Tag: bankruptcy

Orbex failure occurred partly because UK government withheld promised funding

10:34 am

Prime rocket prototype on launchpad
The prototype of Orbex’s never-launched Prime rocket,
on the launchpad in 2022

It appears the government of the United Kingdom contributed to the bankruptcy and sale of the British rocket startup Orbex in more than one way.

Orbex had hoped to do its first launch from the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland in 2022, but was blocked for four years because of red tape. First, the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority would not issue the spaceport and launch licenses. Second, local opposition delayed approvals as well. Those delays ate into the company’s resources, until it became entirely dependent on grants from the UK government (some through the European Space Agency) to keep it afloat.

Orbex’s problems were further compounded when it became clear in 2024 that the Sutherland spaceport would never get clearance. Orbex then switched to the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands, but this forced more delays because the company had no facilities there. It had already spent a fortune building everything for Sutherland.

A new report today says that it was finally forced to shut down and sell its assets to the French startup The Exploration Company because the UK government had withheld some of that promised funding.

News of the potential sale came just a month after a European Space Agency document confirmed that €112 million of €144 million UK government funding, earmarked for the European Launcher Challenge (ELC) scheme, was still “to be distributed”.

As a result, Orbex received just €34.9 million from the scheme – one-fifth of the €169 million awarded to each of its rivals by European governments.

That shortfall equates to about $160 million, a substantial amount of cash. While it is perfectly reasonable for the UK government to withheld these funds if it thinks the money would be badly spent, none of this government funding would not have been necessary at all if the UK government had simply issued the launch permits in a timely manner, allowing Orbex to launch and earn revenue.

As I noted early, congratulations to the United Kingdom, the place where rocket companies go to die! This is now the second such company killed by UK red tape and government incompetence, the first being Virgin Orbit.

8 comments

Russian official says Soyuz launchpad repair likely delayed

9:48 am

According to the Russian official in charge of ground infrastructure at Roscosmos, the repair of Russia’s only Soyuz launchpad for launching Progress and Soyuz capsules to ISS might not be completed by late March, as Roscosmos has previously promised.

It appears the winter weather at Baikonur is causing issues. In addition:

Barmin explained that the new service platform had to be assembled from components manufactured at different times and sometimes mismatching each other, requiring on-site modifications. For example, the core of the spare platform was manufactured in 1977 in accordance with a different set of blueprints for a planned-but-never-implemented refurbishment of another Soyuz pad, Barmin said. When it was shipped from an arsenal in the city of Tambov to Baikonur, the set of hardware was incomplete, requiring it to be complemented with parts from other sources and with newly manufactured elements.

It also appears the Russian government is going to make scapegoats of the workers who handled the launch platform during the November 2025 launch. It has placed them under criminal investigation. The managers, whom according to one report demanded the launch take place even though these workers could not get the platform properly fastened in place, appear to have been cleared of wrong-doing.

Until this pad is repaired, Russia has no way to launch any manned missions. Nor can it send cargo to ISS.

The decision to scapegoat the workers will further hinder work, as it will certainly damage morale. Such an approach also helps explain why there has been several cases of sabotage of Soyuz and Progress capsules while they are being prepped for launch.

5 comments

NASA delays Artemis-2 wet dress rehearsal countdown due to weather

9:30 am

NASA today announced it is delaying until February 2, 2026 the wet dress rehearsal countdown of its Artemis-2 mission due to weather concerns.

NASA is targeting Monday, Feb. 2, as the tanking day for the upcoming Artemis II wet dress rehearsal at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, as a result of weather. With this change, the first potential opportunity to launch is no earlier than Sunday, Feb. 8.

Over the past several days, engineers have been closely monitoring conditions as cold weather and winds move through Florida. Managers have assessed hardware capabilities against the projected forecast given the rare arctic outbreak affecting the state and decided to change the timeline. Teams and preparations at the launch pad remain ready for the wet dress rehearsal. However, adjusting the timeline for the test will position NASA for success during the rehearsal, as the expected weather this weekend would violate launch conditions.

