On 21 April 2022, representatives of companies and organizations involved in space exploration, practitioners and researchers, met at a conference organized by Kozminski University in partnership with the Polish Space Agency and the Industrial Development Agency to discuss the widely understood risks in the space sector.
I had the opportunity to take part in a panel focusing on practical experience of international cooperation in the space sector. The panel was led by Kinga Gruszecka, an expert in the Department of Research and Innovation of POLSA, and participated by representatives of Polish companies: Joanna Baksalary (ITTI), Maciej Krzyżanowski (CloudFerro), and a representative of the European Union Space Programme Agency (EUSPA) Stefan Schneider.
TTMS has experience in implementing projects for a wide range of sectors – medical, industrial, energy, but also the defence and space sector, which is now extremely important. We hear a lot on it right now. Do you think our defense sector was prepared for the world we live right now in?
I believe not a single sector was prepared for both the current conflict in Ukraine and the COVID pandemic. Because COVID19 also has an impact on what we are seeing now. Maybe the IT sector has been able to quickly adapt to new realities. It was easier for entrepreneurs to send their employees to work remotely than workers in the manufacturing industry.
However, focusing on your question about the defense industry, we need to focus on the short term, medium-term goals or challenges posed by the conflict in Ukraine and expansionist Russian policy, and the long term challenge presented by China.
We need to be straightforward and remember that the conflict in Ukraine did not start a few weeks ago. This conflict has already been going on for over 8 years. Therefore, since then, many countries, especially in our region, but not only, have decided to increase their defense spending and procurement of military equipment.
Nevertheless, if we look at the European or more transatlantic defense industry base we actually do not see a rapid increase in production capacity in recent years. Despite the various so-called Proxy Wars going on in Africa or the Middle East, tensions in East South Asia, and production processes were strongly correlated with the needs of these conflicts and kept on a low or medium scale. Because Western states have not fought state actors with advanced arms, or even more simply were only fighting against terrorist groups.
Let’s not forget that last year the West withdrew its forces from Afghanistan, where tanks, anti-tank weapons, and anti-aircraft systems were not used in combat. This was not the full-scale warfare that we are witnessing in Ukraine. Where in Ukraine we see a full-scale conflict involving tens of thousands of troops, using the full spectrum of land and air weapons, and limited maritime assets.
That’s why we can now say that the Ukrainian defense industry has been preparing for this moment for 8 years and has been executing orders at a more wartime-like accelerated pace. Because their state was at war. So generally speaking, those who were supposed to be prepared were prepared.
The problem of preparing defense industry production capacity did not come out of anywhere. For several years, we have had a strong debate in the United States and Europe about what armament programs should be done together to avoid duplication and waste of resources and money. We constantly discuss how we can work together to deliver more complex defense programs faster. What defense capabilities will actually allow us to gain an advantage on the future battlefield.
This is why the European Defence Fund was established in the European Union to increase cooperation between defence industries (7.95 bln EUR). That’s why there are the Smart Defence Initiative, the Connected Forces Initiative and the NATO Innovation Fund and the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA) (1 bln EUR), which are all aimed at strengthening the defence capabilities of the Alliance and delivering breakthrough defence technologies to our soldiers.
The crisis in Ukraine imposed new terms on all players operating in the defense market, but also in aerospace. Let’s remember that the defense industry (especially in North America and European) is still rebuilding its capabilities after successive phases of a pandemic. The most impacted segments of the defense industrial base have been shipbuilding, military aviation, and small space launch. In its aftermath, for example, supply chains were broken, and some plants were forced to reduce production or even shut down. Some plants required 2-3 months to resume production at that time. The entire aerospace sector has been strained due to a decline in orders for new aircraft because of restrictions on people’s movement. All of this has affected and continues to affect our industry. We have manufacturing and production challenges, counterfeit parts and components (not up to the demanding standards of military specifications), and limited or restricted access to key input materials (such as rare earth metals). You also have problems with a cash conversion cycle — how long it took for firms to buy parts and turn them into a system and sell it — rose from 56 days in 2019 to 128 days in 2020.
