Is it time for a UK space agency?
When I started the Spaceman blog, I wondered how long it would be before we got on to "the big question".
Well, here we are, one week gone and that issue is before us. Should the UK have its own dedicated space agency?
The UK Science Minister Lord Drayson has initiated a 12-week consultation on the matter.
Now, I need to reverse up a bit here because many who come to this blog may not realise that Britain operates without a space agency, a situation unlike all the other major industrialised nations.
Instead, it operates a "partnership" of government departments and research councils (the bodies that distribute UK science funding).
The UK space budget (a modest £250m per annum) is devolved to these partners and they make space policy, helped by a group of specialist civil servants in the British National Space Centre (BNSC).
It's been argued that this arrangement gets best value out of limited funds. It stops, for instance, Britain chasing what might be termed vanity projects (some have put manned spaceflight in this category), and focuses the cash on practical space applications that bring the most benefit to its citizens (for example, satellite communications).
Certainly, the approach has forced users to stretch every pound as far as it will go, and what Britain achieves on the budget it has is frankly astonishing. UK technologies make critical contributions to other nations' space efforts.
But is the current organisation the best structure?
Lord Drayson doesn't think so, and his mind was pretty much made up for him on the morning of Tuesday 25 November last year.
That was the morning when he had to make a five-minute speech in front of all the other national delegations at the European Space Agency's triennial Council Meeting at ministerial level, setting out what monies the UK was prepared to invest in the various Esa programmes.
He wanted to say - and indeed stated - that Britain would invest heavily in GMES, a major Earth-observation project.
But even as he did so, the Treasury note backing up the pledge had still not been despatched from London to The Hague where the meeting was taking place.
In other words, although the British government thought this was a strategically important project in which to participate, the devolved partnership had had difficulty in arriving at a coherent position.
The money came through and industry breathed a huge sigh of relief because under Esa rules, the money you put into projects you get back in work contracts.
There is a good chance now that the UK will get to build important spacecraft components for the GMES endeavour.
All this led Lord Drayson to conclude there might be a better way of conducting affairs.
That there should be differences of opinion on where money is spent is quite natural: what interest does an astronomer looking out into space share with an Earth observation scientist whose spacecraft is pointing in completely the other direction?
The issue is about who takes the decisions that fall across different areas and responsibilities, or placates the conflicting interests. Many would say that in a perfect world, it probably ought to fall to a space agency.
Before we begin this debate, there is another very pertinent question worth asking, and that is: who controls the money?
Unless the agency gets to put its hand on the available cash and decide financially what the priorities are, then critics will say it's all just a bit of space-wash. But put yourself in the shoes of those who would be asked to give up their devolved budgets. You'd squeal, too, wouldn't you?
There will undoubtedly be some out there who will fear that a space agency will marginalise their specialism.
Lord Drayson's view, though, is that the space agency should control the money.
So what do you think? And then - and this is where we could have some fun - what would you call the agency? UKASA, UKSA, GBSA, SAUK, HMSA, BSA...?
You can tweet Lord Drayson directly.
I’m 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~15~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I absolutely believe that we do need a unified space agency with control of it's own budget. Such an agency could be beneficial in advising Parliament on the necessary reforms to aaerospace law to allow for Virgin Galactic to operate in the UK, which Branson has implied is something he wants to happen, and could hopefully give us a bit more clout at the ESA, since every other member state has their own space agency as well.
An agency with the authority to co-ordinate government resources on space and prioritise ESA and private missions of real importance using it's own dedicated budget would be a huge boost to the UK space sector.
As for the name? BSA definitely. Simple, no nonsense and identifiable amongst the hodge-podge of names of other ESA member agencies!
By the way, I'd just like to thank you, Jonathan, for starting this blog, it makes for a great read, and it's always fun to discuss an exciting field like space exploration and research! The techies at the BBC seriously need to add it to the list of blogs, though.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Gordon Brown as well as countless PM's before him continue to make claims on how Britain leads in certain fields, how he intends Britain to lead in others, yet at the end of the day our own nation's development and progression is so thwarted by backwards systems, needlessly difficult bureaucracy and frankly confusing decision making that all of these councils, governing bodies, health and safety authorities, departments conglomerates and schemes are counter productive and result, largely, in the opposite of their intent.
