Focus Areas

The categorisation of the focus areas has been defined specifically for the needs of this survey, based on the outcomes from the capabilities definition workshops we ran in July. We’ve selected 10 focus areas from a wider pool.

The objective is to get a high-level sense check of opinions to see if there is agreement on what the UK community could focus on.

We’re not looking to split-hairs over terminology and we know there are limitations with this list. Please use Q11 for clarification and anything you’d like to add.

  • Terrestrial test facilities, with the extra capabilities that ISAM requires such close-proximity simulation.

  • In-Orbit Robotic Manipulation.

    This is a broad capability in its own right, though we recognise it has overlap with other categories.

  • Particularly, in-orbit fluidic management.

    The intent of this focus area is to cover what is needed for refuelling that does not specifically come under the other categories.

  • Manufacturing, testing or research and development that relies on the space environment (not just microgravity).

  • This is a broad category, as it considers the evolution of space into the future, reflecting the scale up of logistics and infrastructure in-orbit.

    It includes (but is not limited to)

    • large scale-assembly and maintenance

    • frequent inter-orbit transportation and resupply,

    • in-orbit utilities (providing power, comms, PNT to other satellites in orbit),

    • recycling facilities

  • Considering the modifications needed on satellites platforms and subsystems, such as docking plates, refuelling ports, fiducial markers, grasping points, access panels, material choices, interfaces.

    Considers the technical challenges of interoperability and standardisation

Rendezvous, Close Proximity Operations and Docking

  • Including On-Board Software & Autonomy, Algorithms and Sensors

  • Actuators and hardware, such as thrusters and reaction wheels.

    We only consider subsystems with performance requirements beyond what is required of standard space missions, such as high precision, capacity and failure tolerance.

  • Two spacecraft joining together cooperatively. This could be prepared (e.g via a docking plate) or unprepared (e.g via a launch adapter ring).

    Life Extension and Refuelling are example applications enabled by this.

  • This refers to the capture of a usually unprepared satellite. Could be cooperative or uncooperative.

    The national Active Debris Removal mission is an example application enabled by this.

As it is a clear enabler of ISAM, we have attempted to split out the different capabilities that make up rendezvous, close proximity operations and docking. We recognise that definitions vary between organisations and that the capabilities are intertwined. We want to explore if there are differences between these, particularly if docking and capture require identical or entirely difference servicer designs.