Louis de Gouyon Matignon

mars society

The res communis concept in Space Law

space law, , ,

The res communis and res nullius maxims are the two legal concepts which have a great significance in the legal world, especially in the laws related to highs seas, outer space, and Antarctica. In the development of Space Law, the question of outer space’s legal status (and its resources) was raised: was outer space a res communis or a res nullius? Who owned outer space? Who owned the Moon?

Since the inception of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, international law regarding the use of outer space by States and individuals has been dominated by the res communis doctrine, the concept that outer space belongs to mankind and not to one individual or country; the non-appropriation principle prevails and reference to the State sovereignty is absent. Outer space is a res communis omnium (a thing of the entire community). Accordingly, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which sets out the rules governing the interactions between States in outer space, establishes that its use and exploration are “province of all mankind” (Article I). Therefore, the OST in essence sets outer space aside as an extra-jurisdictional territory and no State can exercise any sovereign rights over it.

Space Law and res communis

A res communis could be defined as a “common thing”. It is a Latin phrase used in ius publicum (Latin for public law): by the past, public law regulated the relationships of the government to its citizens, including taxation, while ius privatum (Latin for private law), based upon property and contract, concerned relations between individuals. The “public/private law dichotomy” is a structural core of Roman law and all modern western legal systems.

Ius publicum was used also to describe obligatory legal regulations, such as ius cogens, which is now a term used in public international law meaning basic rules which cannot (or should not) be broken, or contracted out of. Regulations that can be changed are called today ius dispositivum, and they are used when party shares something and are not in opposition.

Res communis preceded today’s concepts of the commons and common heritage of mankind. It has relevance in public international law and common law (also known as judge-made law and case law, is that body of law derived from judicial decisions of courts and similar tribunals).

In the sixth century C.E., the Institutes of Justinian restated the Roman rule as follows: “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind – the air, running water, the sea, and consequently the shores of the sea”. The public acquired certain usufructuary rights (a limited real right, or in rem right, found in civil law and mixed jurisdictions that unites the two property interests of usus, the right to use or enjoy a thing possessed, directly and without altering it, and fructus, the right to derive profit from a thing possessed: for instance, by selling crops) in these resources by virtue of its common property interest in them. For example, all rivers and ports were public such that everyone had a right to fish in them.

Everyone also had the right to approach the seashore provided that habitations, monuments, and buildings were respected; to build a cottage on the seashore; to haul nets to the shore from the sea; and to dry them there. Finally, everyone had a right to navigate rivers, to bring vessels to their banks and to tie them to trees growing there, and to deposit the vessels’ cargo on the banks, even though the banks and trees were the property of the riparian landowners. The state apparently protected the uses to which the res communis concept applied, although there is no evidence that the Roman public could enforce its right against the state to these uses.

Biological examples of res communis include fish and mammals in high seas. Rules for use of the continent Antarctica were based on res communis as was development of Space Law. The term can be contrasted with res nullius, the concept of ownerless property, associated for example with terra nullius, the concept of unowned territory.

Res nullius

A res nullius could be defined as “nobody’s thing”. It is a Latin phrase used in ius privatum (Latin for private law), based upon property and contract, concerned relations between individuals. It means “something without a master”, that is to say which has no owner but which is nevertheless appropriable.

“Res” (an object in the legal sense, anything that can be owned) is not yet the object of rights of any specific subject. Such items are considered ownerless property and are free to be acquired by means of “occupatio”. In Roman law, occupatio was an original method of acquiring ownership of un-owned property (res nullius) by occupying with intent to own. According to the Roman jurist Gaius, any previously unowned thing becomes the just property of the first occupant able to “capture” it: “Another title of natural reason, besides Tradition, is Occupation – occupatio, whereby things previously the property of no one become the property of the first occupant, as the wild inhabitants of Earth, air, and water, as soon as they are captured. For wild beasts, birds, and fishes, as soon as they are captured, become, by natural law, the property of the captor, but only continue such so long as they continue in his power; after breaking from his custody and recovering their natural liberty, they may become the property of the next occupant; for the ownership of the first captor is terminated. Their natural liberty is deemed to be recovered when they have escaped from his sight, or, though they continue in his sight, when they are difficult to recapture”.

Examples of res nullius in the socio-economic sphere are wild animals (ferae naturae) or abandoned property (res derelictae). Finding can also be a means of occupation, since a thing completely lost or abandoned is res nullius, and therefore belonged to the first taker.

Res derelictae

What was abandoned (res derelictae) was also res nullius and subject to acquirement through occupatio. In Roman law, res derelictae referred to property voluntarily abandoned by the owner. It was necessary to establish that it had been voluntarily abandoned. The opposite was “res mancipi” or owned property.

Terra nullius

“Terra nullius” (plural terrae nullius) is a Latin expression meaning “nobody’s land” and is a principle sometimes used in public international law to describe territory that may be acquired by a State’s occupation of it. Terra nullius stems from the Roman law term res nullius, meaning nobody’s thing. According to the Roman law res nullius, or things without an owner, such as wild animals (ferae beastiae), lost slaves and abandoned buildings could be taken as property by anyone by seizure. A part of the debate over the history of terra nullius is when the term itself was first used. According to some historians, the term terra nullius was first introduced at the beginning of the 20th century during legal disputes over the Polar Regions. There is considerable debate among historians about how and when the terra nullius concept was first used.

However, we know today that the expression finds its origin and its use in public international law in papal bull Terra Nullius of Pope Urban II, rushed in 1095, which authorized the European Christian States to appropriate territories occupied by non-Christians. At a time when the Church was the reference for the international order of the Christian West, it was the legal framework in which the Latin States of the East were erected during the Crusades, starting in 1096.

The concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in public international law

The concept of the common heritage of mankind is one of the most extraordinary developments in recent intellectual history and one of the most revolutionary and radical legal concepts to have emerged in recent decades. The year 2017 marked the fiftieth anniversary of the advent of the concept in the domain of public international law (Outer Space Treaty, 1967). Ever since its emergence, it has become evident that no other concept, notion, principle or doctrine has brought as much intensive debate, controversy, confrontation and speculation as the common heritage phenomenon did. This is because it is a philosophical idea that questions the regimes of globally important resources regardless of their situation, and requires major changes in the world to apply its provisions. In other words, the application and enforcement of the common heritage of mankind require a critical re-examination of many well-established principles and doctrines of classical international law, such as acquisition of territory, consent-based sources of international law, sovereignty, equality, resource allocation and international personality.