Should we have a Space Agency over the current setup? Yes, without a doubt. Regardless of funding increases it quite clearly simplifies the entire process and should, therefore, simplify the deployment of it's budget. The fact that it would also be a singular governing agency also simplifies it's relationship with the MOD which is a partnership that often tends to go forgotten.
As for the name? I think "BSA" would likely get the most votes because of it's simplicity but I rather like the sound of "BASA" (British Aeronautical Space Agency) or better yet "BASE" (British Agency for Space Exploration) or perhaps "BASED" (British Agency for Space Exploration and Development) ... I could go on :)
Complain about this comment
Why bother with a space agency when we have Crash Gordon who, apparently, had been saving the world ?? I'm sure Ming the Merciless will be terrified of him, especially if Crash Gordon offers to help run his economy !!
Complain about this comment
I don't think we need a *national* space agency which would only duplicate functions at the ESA level. No, instead we need to reform the European public space sector to be better centralised in ESA itself. There is almost no public controversy with regard to federalist approaches to space exploration in Europe; I think we can all agree the salaries of the bureaucrats who would head a national agency would be better spent on actual science and exploration.
We should definitely promote a public sense of ownership with regard ESA, though! Americans immediately identify a NASA craft as their own, but we do a poor job of allowing the public to feel pride in the European equivalents.
Complain about this comment
what Britain achieves on the budget it has is frankly astonishing.
Hm. I can hear finance ministries round the world saying "Look at Britain" while sharpening the knives for their own space agencies.
In Thatcher's day, we'd have called it BritSpace; in Blair's, the People's Rockets. I suggest Her Imperial Majesty's Interplanetary Navy. We can start by claiming Mars for the Crown.
Complain about this comment
If we have a space agency, this implies that the UK is to have its own space programme, or at least make an increased contribution to the ESA's space programme. This is money that will come from the taxpayer. Therefore the National Space Service will become a political football as much as the NHS has been since it was created. This is not conducive to getting a man (a European?) on Mars sooner.
As a keen follower of manned spaceflight, I think that we should put more money into this. However I think that a space agency should perhaps be trying to find how private money can be funnelled into space. I think that some way of incentivising financial institutions to invest in space travel should be found. After all, these people were perfectly happy investing in duff mortgages that left them with nothing, why can't they put their money into something more constructive?
I do believe that space will not be conquered by astronauts, scientists or engineers. It will instead be conquered by accountants and the people that create the financial instruments that will allow the private sector to make space pay directly.
Complain about this comment
I like 'BASA'- British Aeronautical and Space Agency.
The 'aeronautical' bit is important. To get to space, you have to go through the atmosphere. One of the UK's most exciting space projects, for example, is Reaction Engines' Sabre/Skylon programme- a dual air breathing and liquid O2 rocket, and spaceplane design- essentially an aeroplane that can fly into space. You can't even think about 'conquering' space without mastering the atmosphere first.
Complain about this comment
Yes.
Complain about this comment
Please excuse me! I'm from Suffolk.
Is there a food blog at the BBC?
Complain about this comment
Surely it should be the Ministry of Space.
Complain about this comment
Britain ( after Gormless Gordon's management ) can no longer financially afford to be associated with anything labelled with the word " Space ".
Apart from the space required for the building of new houses in new towns to house the homeless.
Complain about this comment
Ignoring the comments that seem to have confused this for Nick Robinson's blog my feeling is yes we should have a space agency, if only to make it clear we are serious about space to our ESA partners. In an ideal world this would be accompanied by the increased funding necessary to join ESA's top table. Yes its a lot of money but not compared to the total Government budget and since British companies and universities are important players in the european space effort this would be investing in a successful industry, and a large part would potentially come back in the shape of ESA contracts awarded to British companies.