Additionally, the intense Sino-American competitions make the whole situation more difficult. China is in possession of 80% of rare earth minerals. In February, China limited the export of rare earth minerals that are crucial for the manufacture of American F-35 fighter jets and other sophisticated weaponry. If you don’t know each F-35 required 417kg of rare-earth materials when the F35 weighs 14700 kg. It’s as low as 3%, or it’s 3%, that provides the F-35 with air dominance.
So to recap a bit – our budgets, appropriations, requirements, and acquisition systems are stuck in a peacetime mode. We have to change this and use more agile procurement and project models. But, we need to remember not every program can be implemented this way. Software, small arms – YES, but not the development of a new hypersonic missile or tank.
Here I must mention our TTMS experience working for the NATO Innovation Hub. This is a special structure at the NATO Allied Command for Transformation in the US, where experts collaborate and design solutions meeting NATO Allies’ needs and requirements. We work on a Minimum Valuable Products which are developed in collaboration with users/sponsors to be delivered to where needed for action. What characterizes our work within the Innovation Hub? The agility. Our engineers are delivering to the end users products developed following the best industry Agile DevSecOps methods with a strong focus on rapid, iterative delivery that meets customers’ requirements.
Last, but most important. The main current problem for the defence industry and aerospace is a lack of engineers and workers. It’s not just a matter of having the necessary skills and qualifications, but also a high level of entry. Obviously, there is still a need for people at the junior level, but the greater need is at the senior level. There is a growing generational gap in the defense sector. Over 60% of the people employed in the defense sector are over 40! When you look at who was behind the Apollo program at the beginning of the Cold War it was engineers who were in their 20s or 30s. In the U.S., even before the pandemic, more than 50,000 employees were needed in the aviation sector alone. There is a growing demand for people with security clearance. Security clearance requires time and willingness to tell a little more about yourself to the authorities responsible for the security of our countries. This problem exists in the USA and Europe. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to encourage those listening to us to partner with us and encourage you to work in this interesting sector.
There is not a strong connection between space sector and defense in Poland. Do you think there is anything we can do about it? Or maybe we shouldn’t do anything and strong ties are not needed? Is there any experience from defense sector that space sector companies may use?
I think the issue of bridging/connection between the space sector and the defense sector is very complicated. The Polish defense industry, especially the state-owned one, operates on different principles than the space industry or private defense sector entities. So far, the industry has shown limited interest in involvement in space activities. A few companies belonging to the PGZ, e.g. PCO, WZŁ or Military University of Technology have attempted to implement projects for the European Space Agency. Because industry did not have the necessary competencies to pursue space projects, or if it did, they were busy pursuing other defense projects or programs. It all depends on the goals set for PGZ by the Armed Forces. PGZ does not have unlimited production or research capabilities to participate in every project. Now they must surely focus on the production of modern armaments and their modernization.
On the other hand, the aforementioned companies are cooperating with the space sector and vice versa. The Institute of Aviation, for example, performs work for both the ESA and, among others, the Polish Armed Forces.
We also have to remember that many defense projects supervised by the Ministry of Defense related to launchers and within SSA/SST are implemented by civil entities from the space sector. I see it as a plus that SME’s have a chance to develop. Let’s remember that the Ministry of Defense as well as the military itself is historically a very hierarchical organization, working slowly and more by waterfall methodology. (which is where the Prince2 methodology comes from). These companies should be like Special Forces, operating with agility and efficiency.
Finishing, it would be wrong not to mention the needs of the military itself. Our military units and soldiers do not rely heavily on „space” capabilities or space-enablers. Of course, we use imagery intelligence that we currently get from Italian Cosmo-Skymed satellites and soon we’ll get our own two satellites., we use satellite communication terminals when we are going for an expeditionary mission. Of course, pilots and sailors establish communications via Link 16 sometimes using satellites or they are using satellites to determine their location.