Space legal issues concerning Space Law and res communis

Outer space, extraordinary in many respects, is, in addition, unique from the legal point of view. It is only recently that human activities and international interaction in outer space have become realities and that beginnings have been made in the formulation of international rules to facilitate international relations in outer space. As is appropriate to an environment whose nature is so extraordinary, the extension of international law to outer space has been gradual and evolutionary – commencing with the study of questions relating to legal aspects, proceeding to the formulation of principles of a legal nature and, then, incorporating such principles in general multilateral treaties.

The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (entered into force on October 10, 1967) could be viewed as furnishing a general legal basis for the peaceful uses of outer space and providing a framework for the developing law of outer space. Its preamble states that it recognises “the common interest of all mankind in the progress of the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes” and believes “that the exploration and use of outer space should be carried on for the benefit of all peoples irrespective of the degree of their economic or scientific development”.

Article I enounces that “The exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind. Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies. There shall be freedom of scientific investigation in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, and States shall facilitate and encourage international cooperation in such investigation”. The words “for the benefit and in the interests of all countries”, “free for exploration and use”, “free access to all areas of celestial bodies” are important. They underline the res communis aspect of outer space and its resources.

Article II affirms that “Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other mean”. This statement is as important as the words used in Article I. It reinforces the res communis aspect of outer space and its resources and excludes the concept of terra nullius. It is important to recall that activities in outer space began in the late 1950s and truly developed in the 1960s, a time influenced by the decolonisation of Africa (in the mid-to-late 1950s and 1960s), where discussions had been held on the status of Antarctica (the Antarctic Treaty was signed on December 1, 1959). This Article II is at the foundation of the res communis aspect of outer space.

Let’s also recall that Article 2 of the Convention on the High Seas (Geneva, April 29, 1958) states that “The high seas being open to all nations, no State may validly purport to subject any part of them to its sovereignty. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by these articles and by the other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and non-coastal States: (1) Freedom of navigation; (2) Freedom of fishing; (3) Freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines; (4) Freedom to fly over the high seas. These freedoms, and others which are recognized by the general principles of international law, shall be exercised by all States with reasonable regard to the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas”.

Some believe today that the underlying premise of res communis effectively limits expansion and innovation in the realm of outer space. Two areas in particular: national security and property rights and commercialization.

Property rights and commercialisation – Space Law and res communis

When speaking about Space Law and res communis, the res communis doctrine resounds most prominently when dealing with property ownership rights in outer space. The Outer Space Treaty (1967) not only forbids claiming of territory by nations, but its child, the Moon Treaty (1979), attempts to extend that prohibition to private legal entities also. Although the United States of America is not a signatory to the Moon Treaty, it has not taken open actions to actually refute its legal viability. The result is that the Moon Treaty and its res communis doctrine has slowly crept into the realm of accepted international law.

Some believe that the Outer Space Treaty and its res communis doctrine should be rethought. That is what we can say about Space Law and res communis.

The birth of the Lebanese space program

space law, , ,

During the 1960s, the U.S. and the Soviet Union competed for supremacy in outer space. But there was another contestant in the race – the Lebanese Rocket Society, a science club from a university in Beirut. The Lebanese space program was not initially an official government-sponsored effort. It started in the 1960s with the Lebanese Rocket Society. The original society gained fame in Lebanon after a series of successful launches of Cedar rockets.

The Lebanese Rocket Society

The Lebanese Rocket Society was founded by Manoug Manougian in 1960. Manoug Manougian, which was born on April 29, 1935 in Jerusalem, was an Armenian scientist; he is considered the father of the Lebanese space program. He began at the age of 25 years old, in 1960, to teach at Haigazian University, a higher education institution founded in 1955 in Beirut, Lebanon as Haigazian College. He founded the Haigazian College Rocket Society (HCRS) in November 1960. “My vision was to explore space – Lebanon could have done that” said Manougian. Manougian’s passion for space began as a boy in the 1940s growing up in Jericho in the West Bank. Inspired by Jules Verne novels, he would climb the nearby Mount of Temptation and gaze at the night sky. At school he carved rockets onto his desk.

With a very limited budget, the society launched a series of rockets to increasing altitudes. It received funding from the Lebanese government and became the Lebanese Rocket Society. He and his students finally launched a suborbital rocket in 1963. The Cedar IV rocket, launched on Lebanese Independence Day (November 21, 1963) from Dbayeh, reached one hundred and forty kilometres and was featured on Lebanese stamps. “Here was tiny Lebanon, able to do what the rest of the Arab world hadn’t done” Manougian recently added.

The Lebanese Rocket Society consisted of a small group of students from the Haigazian University: “We were young kids, in our early 20s, doing something incredible”. The society developed into the wider Lebanese space program and it produced the first rockets of the Arab World, which were capable of suborbital flight. Early rockets were built from cardboard and bits of pipe. “To my surprise a number of students decided to join”, Manougian said. “I had no finances and there was little support for something like this. But I figured I could dip into my meagre salary and convince my wife that I could buy what I needed for the experiments”. Students were tasked with preparing chemicals for the rocket propellant. Everything for the project had to be built from scratch. Prototype rockets were tested on a farm in the mountains above Beirut. “The college came to watch one of the first launches”, recalls Manougian. “As soon as ignition took place, the rocket – which was hanging on a very primitive launcher – fell backwards and went up the mountain and landed outside a church”.

Manougian and his team of seven students refined their designs and rocket launches grew more ambitious. Each student was assigned a different aspect of the rocket and by April 1961, it could reach an altitude of one kilometre. The next rocket reached two kilometres. Word spread and the Lebanese military took an interest. They offered the services of Youssef Wehbé, a young military specialised in ballistics. “We were told that we needed a safe area to launch from” said Manougian. “They gave us an old artillery range and provided us with transportation to get up there”. Youssef Wehbé was able to source components from France and the U.S. that would otherwise have remained off-limits. He commandeered a military factory to allow the construction of more complex rockets. Manougian, however, still considered the project to be a purely scientific endeavour. “All our launches were attended by the public and the military”. “The military would always ask how far it would go if you were to place such and such a load in the nose cone, but my response was that this is not a military operation, it’s about teaching students science. That was the mission I had”.