Complain about this comment
I was interested to read your suggestions for a name. BSA and BASA seem to be the obvious choices. Of course, before settling on an acronym one ought to check who already occupies the real estate. So whacking BSA into Google throws up the likes of the British Surfing Association and even the British Stammering Association. BASA is used by the British Adhesives and Sealants Association and the British Automatic Sprinkler Association (although I see they are putting an "f" for "fire" in their name now). While this might seem like a bit of a joke, any brand manager will tell you that dangers lie in wait for an acronym that is chosen in haste and without a view to media management. "Britain's space policy comes unstuck" is the sort of mischievous saying that might attach itself to BSA, for example.
With regard to a previous posting of mine, there will be the extra issue for the Beeb of how to render the name upper-case or lower-case? But I think you know the "rule" on that by now.
Complain about this comment
I would suggest the Ministry of Space. This would honour the forlorn aspirations of that generation which expected Britain to lead in space and see a new ministry dedicated in pursuit of that. It was after all ministries acting in concert that gave birth to the original British space programme in the aftermath of WW2 and the uncertain world that demanded national research at the very boundary of our knowledge and ability. It would also be a ministry of the Crown symbolising the UK.
Complain about this comment
I'd go with UKSA... hell I'd go with anything, just give us a space agency! BNSC is simply unworkable on the global platform. Some will say that the consultation is just government delaying things, but for once it seems we've got a science minister that's actually looking at the big picture. So need to be patient...fingers crossed!
Complain about this comment
A uk space agency? Too late, we cancelled our own launch capability in 1971. We remain the only country ever to develop a successful satellite launch system then promptly cancel it! no wonder we are the laughing stock of the space faring nations.
Complain about this comment
"I would suggest the Ministry of Space."
Yes, the Ministry of Space did occur to me as well, but that requires it to have a minister in it who sits on the Cabinet. It should be a Government Agency, but not a Government Department, which the title of ministry would make it into. After all, I'm sure everyone wants it to remain in the hands of scientists who actually know what to do with the money, rather than turn it into a legitimised quango under a cabinet minister. Of course, it will have to answer to a cabinet minister, probably Lord Drayson at the moment, but the minister should not be involved directly in the framework of the agency.
Complain about this comment
Of course UK needs its own space aqency. There's already a European Space Agency but it uses metric measurements and that's just not good enough. A British agency could send rockets along the left hand side of space at speeds in miles per hour and that's something the Europeans couldn't do. By the way how far away is Mars in feet and inches, how many stones does it weigh and how many pounds would it cost to send someone there? That's something the Euros could learn from the Brits.
Complain about this comment
Space and a space agency has more than just scientific implications. Finding questions to ask about the universe is one thing but surely just as important is strategic interest. What can the country gain from space, whether that is raw material, energy, security, scientific knowledge, technological prestige and inward investment etc. A minister is charged with having to take account of all these interests.
Complain about this comment
time the noble Lord returned to whatever planet he came from.
as for a suitable acronym for the "Great" Britain space adventure: why not UKUIOP (UK, Up It's Own Posterior)?
Complain about this comment
I gather from speaking to someone in the know that the original intention was that ESA would be Britain's space agency.
If we set up a British space agency, we need to decide what it will be for. Will it be a copycat Nasa? Nasa and Esa promote science and exploration, but only support commercial aspects of space if they are already in the well-established areas of telecoms, satnav or Earth observation.
In my view, we need a UK Space Exploration and Development Agency, i.e. one for which developing practical applications of space is an intrinsic part of its mission. At present we have the absurd situation where new large-scale applications of space -- space tourism and space solar power -- are being frustrated by lack of official support.
But unless there is a change of heart in government, such that space is seen as an essential part of our future, then it matters little whether we have an Ukseda / BSA / BASA or not.
A few years ago, Britain had a brilliant space policy. Avoid prestige projects, support commercial applications and seek excellence in planetary exploration.