I had previously said this dress rehearsal countdown would include the astronauts inside Orion. This was incorrect. The astronauts are in quarantine in preparation for the actual mission. Orion will be unmanned during the rehearsal countdown.

6 comments

Artemis-2 proves NASA learned nothing from the Challenger and Columbia failures

9:56 am

NASA: an agency still avoiding reality
NASA: an agency that still avoids reality

Our bankrupt new media continues to fail us. NASA is about to send four astronauts on a ten-day mission around the Moon in a capsule with questionable engineering, and that media continues to ignore the problem. Mainstream news outlets continue to describe the mission in glowing terms, consistently ignoring that questionable engineering. In some cases the stories even make believe NASA has fixed the problem, when it has not.

The most ridiculous example is an article yesterday from an Orlando outlet, Spectrum New 13: “How the lessons learned from the Challenger disaster apply to Artemis rockets”. It focuses entirely on the O-ring problem that destroyed Challenger, noting repeatedly that NASA has fixed this issue in its SLS rocket.

Of course it has. That’s the last war, long over. Engineers fixed this issue almost four decades ago. The article however dismisses entirely the new engineering concern of today, Orion’s heat shield, which did not work as expected during its own test flight in space in 2022. It covers this issue with this single two-sentence paragraph:

However, during re-entry, it broke up into chunks instead of burning away. This issue pushed back the Artemis II and III missions, but NASA has stated it has resolved the problem.

NASA however has not resolved the problem. It is using the same heat shield now on this manned mission, and really has no reason to assume it will work any better, even if the agency has changed the re-entry flight path in an effort to mitigate the heat shield’s questionable design.

You see, NASA with Artemis-2 is doing the exact same thing it did prior to both the Challenger and Columbia accidents. » Read more

40 comments

NASA targeting January 31, 2026 for Artemis-2 dress rehearsal countdown

8:25 am

The flight plan for the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon
The flight plan for the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon. Click for original.

NASA engineers are now targeting January 31, 2026 for the manned dress rehearsal countdown of the Artemis-2 SLS rocket and Orion capsule.

The upcoming wet dress rehearsal is a prelaunch test to fuel the rocket. During the rehearsal, teams demonstrate the ability to load more than 700,000 gallons of cryogenic propellants into the rocket, conduct a launch countdown, and practice safely removing propellant from the rocket without astronauts inside the spacecraft.

During several “runs,” the wet dress rehearsal will test the launch team’s ability to hold, resume, and recycle to several different times in the final 10 minutes of the countdown, known as terminal count. The rehearsal will count down to a simulated launch at 9 p.m. EST, but could run to approximately 1 a.m. if needed.

This rehearsal will include the four-person crew inside the Orion capsule, which will once launched take them in a wide ten-day Earth orbit that will swing them past the Moon and then back to Earth. The crew entered quarantine at the end of last week to reduce the chance they will catch any illnesses prior to launch.

This mission carries great risk, as the capsule’s life support system has never been used in space before, while the viability of its heat shield remains questionable.

5 comments

“AI isn’t getting smarter. We are getting dumber.”

2:20 pm

Link here. The point the op-ed makes is fundamental: AI cannot add anything to the information it has. It might be able to compile that information well, but its analysis is always going to be limited because it has no true creative spirit. It is merely a software program, albeit a very sophisticated one.

This quote from the essay will give you the sense:

Maybe you just use AI to clarify your thoughts. Turn the mottle of ideas in your head into coherent communicable paragraphs. It’s OK, you say, because you’re reviewing the results, and often editing the output. You’re ending up with exactly what you want to say, just in a form and style that’s better than any way you could have put it yourself.

But is what you end up with really your thoughts? And what if everyone started doing that?

Stripping the novelty and personality out of all communication; turning every one of our interactions into homogeneous robotic engagements? Every birthday greeting becomes akin to a printed hallmark card. Every eulogy turns into a stamp-card sentiment. Every email follows the auto-response template suggested by the browser.

We do this long enough and eventually we begin to lose the ability to communicate our inner thoughts to others. Our minds start to think in terms of LLM prompts. All I need is the gist of what I want to say, and the system fills in the blanks. [emphasis in original]

Comments are of course welcome. But please read the full essay before doing so.