By now, the Haigazian College Rocket Society had become a source of national pride. Manougian was invited to a reception held by Fuad Chehab, the President of the Lebanese Republic from 1958 to 1964, to be told that the Ministry of Education would provide limited funding for 1962 and 1963. It was renamed the Lebanese Rocket Society and the national emblem was adopted for its Cedar rocket programme. “We were launching three-stage rockets”. “They were no longer toys and could go way beyond the borders. We could reach the thermosphere”. “One time, I received a call from Fuad Chehab’s office, asking us to make sure we weren’t getting too close to Cyprus”. “So we moved slightly south which was a concern because then we were getting near Israel”. The Lebanese military soon realised the rockets could be used as a weapon.

“It was at the time the Soviets and Americans were launching animals and humans into orbit”. “We’d been training a mouse called Mickey to withstand high acceleration. We thought we’d put it in the nose cone”. Manougian’s little club was regularly front page news in Lebanon. Every launch was accompanied by a glamorous party in Beirut. But as Manougian’s profile grew, so did the level of unwanted attention. He suspected that foreign agents were monitoring his work and found that papers in his office were being disturbed overnight. Other Arab countries were keen to use his skills for their own weapons programmes. Manougian was growing concerned at what his project risked turning into. But events that took place in July 1964 whilst he was abroad finally convinced him that the society was now out of his control. “When I came back from the U.S., I found out that one of the students had decided to prepare a rocket using the propellant”. In the ensuing fire, two students were severely injured.

In 1966, a rocket was launched into the Mediterranean, seemingly a safe distance from Cyprus. But the trajectory took it straight towards a British naval vessel monitoring the launch, and landed just a few meters short. It was the end. Memories of the Lebanese Rocket Society quickly faded and archive material was lost during the country’s civil war. Many of the students left to work overseas.

The Cedar rockets and the Lebanese space program

From 1960 to 1967, more than a dozen rockets called Cedar, still more powerful and rising to more than six hundred kilometres, were designed, produced and launched. The rockets were named after the cedar tree, Lebanon’s national emblem. On November 21, 1962 Cedar III, a three stages solid propellant rocket, was launched. It had a length of seven meters and a weight of one thousand and two hundred kilograms. The Cedar IV launched in 1963 was so successful that it was commemorated on a stamp. It reached a height of one hundred and fifty kilometres, putting it close to the altitude of satellites in low Earth orbit. The trials will cease as a result of international pressure.

The Echo satellites

space law, , , ,

The Echo satellites, two American spacecraft launched in 1960 and 1964, were the first passive communications satellites. They were NASA’s first experimental communications satellite project. Each spacecraft was a large metallized balloon designed to act as a passive communications reflector to bounce communication signals transmitted from one point on Earth to another.

A communications satellite

When talking about the Echo satellites, let’s remember that a communications satellite is an artificial satellite (in the context of spaceflight, a satellite is an artificial object which has been intentionally placed into orbit. Such objects are sometimes called artificial satellites to distinguish them from natural satellites such as Earth’s Moon) that relays and amplifies radio telecommunications signals via a transponder; it creates a communication channel between a source transmitter and a receiver at different locations on Earth. Communications satellites are used for television, telephone, radio, Internet, and military applications. There are more than two thousand communications satellites in Earth’s orbit, used by both private and government organizations. Many are in geostationary orbit above the equator, so that the satellite appears stationary at the same point in the sky, so the satellite dish antennas of ground stations can be aimed permanently at that spot and do not have to move to track it.

The high frequency radio waves used for telecommunications links travel by line of sight and so are obstructed by the curve of the Earth. The purpose of communications satellites is to relay the signal around the curve of the Earth allowing communication between widely separated geographical points. Communications satellites use a wide range of radio and microwave frequencies. To avoid signal interference, international organizations have regulations for which frequency ranges or bands certain organizations are allowed to use. This allocation of bands minimizes the risk of signal interference.

A balloon satellite

A balloon satellite, also occasionally referred to as a satelloon (which is a trademarked name), is a satellite that is inflated with gas after it has been put into orbit. The first flying body of this type was Echo 1A, which was launched into a one thousand and five hundred kilometres high orbit on August 12, 1960, by the United States of America. It originally had a spherical shape measuring thirty meters, with a thin metal-coated plastic shell. It served for testing as a passive communication and geodetic satellite. Its international COSPAR number was 6000901 (9th satellite launched in 1960, 1st component).

The Thor-Delta

The Thor-Delta, also known as Delta DM-19 or just Delta, was an early American expendable launch system used for twelve orbital launches in the early 1960s. A derivative of the Thor-Able, it was a member of the Thor family of rockets, and the first member of the Delta family. The first stage was a Thor missile in the DM-19 configuration. The second stage was the Delta, which had been derived from the earlier Able stage. An Altair solid rocket motor was used as a third stage. The Thor-Delta was the first rocket to use the combination of a Thor missile and a Delta upper stage. This configuration was reused for a large number of later rockets, and a derivative, the Delta II, remained in service until 2018.

The Thor-Delta launched a number of significant payloads, including the first communications satellite, Echo 1A; the first British satellite, Ariel 1; and the first active direct-relay communications satellite, Telstar 1. All twelve launches occurred from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 17. The launch of Telstar 1 used pad B, while all other launches were from pad A. All launches were successful except the maiden flight, which failed to place Echo 1 into orbit due a problem with the second stage.

The Echo satellites

Echo 1 – The Echo satellites

NASA’s Echo 1 satellite was built in Northfield, Minnesota. The balloon satellite functioned as a reflector, not a transceiver, so after it was placed in a low Earth orbit a signal could be sent to it, reflected by its surface, and returned to Earth. During ground inflation tests, eighteen thousand kilograms of air were needed to fill the balloon, but while in orbit, several pounds of gas were all that was required to fill the sphere. At launch, the balloon weighed seventy-one kilograms. According to NASA, “To keep the sphere inflated in spite of meteorite punctures and skin permeability, a make-up gas system using evaporating liquid or crystals of a subliming solid were incorporated inside the satellite”.

