for a comparable satellite network (IRIS2) in December 2024, with only 290 satellites, it will only cover the European continent and will not go into operation until 2030 at the earliest. According to the two authors, IRIS2 is not suitable for the latest trend – satellite communication with standard smartphones. ‘With IRIS2, Europe is at least one generation behind the US in satellite communication,’ concluded Andreas Dripke.

The two authors believe that the emerging Kuiper satellite network from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos' space company Blue Origin has a better chance of catching up with Starlink. Since 2024, the company has been producing up to 80 satellites per month in its own manufacturing facility. The commercial launch is planned for the end of 2025. Kuiper will primarily serve as a satellite backbone for broadband data connections for Amazon Web Services (AWS). Andreas Dripke sumed it up: ‘AWS is already by far the global market leader in cloud computing, with a market share of between 30 and 40 percent. With Kuiper, Amazon clearly wants to further expand this market position. The race for fast internet connections from space will probably take place largely between Jeff Bezos’ Kuiper and Elon Musk's Starlink in the future.’

Dr Heinrich Kreft clarified: ‘Global satellite networks go far beyond economic interests and involve fundamental geostrategic security concepts. The spectrum ranges from drone control in war zones such as Ukraine to the provision of a non-terrestrial communications infrastructure in the event of natural disasters on Earth.’ He recalls the words of former US President John F. Kennedy in 1960, ‘Whoever controls space controls the Earth,’ which are ‘more true today than ever before’ (Dr. Heinrich Kreft). ‘With Starlink and, in the future, Kuiper, every future US administration, well beyond Donald Trump's term in office, will have a bargaining chip in its hand whose strategic importance cannot be overestimated,’ added Andreas Dripke.

The book cites the establishment of the US Space Force as evidence of the ‘absolute claim to power over space by the US.’ The members of the space forces, known as Guardians, are to monitor the area between Earth and the Moon, known as cislunar space, without interruption. This is equivalent to an expansion of the range of surveillance by geostationary satellites by a factor of about a thousand. As early as 2021, the Western military alliance NATO made it clear that attacks in space, for example on a country's satellites, would trigger the alliance clause, i.e. be considered an attack on all states belonging to the alliance.

Dr Heinrich Kreft and Andreas Dripke describe in detail in their book how China is the only country to stand up to the US on a large scale in space. In 2024, two projects comparable to Starlink were launched around the globe with 13,000 (Guowang) and 14,000 (Spacesail) satellites respectively. ‘China's space dream, as expressed by President Xi Jinping, is comparable to the USA's claim to power in space,’ said Dr Heinrich Kreft. He adds: ’In terms of implementation, China is behind the USA, but well ahead of Europe.’

After all, there are many market niches in which European space travel could gain a foothold, according to the book. For example, the ESA wants to develop scrap collection in space as a ‘new commercial sector of the space industry.’ Already today, around one million pieces of debris measuring one centimetre or more and around 5,000 scrap objects measuring at least one metre orbit the Earth. In addition to scrap collection, the launch of small rockets to transport micro-satellites is also considered a lucrative niche for European space companies. There are even plans for a spaceport in the North Sea for this literally small-scale business. ‘Compared to the high-flying US plans, however, the European niches appear extremely modest,’ said Dr Heinrich Kreft.