29 comments

Isar postpones 2nd Spectrum rocket launch attempt, no new date set

10:24 am

Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe
Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe

The German rocket startup Isar Aerospace yesterday canceled its second attempt to launch its Spectrum rocket from Norway’s Andoya spaceport, citing an issue with a “pressurization valve”.

We are standing down from today’s launch attempt to address an issue with a pressurization valve. The teams are currently assessing the next possible launch opportunities and a new target date will be announced shortly.

The update also stated the company is moving to a “new launch window” without noting the dates of that window. This statement however suggests that no new launch attempt will occur for at least a month. And considering it is winter at Andoya in the high north, it is quite possible the launch will be delayed until March.

Meanwhile, Andoya continues to lead the race to become the first spaceport in Europe to achieve an orbital launch. Sweden’s Estrange spaceport is limited because of its interior location. The two sea platforms proposed for the North Sea are not yet ready.

And the United Kingdom has effectively eliminated itself from the competition. Its bureaucracy and Byzantine regulations have now put two rocket companies out of business, and that same red tape (combined with location opposition) has essentially shut down the Sutherland spaceport. I doubt there are any rocket companies willing to deal with the UK at this point.

0 comments

Orbex’s Danish subsidiary to file for bankruptcy

8:30 am

In what appears to confirm the story yesterday that the rocket startup Orbex was about to be bought out by the French startup The Exploration Company — thus likely ending operations in Great Britain — there was a second follow-up story later in the day that claimed Orbex’s Danish subsidiary is about to file for bankruptcy.

On 20 January, more than 15 Orbital Express Launch ApS employees announced at around the same time on LinkedIn that they were looking for work. Since then, European Spaceflight has received confirmation from three independent sources, who wished to remain anonymous, that the subsidiary has dismissed its entire workforce, with the company expected to officially file for bankruptcy on 22 January.

The article notes that this subsidiary had been losing millions in the past two years, and was entirely reliant on cash from its parent company. Unfortunately, Orbex has had no incoming revenue itself, because red tape in the United Kingdom had prevented it from launching for the past four years.

If true, this story confirms that Orbex’s negotiations with The Exploration Company is likely an attempt to make as much money from its remaining assets as possible before closing down.

Congratulations to the United Kingdom, the land where rocket companies go to die!

2 comments

French startup The Exploration Company negotiating purchase of UK rocket startup Orbex

8:39 am

Prime rocket prototype on launchpad
The prototype of Orbex’s never-launched Prime rocket,
on the launchpad in 2022

In what appears to be a direct consequence of British red tape blocking Orbex from launching in the past four years, it is now in negotiations to sell its assets to the French startup The Exploration Company.

On 21 January, Orbex published a brief press release stating that a letter of intent had been signed and that negotiations had begun. The company added that all details about the transaction remain confidential at this stage. A statement from Orbex CEO Phil Chambers suggests that the company’s financial position factored into its decision to pursue a buyer. “Our Series D fundraising could have led us in many directions,” said Chambers. “We believe this opportunity plays to the strengths of both businesses, and we look forward to sharing more when the time is right.”

Let me translate: In 2022 Orbex had set up a factory close to the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland, had signed a 50 year lease with that facility to launch its Prime rocket there, had built a launch platform and tested a prototype of the rocket, and was poised to do its first launch. All it needed was license approvals from the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

And then it waited, and waited, and waited, and waited. By 2024 it gave up on Sutherland, because the authorities (local and national) kept rejecting its spaceport license for environmental and political reasons. It switched its launch site to the SaxaVord spaceport on the Shetland Islands, pushing back that first launch to 2026. Along the way the UK gave it a $25 million grant, likely to keep the company above water because the UK was blocking its ability to launch.

All for naught. It is very clear Orbex has run out of cash waiting, and is now looking to salvage its work by selling everything to the French company, which so far has focused on building a cargo capsule to supply the upcoming commercial space stations.

If the sale goes through, do not be surprised if Orbex’s assets exit the UK entirely. And at that point, the CAA’s red tape can be given credit for destroying a second rocket company, following Virgin Orbit.