The first attempt to orbit an Echo satellite (also the maiden voyage of the Thor-Delta launch vehicle) miscarried when Echo 1 lifted from Cape Canaveral’s LC-17A on the morning of May 13, 1960. The Thor performed properly, but during the coasting phase, the attitude control jets on the unproven Delta stage failed to ignite, sending the payload into the Atlantic Ocean instead of orbit.

Echo 1A

Echo 1A (commonly referred to as just Echo 1) was put successfully into orbit by another Thor-Delta, and a microwave transmission from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, was received at Bell Telephone Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey, on August 12, 1960. The 30-meter diameter balloon was used to redirect transcontinental and intercontinental telephone, radio, and television signals. One of the first radio contacts using the satellite was successful at a distance of nearly eighty thousand kilometres. The satellite also aided the calculation of atmospheric density and solar pressure due to its large area-to-mass ratio. As its shiny surface was also reflective in the range of visible light, Echo 1A was easily visible to the unaided eye over most of the Earth. The spacecraft was nicknamed a “satelloon” by those involved in the project.

It also had 107.9 MHz beacon transmitters for telemetry purposes, powered by five nickel-cadmium batteries that were charged by seventy solar cells mounted on the balloon. During the latter portion of its life, the spacecraft was used to evaluate the technical feasibility of satellite triangulation. It had a total mass of one hundred and eighty kilograms. Echo 1A was originally loosely estimated to survive until soon after its fourth dip into the atmosphere in July 1963 but possibly until 1964 or beyond but it ended up living much longer than these estimates and re-entered Earth’s atmosphere on May 24, 1968. By the time Echo 1A burned up in 1968, the measurements of its orbit by several dozen earth stations had improved our knowledge of the precise shape of the planet by nearly a factor of ten.

Echo 2 – The Echo satellites

Echo 2 was a 40-meter-diameter balloon launched on January 25, 1964. It used an improved inflation system to improve the balloon’s smoothness and sphericity. Instrumentation included a beacon telemetry system that provided a tracking signal, monitored spacecraft skin temperature, and measured the internal pressure of the spacecraft (especially during the initial inflation stages). The system consisted of two beacon assemblies powered by solar cell panels. In addition to the passive communications experiments, it was used to investigate the dynamics of large spacecraft and for global geometric geodesy. Echo 2, being larger than Echo 1A and also orbiting in a near polar orbit, was conspicuously visible to the unaided eye over all of the Earth. Echo 2 re-entered Earth’s atmosphere on June 7, 1969.

Unlike Echo 1, Echo 2 was capable of maintaining its shape without a constant internal pressure. This removed the requirement for a long term supply of inflation gas, and meant that the balloon could easily survive strikes from micrometeoroids. Both Echo 1A and Echo 2 experienced a solar sail effect due to their large size and low mass.

Although NASA abandoned passive communications systems in favour of active satellites following Echo 2, the Echo systems demonstrated several ground station and tracking technologies that would be used by active systems. Also, the Echo program provided reference points for the precise location of the city of Moscow, necessitated by the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles. That is what we can say about the Echo satellites.

The Syncom satellites

space law, , , , , , , ,

The Syncom satellites were first developed in the 1960s by NASA. NASA began development of new communication satellites in 1960, based on the hypothesis that geosynchronous satellites, which orbit Earth thirty-six thousand kilometres above the ground, offered the best location because the high orbit allowed the satellites’ orbital speed to match the rotation speed of Earth and therefore remain essentially stable over the same spot. Only seventeen months after development began, NASA launched Syncom I, but it stopped sending signals a few seconds before it reached its final orbit. Five months later, NASA launched Syncom II, which demonstrated the viability of the system. The next Syncom transmitted live coverage of the 1964 Olympic Games in Tokyo to stations in North America and Europe.

Syncom (the Syncom satellites) for “synchronous communication satellite” started as a 1961 NASA program for active geosynchronous communication satellites, all of which were developed and manufactured by Hughes Space and Communications (the Hughes Aircraft Company was a major American aerospace and defense contractor founded in 1932 by Howard Hughes in Glendale, California as a division of Hughes Tool Company. The company was known for producing, among other products, the Hughes H-4 Hercules Spruce Goose aircraft, the atmospheric entry probe carried by the Galileo spacecraft, and the AIM-4 Falcon guided missile). Syncom II, launched in 1963, was the world’s first geosynchronous communications satellite. Syncom III, launched in 1964, was the world’s first geostationary satellite. In the 1980s, the series was continued as Syncom IV with some much larger satellites, also manufactured by Hughes. They were leased to the United States military under the LEASAT program.

List of orbits

An orbit is the curved path through which objects in space move around a planet or a star. The 1967 Treaty’s regime and customary law enshrine the principle of non-appropriation and freedom of access to orbital positions. Space Law and International Telecommunication Laws combined to protect this use against any interference. The majority of space-launched objects are satellites that are launched in Earth’s orbit (a very small part of space objects – scientific objects for space exploration – are launched into outer space beyond terrestrial orbits). It is important to precise that an orbit does not exist: satellites describe orbits by obeying the general laws of universal attraction. Depending on the launching techniques and parameters, the orbital trajectory of a satellite may vary. Sun-synchronous satellites fly over a given location constantly at the same time in local civil time: they are used for remote sensing, meteorology or the study of the atmosphere. Geostationary satellites are placed in a very high orbit; they give an impression of immobility because they remain permanently at the same vertical point of a terrestrial point (they are mainly used for telecommunications and television broadcasting).

A geocentric orbit or Earth orbit involves any object orbiting Planet Earth, such as the Moon or artificial satellites. Geocentric (having the Earth as its centre) orbits are organised as follow:

1) Low Earth orbit (LEO): geocentric orbits with altitudes (the height of an object above the average surface of the Earth’s oceans) from 100 to 2 000 kilometres. Satellites in LEO have a small momentary field of view, only able to observe and communicate with a fraction of the Earth at a time, meaning a network or constellation of satellites is required in order to provide continuous coverage. Satellites in lower regions of LEO also suffer from fast orbital decay (in orbital mechanics, decay is a gradual decrease of the distance between two orbiting bodies at their closest approach, the periapsis, over many orbital periods), requiring either periodic reboosting to maintain a stable orbit, or launching replacement satellites when old ones re-enter.