The main question is whether all these things should not be used in Polish command systems? Which we don’t have on the operational level? Or are not advanced enough to use space data? Also, we should ask ourselves if we have a doctrine of „space uses” in the military? Is there the same NATO doctrine? There are a number of questions that remain unanswered. We know that the Ministry of Defense is working on a space strategy for the Ministry of Defense. But is not the doctrine more important because it makes space capabilities more practically usable? We are buying real modern equipment that possibly will utilize the space-enabling – like F35, HIMARs, Miecznik frigates.
TTMS was leading a project on supporting PA/QA activities in Polish space SME. Can you tell us a bit more about this project and share any thoughts/evaluation points on how PA/QA and risk management concerning this area look like in companies you supported?
TTMS continues to implement a PA/QA and project management support program. Here we finally come to the real topic of the conference, what is risk engineering in the space sector?
You will ask what product assurance and quality assurance is? According to Murphy’s Law „Anything that can go wrong will go wrong”. In the space sector, which is worth $345 billion a year, this pessimistic statement has no place (or very little). Everyone has in front of their very eyes the tragedy of the Columbia shuttle in 2003. Seven astronauts died as a result of the vehicle’s disintegration on re-entering the atmosphere. This tragedy has increased the demand for assuring the safety of astronauts, but also of other systems and devices launched into space. In order to avoid mission failure, a separate team of engineers working on space projects is responsible for failure-proofing missions by ensuring that the materials, mechanical parts, processes and electrical components used to assemble a spacecraft or launcher shall be fit for purpose over the entire life of a mission. In this way, Product Assurance & Safety Engineers lead to the success of the mission. This is Product Assurance and Quality Assurance in the space sector.
This is a long-term program carried out together with the European Space Agency. Over the past years and months, TTMS has had and continues to have the opportunity to work with more than 7 companies in the areas of PA/QA and project management. We have worked with companies with different problems and operating in different technology domains. Our consultants are guiding and coaching project’s quality management teams in the implementation of the quality assurance elements, helping in establishing the PA&QA requirements baseline for all elements of the projects. Assessing the implementation of PA&S requirements by the project, participating in design and safety reviews. Also, consultants are available to monitor the manufacturing, integration and test activities.
Okay, but you will ask me what’s is PA? PA is a discipline devoted to the study, planning and implementation of activities intended to assure that the design, controls, methods and techniques in a project result in a satisfactory degree of quality in a product. In ideal projects, there is a dedicated Product Assurance person, who is often the core of the project, and who takes care of PA management, reporting and auditing.
Was our mission successful? It is difficult to judge yet, partly yes partly no. A lot of problems were caused by the pandemic which appeared and disturbed our actions a bit.
The Polish space industry still needs time to develop competence and learn how to maintain PA/QA. Some organizations treat the requirements of ECSS standards a bit like ISO – additional paperwork that an employee will do in their spare time. And that’s how we know it doesn’t work. The space sector, indeed like the defense sector, is not forgiving. The loss of a device is followed by hundreds if not millions of euros/dollars of losses. Let’s remember that it’s often the taxpayer’s loss, because the membership fee to the European Space Agency comes from the state budget, and therefore from our taxes. Sometimes also human lives.
The biggest problem in the companies themselves is how to organize PA and designate a person who deals only with PA/QA. Often PA/QA people have pulled away from PA/QA in favour of technical work. They lack time for PA/QA. Another problem is reconciling the requirements of ECSS with already implemented standards e.g. ISO. This is often an obstacle for organizations for which the space sector is not a single recipient of products and services. But it can be overcome.
I’m really proud of the team of consultants I’ve been able to put together. We have experts with over 20 years of experience who have participated in both hardware and software projects. They have worked for the European Space Agency, NASA, Roscosmos, JAXA, but also for the largest private entities in the space sector – Airbus, Thales, etc. Nothing but to benefit from the knowledge of these people.