5 comments

JAXA releases preliminary results of investigation into December 2025 H3 rocket launch failure

8:01 am

Japan's space agency JAXA

JAXA yesterday released the preliminary results of its investigation into upper stage failure during the December 2025 launch of its H3 rocket.

Previously the agency had indicated it believed the cause was linked to the separation of the rocket’s payload fairings. This new report changes that conclusion:

After liftoff, the No. 8 H3 rocket sustained damage to the section where the Michibiki No. 5 positioning satellite was mounted, when the satellite cover, called fairing, was separated.

In addition, the fuel tubing of the rocket’s second-stage engine was damaged, presumably causing combustion to stop earlier than planned, JAXA said in a progress report on its investigation into the failure at a meeting of a subgroup of a science ministry panel.

As the section was damaged, the satellite was no longer attached to the second stage of the rocket. The satellite fell off when the first stage separated.

In other words, as the fairings released, the satellite apparently deployed, damaging the fuel feed to the upper stage engine. It is as yet unclear whether the deployment system worked as intended, but did so prematurely, or if it failed entirely, allowing the satellite to fall away once the fairings separated.

At the moment Japan has no launch capability. Both of JAXA’s rockets, the H3 and the Epsilon-S are grounded due to launch failures. Meanwhile, the country has only recently begun to develop private launch companies, none of which are ready to launch.

1 comment

Update on NASA’s damaged Goldstone antenna

8:25 am

According to a scientists at JPL, the Goldstone antenna — one third of NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) that scientists and NASA use to communicate with any interplanetary mission — will not resume operations until May of 2026.

The antenna has been out of service since September 2025 when it was damaged badly by workers who rotated the antenna past its correct limits, causing damage to piping and cables.

DSS-14 is officially scheduled to resume operations May 1, Benner said. “Unofficially, this might change. We’re hearing a variety of things,” he added, without specifying whether the return could be earlier or later. He noted that DSS-14 had already been scheduled to go offline in August 2026 for extended maintenance expected to last until October 2028, replacing equipment that in some cases is 40 to 50 years old.

In other words, this outage essentially took the antenna out of service a year early.

The outage can be covered by NASA’s other two DSN antennas in Spain and Australia, but it also limits the whole network’s capabilities. When Artemis-2 launches in the next month or so this limitation will significantly reduce communications with NASA’s other planetary missions at Mars and elsewhere during that mission’s 10-day flight around the Moon.

We still do not know the cause of the over-rotation, which at present does appear to have been the result of human carelessness. And NASA’s lack of transparency in this matter reinforces that speculation.

9 comments

The recent computer hack of the European Space Agency was bigger than it admitted

9:00 am

After the European Space Agency (ESA) claimed in December that a computer hack that stole about 200 gigabytes of data was “limited,” it turns out that the agency had been hacked more than once preveious this past fall, and that the data stolen was far larger and apparently not limited at all.

The European Space Agency on Wednesday confirmed yet another massive security breach, and told The Register that the data thieves responsible will be subject to a criminal investigation. And this could be a biggie.

Earlier in the week, Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters told us that they gained initial access to ESA’s servers back in September by exploiting a public CVE, and stole 500 GB of very sensitive data. This, we’re told, includes operational procedures, spacecraft and mission details, subsystems documentation, and proprietary contractor data from ESA partners including SpaceX, Airbus Group, and Thales Alenia Space, among others.

And, according to the crims, the security hole remains open, giving them continued access to the space agency’s live systems.

“ESA is in the process of informing the judicial authorities having jurisdiction over this cyber incident to initiate a criminal inquiry,” an ESA spokesperson said via email. The agency declined to answer The Register’s specific questions about the intruders’ claims.

The article at the link outlines a slew of other hacks at ESA over the last decade. The agency seems unable to clean up its act.

2 comments

Because Boeing did nothing to replace a defective part, an airplane crashed killing fifteen

5:10 pm

MD-11 crash from November 2025
Click for NTSB report.

Despite previously identifying stress fractures in a part that held the engines to the wing on three different MD-11 airplanes, Boeing did nothing to replace the part, and so fifteen people died when the engine fell off a UPS cargo plane at take-off in November 2025.

The sequence of images to the right, which I have annotated to show the engine breaking free from the wing, comes from the NTSB preliminary investigation report [pdf]. From the article at the link above:

In an update to its ongoing investigation into the crash of UPS Flight 2976, the National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] said its team found fatigue cracking and overstress failure across much of the bearing race inside the area that attached the plane’s left engine to its wing. NTSB investigators then went back into Boeing service data and confirmed the design of the bearing assembly was consistent with the original design of that part.

[A] Boeing Service Letter dated Feb. 7, 2011 [and found by the NTSB], told operators the company was aware of four previous bearing race failures on three different airplanes. Boeing had seen the fractures of the bearing race, with the parts splitting in two and moving out of place. However, Boeing told operators its review of the bearing failure “would not result in a safety of flight condition.”

Boeing said further regular inspection of MD-11 airplanes would include a look at this bearing assembly, something scheduled for 60-month service intervals. And while Boeing used that service letter to discuss a new bearing assembly configuration, the installation of the original parts “was not prohibited.”

The plane itself had been built by McDonnell-Douglas, prior to its merger with Boeing. Nonetheless, Boeing engineers and managers were aware of this issue and did nothing to inform the owners of this plane so they could take action. In fact, Boeing apparently continued to ship out the original parts to airlines as replacement spares.

This is another example of a serious quality control problem at Boeing, where engineers no longer view serious engineering failures as serious engineering failures.

22 comments

Isaacman makes it official: Artemis-2 will fly manned around the Moon, despite Orion’s heat shield concerns

8:01 am

Orion's damage heat shield
Damage to Orion heat shield caused during re-entry in 2022,
including “cavities resulting from the loss of large chunks”

In a tweet yesterday afternoon, NASA administration Isaacman essentially endorsed the decision of the NASA managers and engineers in its Artemis program who decided they could live with the engineering issues of Orion’s heat shield (as shown in the image to the right) and fly the upcoming Artemis-2 mission around the Moon carrying four astronauts with that same heat shield design.

Isaacman’s statement however suggests to me that he is not looking at this issue as closely as he should.

Human spaceflight will always involve uncertainty. NASA’s standard engineering process is to identify it early, bound the risk through rigorous analysis and testing, and apply operational mitigations that preserve margin and protect the crew. That process works best when concerns are raised early and debated transparently.

I appreciate the willingness of participants to engage on this subject, including former NASA astronaut Danny Olivas, whose perspective reflects how serious technical questions can be addressed through data, analysis, testing, and decisions grounded in the best engineering judgment available. [emphasis mine]

The highlighted sentence is fundamentally incorrect. » Read more

12 comments

Isaacman okays flying Artemis-2 manned, despite heat shield questions

1:53 pm

According to an article posted today at Ars Technica, after a thorough review NASA administrator Jared Isaacman has decided to allow the Artemis-2 mission — set to launch sometime before April and slingshot around the Moon — to fly manned with four astronauts despite the serious questions that still exist about its heat shield.

The review involved a long meeting at NASA with NASA engineers, several outside but very qualified critics, as well as two reporters (for transparency).

Convened in a ninth-floor conference room at NASA Headquarters known as the Program Review Center, the meeting lasted for more than three hours. Isaacman attended much of it, though he stepped out from time to time to handle an ongoing crisis involving an unwell astronaut on orbit. He was flanked by the agency’s associate administrator, Amit Kshatriya; the agency’s chief of staff, Jackie Jester; and Lori Glaze, the acting associate administrator for NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate. The heat shield experts joined virtually from Houston, along with Orion Program Manager Howard Hu.

Isaacman made it clear at the outset that, after reviewing the data and discussing the matter with NASA engineers, he accepted the agency’s decision to fly Artemis II as planned. The team had his full confidence, and he hoped that by making the same experts available to Camarda and Olivas, it would ease some of their concerns.

My readers know that I have been strongly opposed to flying Artemis-2 manned, an opposition I expressed in an op-ed at PJMedia only yesterday. However, after reading this Ars Technica report, my fears are allayed somewhat by this quote:
» Read more

21 comments

Scientists: Methane from spacecraft landing on the Moon could “obscure” evidence of life

12:31 pm

Chicken Little rules!
Chicken Little rules!

Chicken Little stupidity now abounds everywhere! Scientists using computer models say the methane fuel that many lunar landers will use can spread quickly across the entire Moon and then “obscure” any evidence of life that might be found there.

Sinibaldi and Francisca Paiva, a physicist at Instituto Superior Técnico and lead author of the study, built a computer model to simulate how that contamination might play out, using the European Space Agency’s Argonaut mission as a case study. The simulations focused on how methane, the main organic compound released during combustion of Argonaut propellants, might spread across the lunar surface during a landing at the moon’s South Pole. While previous studies had investigated how water molecules might move on the moon, none had done so for organic molecules like methane. The new model also accounted for how factors like solar wind and UV radiation would impact the methane’s behavior.

…The model showed exhaust methane reaching the North Pole in under two lunar days. Within seven lunar days (almost 7 months on Earth), more than half of the total exhaust methane had been “cold trapped” at the frigid poles — 42% at the South Pole and 12% at the North.

Though this result is of interest, as it suggests such exhaust can spread quickly on a low-gravity planet with no atmosphere, these scientists then make themselves look like fools by claiming this quick spread will contaminate the Moon, thus hindering the search for evidence of life there, and thus require new “planetary protection” measures. From their paper’s conclusion:

As lunar exploration unfolds, prioritizing effective and informed planetary protection measures will be key for safeguarding the Moon’s pristine scientific value and paving the way for a sustainable and responsible lunar exploration.

The level of foolishness in these claims is hard to measure. The Moon is the least likely place to search for evidence of past life. And regardless, limiting the use of methane fuel but allowing other exploration is not going to solve their problem. The mere presence of human activity is going to “contaminate” the Moon’s “pristine” environment. To make believe it is possible to impose some rules to prevent it is idiocy.

This whole study and its focus on “planetary protection” is really aimed at protecting the turf of these scientists. If others are allowed to explore the planets with different goals (profit or settlement instead of pure scientific research), their playground will be spoiled. Thus, they write these reports designed to give them ammunition for convincing governments to impose regulations in their favor. And they know they have allies in the UN for this purpose.

They also know they have willing allies in the propaganda press. Be prepared for numerous mainstream stories in the next day or so, touting this study with no skepticism.

16 comments

A UK law professor and news outlet prove the UK is not the place to launch rockets

9:27 am

Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe
Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe

If I had any remaining hopes that the United Kingdom might finally begin to reform its Byzantine space regulations that bankrupted one rocket company and has blocked any launches from its proposed spaceports for almost a decade — allowing other spaceports in Europe to attract rocket companies and leap ahead — those hopes vanished in reading an article in the Shetland Times today, in which a professor specializing in UK space law described its red tape as “very good,” drawing “on best practice from other industries and jurisdictions.”

Alexander Simmonds of the University of Dundee says a balance should be struck to avoid launch operators being put off by strict regulatory requirements. The lecturer in space law and writer behind The Space Legislation of the United Kingdom says UK regulation of the space industry is “very good” and draws on best practice from other industries and jurisdictions.

Licences are in place for SaxaVord to host the first vertical satelite launch in 2026, and Dr Simmonds says operators have taken responsibilities “very seriously”. But he fears future operators could look elsewhere if compliance becomes too much of a problem and more cost-effective alternatives are available.

“My own view is we’re in a very good place at the moment, as regards to regulation,” Dr Simmonds told The Shetland Times. “I think that the legilsators have been cautious with this and have been very entitled to be, given the nature of what we are dealing with.”

Both this so-called expert and the journalist interviewing him appear entirely ignorant about the history of past decade. While red tape in the UK has blocked or seriously delayed launches, rocket startups have “looked elsewhere,” signing deals and launching from Norway’s long established Andoya spaceport that has now gone commercial with enthusiastic government support. At the same time, new spaceport projects have begun at three other locations, all of which appear to also have support from their local governments in Sweden and Germany. While the UK government has choked off business, the governments at these other spaceports have moved aggressively to ease regulation.