2) Medium Earth orbit (MEO), also known as an intermediate circular orbit: geocentric orbits ranging in altitude from 2 000 kilometres to just below geosynchronous orbit at 35 786 kilometres. The most common use for satellites in this region is for navigation, communication, and geodetic/space environment science. The most common altitude is approximately 20 000 kilometres which yields an orbital period of twelve hours.

3) Geosynchronous orbit (GSO) and geostationary orbit (GEO) are orbits around Earth at an altitude of 35 786 kilometres matching Earth’s sidereal rotation period. All geosynchronous and geostationary orbits have a semi-major axis of 42 164 kilometres. A geostationary orbit stays exactly above the equator, whereas a geosynchronous orbit may swing north and south to cover more of the Earth’s surface. Communications satellites and weather satellites are often placed in geostationary orbits, so that the satellite antennae (located on Earth) that communicate with them do not have to rotate to track them, but can be pointed permanently at the position in the sky where the satellites are located.

4) High Earth orbit: geocentric orbits above the altitude of 35 786 kilometres.

The Syncom satellites

Syncom I – The Syncom satellites

Syncom I was designed to be the first test of a communications satellite in geosynchronous orbit. The objective of the mission was to put the satellite into a 24-hour orbit with an inclination of about thirty degrees over the Atlantic Ocean. After launch into a highly elliptical orbit on February 14, 1963, initial communication tests conducted from the USNS Kingsport (a United States Maritime Commission VC2-S-AP3 type cargo ship) off Nigeria were successful. About five hours after launch the apogee motor was commanded to fire to place the satellite into a near-synchronous orbit. At about the time the motor completed its 20-second burn, all contact was lost. NASA officials assumed that “the satellite’s spin axis was misaligned at the time of the apogee motor firing. Because of this they have been unable to determine whether the satellite is damaged”. Attempts were made to communicate with the spacecraft but contact was never re-established.

Syncom II – The Syncom satellites

Syncom II was the first geosynchronous satellite. Although the period was twenty-four hours and the spacecraft remained at a nearly constant longitude, the orbit was inclined at thirty-three degrees so it was not truly geostationary but moved in an elongated figure eight pattern thirty-three degrees north and south of the equator. Syncom II was an experimental communications satellite placed over the Atlantic Ocean and Brazil at fifty-five degrees longitude. It began regular service on August 16, 1963. It demonstrated the feasibility of geosynchronous satellite communications. Voice, teletype, facsimile, and data transmission tests were successfully conducted between the Lakehurst, New Jersey ground station and the USNS Kingsport while the ship was at sea off the coast of Africa and television transmissions were relayed from Lakehurst to the Andover Earth Station, Maine.

Syncom II was launched into a high Earth orbit from Cape Canaveral on July 26, 1963. Six hours after launch, the apogee motor was fired to place the spacecraft in an orbit ranging from thirty-four thousand to thirty-six thousand kilometres with a drift rate of seven and a half degrees per day eastward. The apogee was then raised and the drift rate changed to four and a half degrees per day westward toward the desired position over fifty-five degrees longitude. After two weeks of drifting, the nitrogen jets were pulsed in a series of four firings to slow the spacecraft to near-zero drift on August 16, followed by an alignment manoeuvre. The final orbit was geosynchronous with an inclination of thirty-three degrees.

Syncom III – The Syncom satellites

Syncom III was the first geostationary satellite. It was an experimental geosynchronous communications satellite placed over the equator at one hundred and eighty degrees longitude in the Pacific Ocean. The satellite provided live television coverage of the 1964 Olympic Games in Tokyo, Japan and conducted various communications tests.

Syncom III was launched from Cape Kennedy on August 16, 1964 and injected into an elliptical orbit inclined sixteen degrees to the equator following a third stage yaw manoeuvre. The apogee motor was fired to remove most of the remaining inclination and to provide a circular near-synchronous orbit. The spacecraft next carried out a series of attitude and velocity manoeuvres to align itself with the equator and to slow its speed so it drifted west to the planned location at one hundred and eighty degrees longitude where its speed at altitude was synchronized with the Earth. These manoeuvres were completed by September, and Syncom III was used in a variety of communications tests, including the transmission of the Olympics, transmissions between the Philippines, USNS Kingsport, and Camp Roberts, California, and teletype transmissions to an aircraft on the San Francisco-Honolulu route.

The LEASAT program

The U.S. Navy’s Leased Satellite (LEASAT) system consisted of three Syncom IV spacecraft leased from Hughes, which was also the satellites manufacturer. The final launch of the LEASAT program occurred in early 1990 on the Space Shuttle. The last operational spacecraft among the constellation of LEASAT communications satellites used for over a decade by the U.S. military was retired in February 1998. LEASAT was developed to augment the Navy’s Fleet Satellite (FLTSAT) Communications System. The LEASAT program was a pioneering effort to provide dedicated communications services through a long-term lease arranged by the Navy for the Department of Defense. The lease provided that the U.S. military would pay for the use of communications channels aboard each spacecraft, but not until the system was built and placed in service. The contract also specified that the LEASAT spacecraft be launched by the Space Shuttle. Built by Hughes, the “wide body” satellites were designed to take full advantage of the room available in the Space Shuttle orbiters’ cargo bay.

LEASATs were the first geosynchronous communications satellites to incorporate integral propulsion. This innovation, when coupled with the satellite’s folding antenna, made it possible for the spacecraft to fit compactly in the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle, reducing launch costs. The first two LEASATs were launched into geosynchronous orbit aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery in August and November 1984. The third LEASAT was deployed in April 1985 but failed to boost itself into geosynchronous orbit. The spacecraft remained dormant until it was retrieved and repaired in orbit by another Discovery crew four months later. That same mission launched the fourth LEASAT, but that spacecraft malfunctioned and became unusable. The fifth LEASAT, deployed in 1990 from Space Shuttle Columbia, completed the constellation by providing four geosynchronous communications satellites approximately ninety degrees apart. That is what we can say about the Syncom satellites.