Excellence in planetary science was achieved by abandoning the extremely popular Beagle 2 as soon as possible, before the programme had achieved any scientific results whatsoever (the first lander having been lost during landing). Commercial applications were supported by ignoring UK spaceplane work, which was and remains the key to lowering the cost of access to orbit sufficiently to make new commercial applications of space economically viable.
In other words, the fine intentions were mere window dressing.
By the way, Jonathan, you've just done a news story on UK space innovation which fails to even mention Reaction Engines and Skylon -- which to my mind is the UK's jewel in the crown as far as space innovation goes. As you know, they are also based at the Culham Science Centre, and recently received a modest contract from Esa / BNSC.
Best wishes,
Stephen
23 July 2009
Complain about this comment
A few people have asked in recent posts, "where are we currently with Skylon and Reaction Engines?" Well, I spoke with Alan Bond, MD of RE, during Wednesday's Esa Harwell launch. I'll let you know the details of our chat early next week. We had an interesting discussion about where Skylon might fit into the scheme of things when Europe comes to consider a successor to the Ariane 5.
Complain about this comment
Jonathan:
Yes, I think it is a wonderful idea...For the U.K. to have a space
agency....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
My comment is a very general one:
I think it is disgraceful that the BBC provides so much opportunity for a science editor to promote space exploration when the there exist demanding problems on earth in need of immediate remedies, such as global warming, massive starvation and malnutrition and shortage of fresh water.The enormous expenditure of monies and technological manpower in space projects would be better used in solving some of these terrestrial problems.
One newspaper described the moon landing, 40 years ago, as man's greatest achievement; i would like someone to enumerate the benefits of this achievement to mankind.
In promoting the exploration of Mars the enthusiasts talk of the possible discovery of life (primitive), water and minerals but never point out that these would be "so what" discoveries. Let's face it talk of establishing colonies on Mars or transporting minerals back to earth is so much "pie-in-the- sky".
Complain about this comment
"I think it is disgraceful that the BBC provides so much opportunity for a science editor to promote space exploration when the there exist demanding problems on earth in need of immediate remedies, such as global warming, massive starvation and malnutrition and shortage of fresh water.The enormous expenditure of monies and technological manpower in space projects would be better used in solving some of these terrestrial problems."
Wondered how long it would be before someone brought up this old chestnut, as if space exploration funding were more wasteful than the money spent on bank bailouts, or hunger in the third world were simply about money. Go study the actual problems involved in hunger and global warming, look at the way Zimbabwe has been reduced to ruin by political ineptitude for example, then you can start talking about practical solutions instead of tired old fantasies about the cost of space exploration.
Complain about this comment
I've said this before a couple of times on HYS, and I'll gladly say it again:
Had space technology existed in the 19th century, then your Victorian ancestors would have been at the forefront of space exploration. A British "space agency" would have been inevitable. I hardly think the Victorians would have spent 60 years dithering over such an issue. No doubt it would have pleased them to plant the Union Jack on moon and Mars before anyone else's flag! Such orbs would have been declared parts of the British Empire. We know that's what they would have done, because that's the kind of people they were. If asked why go there, they would have felt that it was the gutsy British thing to do. They were a folk attracted to what was difficult and challenging.
With all due apologies to Jesus I have to believe: The meek inherit neither the earth nor the realms of space.
Complain about this comment
I would say the best arrangement would be to have Europe,US and other member state to joint a international space agency.We would put are money and minds together to develop a space agency that could take on real mission into space like mars.Private industry will eventually take over putting satellite in space.We start now developing the technology for space flight that brings down cost and increases are abilities to take on the impossible and make it an everyday occurrence.We have seen people in space.We have seen people on the moon.Why waste time making a Uk space agency.Good luck on putting a man on the moon or whatever.It sounds great but what have you really accomplished.
Complain about this comment
I don't think all vanity projects are bad, they could be used to inspire young people to do more science at univesity.
Just think we could end up with more engineers in parliment, thats got to be good.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS