Jamie Seidel
Jamie Seidel is a freelance journalist based in Adelaide.
NASA wants to outsource its exploration of Mars, and Elon Musk is buying his stairway to heaven. So what does this mean for Australia’s attempts to revive its space industry?
“Most countries don’t have an Elon Musk. Most haven’t had a John F. Kennedy. So Australia’s not unique in that respect,” says Curtin University Distinguished Professor Steven Tingay, who believes Australia needs to harness the spirit both represent.
Tingay is one of Australia’s most senior astronomy leaders. He is Executive Director of the Curtin Institute of Radio Astronomy (CIRA) at Curtin University; Deputy Executive Director of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research (ICRAR); and has worked at NASA, CSIRO and was Director of the Murchison Widefield Array, the precursor to the Square Kilometre Array.
“We have plans for a footprint on the Moon with a rover,” he says. “But I’d argue the world has been there and done that. So why doesn’t Australia choose something a little more interesting?”
For the first time, NASA has approached industry about formulating private missions to Mars. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory – famous for its Voyager space probes and Mars rovers – can no longer afford to go it alone.
So it has issued a proposal titled “Exploring Mars Together: Commercial Services Studies”. This asks space industry participants to tell it how they would undertake one or more of four proposed missions to Mars.
But why would any commercial enterprise want to? What profit is there to be had?
“It’s not obvious to me that it’s profit that’s motivating someone like Elon Musk to talk about Mars,” says Tingay.
“I do question what the endgame is. Why are we doing this at the end of the day? Maybe we should pay a bit more attention to getting our house in order on Earth before we try and colonise the galaxy.”
But NASA’s experience and Musk’s impulses offer an answer: A hefty dose of excitement leads to benefits far beyond any initial blue-sky investment.
And that lesson is one Australia must learn from, Tingay adds.
The difference between bold and reckless is one of success versus failure, says Tingay.
It’s not obvious to me that it’s profit that’s motivating someone like Elon Musk
Tingay
The tragedy of the Titan submersible – a titanium-carbon fibre composite deep sea submersible controlled by a gaming console – is wide open to criticism for its engineering flaws and procedural shortcuts.
But the spectacular detonations of two prototype SpaceX Starship super-heavy launch vehicles last year haven’t claimed any lives. And it’s demonstrating progress.
“It’s also pretty wild to watch”, says Tingay.
“Before the launch, they ran through a list of the subsystems that had changed since the last attempt. There’s a bit of a chill going up and down the back of my neck as I describe it because they made multiple massive engineering changes in one go. You just don’t do that.”
Best practice is to make one change. Test it. Deploy it incrementally. And only then consider introducing the next change.
“They didn’t. They did it all at once in one prototype,” says Tingay. “And it pretty much worked.”
NASA would never do it, he adds.
Nor would any participant in an Australian government-funded project.
“In Australia, you’d end up in front of a Senate Estimates committee where you really don’t want to look like you’re wasting taxpayer money,” says Tingay. “But somehow it’s different when money – much from US taxpayers – is spent by a private enterprise. I guess he’s got a lot of skin in the game himself.”
Excitement inspires
“SpaceX has brought back the excitement. There’s an element of fun to the “rapid unscheduled disassembly” of a Starship heavy lifter,” says Tingay.
NASA needs a hefty dose of excitement.
Delays and cost overruns with projects like its own massive rocket – the Space Launch System (SLS) – are leading to cutbacks to other programs, such as the Perseverance Mars Rover’s sample return mission.
The idea of commercial enterprise taking up a share of the Artemis Moon mission has worked well so far.
So why not do the same with Mars?
“Harness entrepreneurial drive and private capital, and you’re harnessing excitement,” says Tingay.
He adds that NASA’s move to divest itself of total ownership of the space exploration process while controlling its specifications is a good thing. “It means you can get money into the commercial sector, and that will stimulate innovation. It will stimulate a workforce”.
But something is needed to inject new vigour into space exploration.
Especially in Australia.
Mars: Australian space industry focus
Australia can’t outspend the US Government. Or Elon Musk.
“What we do have are smart people. We do have good ideas. We have unique things to contribute. But I think we’re struggling to find our niche, set priorities and find the right target,” says Tingay.
But we’ve made a good start.
“There are plenty of green shoots in Australia. One is the success of the SpIRIT testbed satellite program – an excellent confluence of academia, industry, and government choosing an interesting and relevant goal and pulling together to achieve it.”
Plenty of other rewarding projects exist for Australia in space, he adds. “Earth Observation for land management and fire management, for example, builds on a strong Australian tradition and has high relevance for our economy and society.”
And cost is no longer the hurdle it used to be.
“You couldn’t contemplate this 20 years ago,” says Tingay. “But these days, the technology, data analytics, and all the tools are much cheaper and much more accessible. They’re in the hands of people like you and I. We can go to an electronics store and grab a kit of stuff, hook it up to our computer – and we too can be prototyping something like thrust vectoring if we want to. It’s amazing.”
The spinoffs will be of enormous benefit. But these won’t just come by themselves. They need motivation. They need inspiration
Tingay
“I suspect the technology, engineering and economic spinoffs that would result from going to Mars would most likely pay for themselves many, many times over. Just like the Apollo mission did,” says Tingay.
The same applies to other megaprojects.
It’s the same with the Square Kilometre Array (SKA), adds Tingay. The innovations needed to process – and compress – the immense amount of data pulled in by its antennae are finding applications worldwide.
“That’s the motivation for going down this path. The spinoffs will be of enormous benefit. But these won’t just come by themselves. They need motivation. They need inspiration”.
He adds that aligning with and participating in other space agency exploration efforts is the realistic path for Australia.
But Australia has an excitement deficit.
“Changing the direction of our economy and society isn’t easy. It isn’t quick. So there’s been a lot of stop-start, especially with changes in government.”
But he points to the Square Kilometre Array. “Both sides of politics backed that concept that had a very high level of ambition, and then continued to support it. It’s been a long road. It has not been an easy road. And the road isn’t finished yet. But it is an example of what Australia can achieve.”
And it doesn’t have to go it alone.
It may need to find business partners alongside its space agency partners.
“It goes back to picking your winners and choosing your priorities. Right off the bat. It’s to declare an ambition – and stick with it until you achieve it”.