The birth of the Israeli space program

space law, , , , , ,

Let’s have a look at the Israeli space program. The Israel Space Agency or ISA (in Hebrew סוכנות החלל הישראלית‎ – Sochnut HaChalal HaYisraelit), founded following a government decision in 1983, is a national agency operating under the auspices of the Ministry of Science and Technology. The Agency is responsible for initiating, leading and coordinating all activities of the civilian space program.

Development of ballistic missiles was essential for survival of Israel as a country surrounded by hostile Arab neighbours intent on physical annihilation of the Jewish state. The achieved national ballistic missile capabilities subsequently enabled space launches. Naturally, the major objectives of the space program were also driven by the national security requirements and concentrated on space based reconnaissance and communications. The country’s space effort received important boost in 1982 with the formation of the Israel Space Agency (ISA).

The National Committee for Space Research (NCSR) – The Israeli space program

The National Committee for Space Research (NCSR) was a committee established in 1960 by the Israeli Government in affiliation with the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities (Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, based in Jerusalem, was established in 1961 by the State of Israel to foster contact between Israeli scholars in the sciences and humanities and create a think tank for advising the government on research projects of national importance) to explore the feasibility of space launches and satellites development, and later, to create the Israel Space Agency. The committee, made of a group of dedicated to the research and development of space-related sciences, had as one of its objective the goal to demonstrate Israeli capabilities to its then-antagonistic neighbours, especially Egypt.

The committee was formed to increase research activities across the academic communities in Israel. While at the time, establishing a space program was not particularly one of its goals, during the 1960s to the late 1970s, the committee developed the infrastructure needed for research and development in space exploration and sciences. One of the NCSR’s earliest achievements took place in 1961 with the launch of its first two-stage rocket.

At the same time, Israel’s missile program was also established. As with other countries, the ballistic and other missile developments took precedence over the exploration or use of outer space. The Israeli Space Launch Vehicle was developed as an off-shot of its Ballistic Missile program. This interdependency resulted in a blurry line between civilian and military developments in Israel.

Due to the stressed relationship between Israel and its neighbours, Israel has always attempted to acquire intelligence from various sources. During the late 1960s, Israel received satellite imagery from the United States of America, however the resolution was degraded, the coverage was limited, and it was not in real-time. Following the Yom Kippur War, from October 6 to 25, 1973, Israel started changing their focus to developing an independent source of space-based intelligence. This opinion was strengthen after it became known that the U.S. withheld critical intelligence information during the war, obtained by reconnaissance satellites, on Arab offensive formation. Despite its cooperation with the United States of America, Israel did not have routine access to real-time satellite intelligence data: “For years we have been begging the Americans for more detailed pictures from their satellites and often got refusals – even when Iraqi Scud missiles were falling on Tel Aviv”.

Following the political tension with Egypt and Syria (the Six-Day War was fought between June 5 to 10, 1967 by Israel and the neighbouring states of Egypt, Jordan and Syria), reconnaissance flights became ever more difficult. The only solution was overhead photography satellite which would bypass the political obstacles and take imagery of points of interests without generating diplomatic problems. The idea was met with great resistance; nevertheless, a feasibility study projects was initiated on the production of satellite launcher, satellites, and telescope cameras by the Israel Aerospace Industries, the Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, and Electro-Optics industries. The three contractors were asked to complete their study in ten months.

The study was completed by late 1980. While the project received the go-ahead, Israel’s defense industries suffered significant budget shortage following the Iranian Revolution (military cooperation between the two countries ended). In 1982, a new recommendation was submitted to develop an observation satellite. The program included timelines, planning for a ground station, budget estimates, and personnel requirements. The primary goals was to develop a satellite program without relying on any foreign know-how, to allow flexibility and creativity. At the end of 1982, it was decided during a closed-door meeting to establish an Israeli space agency. The decision was taken by Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon.

Yuval Ne’eman – The Israeli space program

Yuval Ne’eman was an Israeli theoretical physicist, military scientist, and politician. He was Minister of Science and Development in the 1980s and early 1990s. Yuval Ne’eman was the founder and director of the School of Physics and Astronomy at Tel Aviv University from 1965 to 1972 and president of the Tel Aviv University from 1971 to 1975. He was a strong believer in the importance of outer space research and satellites to Israel’s economic future and security, and thus founded the Israel Space Agency in 1983, which he chaired almost until his death. He also served on the Israel Atomic Energy Commission from 1965 to 1984. He was described as “one of the most colourful figures of modern science”.

The Israel Space Agency – The Israeli space program

The Israeli Space Agency originated from a university-based research project from the Tel-Aviv University in the early 1960s. The Agency especially supports scientific research and development with real, economic potential such as the development of unique and innovative technologies. In addition, the Agency operates on the premise that all space related activities contribute to the Israeli economy, to the country’s international standing and also benefit its citizens in terms of agriculture, communications, monitoring of environmental pollution and research.

The Israel Space Agency’s goals are many and diverse. They include expanding cooperation and reciprocal relationships with various countries in the field of space, promoting infrastructure research studies in the academic sector and research institutes, investing in start-ups developing components for the Israeli and international space industry, the development and construction of satellites for civilian purposes and supporting the development of unique and innovative space technologies. The Agency also cultivates a cadre of future scientists, through space education and community projects, who will work in the field of space research in the future. In general, the Agency seeks to increase Israel’s relative lead in this field and position the country amongst the leading nations involved in space research and its exploitation.

Shavit 2

Shavit 2 was the first Israeli sounding rocket, launched on July 5, 1961 for meteorological research. The weight of Shavit 2 was two hundred and fifty kilograms and its height was almost four meters. The rocket achieved an altitude of eighty kilometres. The Shavit 2 sounding rocket is distinct from the later Shavit space launch vehicle.

Shavit

Shavit, which means in Hebrew “comet” (שביט), is a small lift launch vehicle produced by Israel from 1982 onwards, to launch satellites into low Earth orbit. It was first launched on September 19, 1988, making Israel the eighth nation to have an orbital launch capability, after the USSR, the United States of America, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, the People’s Republic of China, and India.

The Shavit project is believed to have been an offshoot development, resulting from Israel’s Jericho (a general designation given to a loosely related family of deployed ballistic missiles developed by Israel from the 1960s forward) nuclear armed intercontinental ballistic missile program. Shavit rockets are launched from Palmachim Airbase by the Israel Space Agency into highly retrograde orbits over the Mediterranean Sea to prevent debris coming down in populated areas and also to avoid flying over nations hostile to Israel to the east. This results in a lower payload-to-orbit than east-directed launches would allow. The launcher consists of three stages powered by solid-fuel rocket motors, with an optional liquid-fuel fourth stage, and is manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries.

The Republic of South Africa produced and tested a licensed version in cooperation with Israel called the RSA-3 in an ultimately unsuccessful bid to produce a domestic satellite launch vehicle and ballistic missile. The South African program was closed in 1994.

Ofeq – The Israeli space program

Israel’s first step into space was a launch of a simple Ofeq-1 satellite on September 19, 1988, with the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) leading the effort as the prime contractor. The spin-stabilized Ofeq-1 was deployed in a low Earth orbit with perigee two hundred and fifty kilometres and apogee one thousand one hundred and fifty kilometres. The satellite re-entered the atmosphere on January 14, 1989.

Ofeq, which means in Hebrew “horizon” (אופק), is the designation of a series of Israeli reconnaissance satellites first launched in 1988. Most Ofeq satellites have been carried on top of Shavit rockets from Palmachim Airbase in Israel, on the Mediterranean coast. Both the satellites and the launchers were designed and manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries. While exact technical details and capabilities are classified, it is assumed that the Ofeq satellites have ultraviolet and visible imaging sensors, and an effective operational lifespan of one to three years. Some early reports stated that the reconnaissance capabilities were allowing “reading license plates in Baghdad”.

Most non-Israeli satellites are launched eastward to gain a boost from the Earth’s rotational speed. However, Ofeq satellites are launched westward (retrograde orbit) over the Mediterranean to avoid flying over, and dropping spent rocket stages over, populated areas in Israel and neighbouring Arab countries.

The Palmachim Airbase – The Israeli space program

The Palmachim Airbase is an Israeli military facility and spaceport located near the cities of Rishon LeZion and Yavne on the Mediterranean coast. It is named after the nearby Kibbutz Palmachim. Palmachim is used to launch the Shavit space launch vehicle into retrograde orbit by launching over the Mediterranean, acting as Israel’s primary spaceport. This ensures that rocket debris falls into water, and that the rocket does not fire over regional neighbouring countries near Israel that could use the technology.

Retrograde and prograde motion

Typically, spacecraft are launched in the eastern direction (from left to right, if one looks at a map). Therefore, most satellites move around the Earth in the same general direction as the Earth rotates. Such orbits are called prograde. The rotation of our planet is not negligible and provides significant help for launching satellites. One gets “for free” a significant velocity (four hundred and sixty five meters per second at the equator) when launching a satellite due east. Possible launch directions are usually restricted by safety considerations, to prevent first rocket stages, or malfunctioning rocket, from falling on populated areas. In Israel’s case, political considerations do not allow space launches in the eastern direction. Therefore, the country has to launch satellites over the Mediterranean Sea in the western direction, against the Earth’s rotation. Such orbits are called retrograde. Launch in low-inclination retrograde orbits is highly unfavourable and requires significantly larger rockets than for similar eastward launches.

Amos

Amos is a series of Israeli communications satellites. All Amos satellites are operated by Spacecom, an Israeli communications satellite operator in the Middle East, European Union and North America headquartered in the city of Ramat Gan, Israel. The six different Amos satellites have used five different launch vehicles: Soyuz, Zenit, Proton, Ariane and Falcon 9; and three different launch sites: the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, the Guiana Space Centre in French Guiana and Cape Canaveral in Florida.

Beresheet – The Israeli space program

Will Israel be the fourth country to join the Moon after the United States of America, Russia and China? Nothing is done yet, but the deal seems pretty good. It is already a small victory: Thursday, February 21 in Cape Canaveral (Florida), a rocket Falcon 9 of the private company SpaceX took off with on board an Israeli probe. A few tens of minutes later, the thrower released the probe Beresheet (which means in Hebrew “At the beginning” – בראשית, first word of the Torah) which began a seven-week trip to the Moon. Once arrived at the destination, the craft will seek to land on our natural satellite, and would then make Israel the fourth nation to have achieved a Moon landing. This performance is all the more remarkable as it is a private initiative led by the non-profit organization SpaceIL with the support of the businessman Morris Kahn, a South African-born Israeli billionaire entrepreneur. Half an hour after the launch, more than seven hundred and fifty kilometres above Africa and at a speed of thirty-five thousand kilometres per hour, the second stage of the Falcon 9 rocket deployed Beresheet.

The launch was followed live from Israel, in the middle of the night, by many engineers and supporters of the mission, and by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who waved Israeli flags from the control centre of Israel Aerospace Industries, Israel’s prime aerospace and aviation manufacturer, producing aerial and astronautic systems for both military and civilian usage. The main mission of Beresheet is indeed to Moon land; the probe, which carries children’s drawings, songs and images as well as memories of a Holocaust survivor and even a Bible, is not planned to work more than a few days on our natural satellite. The capsule will be left on the Moon as a testimony for future generations. “We are entering history and are proud to belong to a group that has dreamed and fulfilled the vision shared by many countries in the world but so far only three of them have accomplished”, said the president of SpaceIL. So far, only Russia, the United States of America and China have sent space objects on the Moon. Only twelve American astronauts have walked on the lunar ground between 1969 and 1972.

The country had already launched satellites before, but Beresheet is Israel’s first long-range spacecraft. This mission costed only one hundred million dollars, very little for this type of experience: “it is the cheapest gear to attempt such a mission”. International partners also took part in the project: a Swedish company for managing communications with Beresheet, and even NASA, which equipped the probe with a laser retroreflector to conduct space navigation tests. In a little less than two months, Beresheet should Moon land.