The cluelessness of both Simmonds and the Shetland Times reporter indicates there is absolutely no urgency in the UK to fix things, and in fact it appears they aren’t even aware their emperor is wearing no clothes.

9 comments

European Space Agency hacked

8:43 am

It appears some of the European Space Agency’s (ESA) servers have been hacked, with some of its internal data placed for sale on the web.

On 26 December, reports began to emerge on X claiming that ESA had suffered a significant data breach, with a hacker using the alias “888” offering more than 200 gigabytes of data for sale. According to the hacker’s listing, the allegedly compromised data included source code for proprietary software, sensitive project documentation, API tokens, and hardcoded credentials.

ESA has since issued a statement claiming the data breach was limited, but according to information posted on X, the breach included “Confidential internal documents (Airbus Defence & Space, Thales Alenia Space)” and “sensitive technical information related to space programs.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if China is bidding for this information right now. Then again, Europe’s space effort is so unimpressive compared to China that China might not see the information worth much.

14 comments

SpaceX pulls Starlink service from Papua New Guinea

9:23 am

SpaceX has now withdrawn the Starlink services it informally had provided customers in Papua New Guinea after a volcano eruption in 2021 due to regulatory demands by the government there.

It’s been two and a half years since a volcano eruption tore apart Tonga’s underwater internet cables, and a sympathetic Kiwi MP pleaded to Elon Musk for help on their behalf. Musk, CEO of SpaceX, would answer Shane Reti’s call, offering his Starlink technology in aid of their reconnection to the world.

Starlink’s Pacific debut came with limited trials in American-owned Guam and the Northern Marianas, followed by the Cooks in April 2021. But for the wider Pacific community, its deployment in Tonga captured hearts and minds. The service, provided by a special satellite network, has been hailed as “transformational” in numerous island nations, broadening internet coverage to remote areas, some for the first time.

That is, unless, you’re in Papua New Guinea. Starlink’s attempts to gain licensing in PNG have been tied up since December 2023, with the Ombudsman Commission challenging the government over Starlink’s reliability. The Commission blocked licensing efforts in February 2024, and have argued that existing regulations may not be adequate to manage potential risks to public interest and safety.

In-fighting within Papua New Guinea’s government continues to block Starlink license approval, so it appears SpaceX has decided the best way to get a positive decision is to walk away, hoping the ensuing pressure from its customers might force action from the government.

9 comments

ESA cancels call for commercial cargo services to ISS

9:14 am

European Space Agency logo

In what might be a larger decision by the European Space Agency (ESA) to pull back from support to ISS, the agency has cancelled a call for proposals that asked private commercial startups to provide cargo to ISS.

On 3 October, ESA published a call for proposals under its CSOC Cargo Commercially Procured Offset (3CPO) initiative, seeking commercial transport services to the ISS to deliver between 4,900 and 5,000 kilograms of pressurised cargo to the orbiting laboratory. According to the call, the mission was intended to act as a “strategic offset’ to secure flight opportunities for ESA astronauts. It did, however, stipulate that the prospective procurement would only proceed if member states agreed to fund the initiative at the agency’s Ministerial Council meeting on 26 and 27 November 2025.

Following the late November meeting, ESA announced that member states had “agreed to implement short-term actions to guarantee European astronauts’ access to the International Space Station until its planned end of exploitation in 2030.” While this initially appeared to signal a favourable decision on the 3CPO initiative, the agency formally cancelled the call on 17 December, citing “the implementation of programmatic adjustments.”

What makes me speculate that this decision is part of a larger strategy to pull back from ISS is based on other statements by ESA officials cited in the article. It appears ESA is also delaying the mission of one astronaut to ISS that had originally been planned for ’26, possibly by as much as two years.

Though that official said ESA had fully funded its commitments to ISS at its recently concluded ministerial council meetings, both of the above decisions suggest it is shifting its support elsewhere. It could very well be that ESA is beginning the process of transferring its support from ISS to the new commercial private stations, most especially Starlab, which it already has signed a partnership agreement. By delaying funding to ISS, it reserves that money for later use at the new stations.

1 comment
1 2 3 4 5 6 … 144