The renewed interest in the Moon, sometimes called the “eighth continent” of the Earth, is global and the year 2019 promises to be particularly busy. India hopes to become the fifth lunar country in the spring with its Chandrayaan-2 mission, which will include a mobile robot. Japan also plans to send a small lunar lander to study a volcanic area, called SLIM, short for Smart Lander for Investigating Moon, a candidate for the SPRINT-C (Small scientific satellite Platform for Rapid INvestigation and Test-C) mission. The lander would be one hundred and twenty kilograms and is proposed to be launched on an Epsilon advanced rocket from the Kagoshima Prefecture in late 2019.

As for the Americans, the return to the Moon is now the official policy of NASA, according to the guidelines of President Donald Trump in 2017. “This time, when we go back to the Moon, we will stay there” recently said NASA boss Jim Bridenstine. To achieve this, the U.S. Space Agency is changing its model and no longer wants to design the missions itself. NASA wants to work with private companies and has put financial incentives on the table to reward the companies that will be ready the fastest.

Beresheet on the way to the Moon

space law, , , , , , , , ,

Beresheet, an Israeli probe carried by a Falcon 9 rocket of the private company SpaceX, left Earth Thursday night at 20:45 local time towards the Moon (which it must reach in seven weeks). The 585-kilograms space object, which looks like a cauldron on trestles, will, with the help of its engine, take several elliptical orbits (which will be used as an impetus) around the Earth, to take in a second time the direction of the Moon.

The Moon landing is scheduled, after traveling six and a half million kilometres at a maximum speed of ten kilometres per second, for April 11, 2019. The Falcon 9 rocket also carried an Indonesian satellite and a U.S. Air Force satellite. “For the future of our children and the State of Israel, and because we believe that anything is possible, wish good luck with us to Beresheet which goes to the Moon” said SpaceIL employees on Thursday.

The Israel Space Agency

The Israel Space Agency (ISA) or סוכנות החלל הישראלית, is a governmental body, a part of Israel’s Ministry of Science and Technology, which coordinates all Israeli outer space research programs with scientific and commercial goals. The agency was founded by the Israeli theoretical physicist Yuval Ne’eman (May 14, 1925 – April 26, 2006) in 1983 to replace the National Committee for Space Research (NCSR) which was established in 1960 to set up the infrastructure required for outer space missions. Today, Israel is the smallest country with indigenous launch capabilities.

Beresheet

Will Israel be the fourth country to join the Moon after the United States of America, Russia and China? Nothing is done yet, but the deal seems pretty good. It is already a small victory: Thursday, February 21 in Cape Canaveral (Florida), a rocket Falcon 9 of the private company SpaceX took off with on board an Israeli probe. A few tens of minutes later, the thrower released the probe Beresheet (which means in Hebrew “At the beginning” – בראשית, first word of the Torah) which began a seven-week trip to the Moon. Once arrived at the destination, the craft will seek to land on our natural satellite, and would then make Israel the fourth nation to have achieved a Moon landing. This performance is all the more remarkable as it is a private initiative led by the non-profit organization SpaceIL with the support of the businessman Morris Kahn, a South African-born Israeli billionaire entrepreneur. Half an hour after the launch, more than seven hundred and fifty kilometres above Africa and at a speed of thirty-five thousand kilometres per hour, the second stage of the Falcon 9 rocket deployed Beresheet.

The launch was followed live from Israel, in the middle of the night, by many engineers and supporters of the mission, and by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who waved Israeli flags from the control centre of Israel Aerospace Industries, Israel’s prime aerospace and aviation manufacturer, producing aerial and astronautic systems for both military and civilian usage. The main mission of Beresheet is indeed to Moon land; the probe, which carries children’s drawings, songs and images as well as memories of a Holocaust survivor and even a Bible, is not planned to work more than a few days on our natural satellite. The capsule will be left on the Moon as a testimony for future generations. “We are entering history and are proud to belong to a group that has dreamed and fulfilled the vision shared by many countries in the world but so far only three of them have accomplished”, said the president of SpaceIL. So far, only Russia, the United States of America and China have sent space objects on the Moon. Only twelve American astronauts have walked on the lunar ground between 1969 and 1972.

The country had already launched satellites before, but Beresheet is Israel’s first long-range spacecraft. This mission costed only one hundred million dollars, very little for this type of experience: “it is the cheapest gear to attempt such a mission”. International partners also took part in the project: a Swedish company for managing communications with Beresheet, and even NASA, which equipped the probe with a laser retroreflector to conduct space navigation tests. In a little less than two months, Beresheet should Moon land.

The renewed interest in the Moon, sometimes called the “eighth continent” of the Earth, is global and the year 2019 promises to be particularly busy. India hopes to become the fifth lunar country in the spring with its Chandrayaan-2 mission, which will include a mobile robot. Japan also plans to send a small lunar lander to study a volcanic area, called SLIM, short for Smart Lander for Investigating Moon, a candidate for the SPRINT-C (Small scientific satellite Platform for Rapid INvestigation and Test-C) mission. The lander would be one hundred and twenty kilograms and is proposed to be launched on an Epsilon advanced rocket from the Kagoshima Prefecture in late 2019.

As for the Americans, the return to the Moon is now the official policy of NASA, according to the guidelines of President Donald Trump in 2017. “This time, when we go back to the Moon, we will stay there” recently said NASA boss Jim Bridenstine. To achieve this, the U.S. Space Agency is changing its model and no longer wants to design the missions itself. NASA wants to work with private companies and has put financial incentives on the table to reward the companies that will be ready the fastest.

SpaceIL and Beresheet

SpaceIL is a non-profit organisation established in 2011 aiming to land the first Israeli spacecraft on the Moon. The organization was founded by three young engineers: Yariv Bash, Kfir Damari and Yonatan Winetraub who answered the international challenge presented by Google Lunar XPRIZE: to build, launch and land an unmanned spacecraft on the Moon. SpaceIL was the only Israeli representative. In October 2015, SpaceIL reached a dramatic project milestone by becoming the first team to announce a signed launch contract, an actual “ticket to the Moon”. In January 2017, SpaceIL became one of the competition’s five finalists. The competition officially ended with no winners in March 31, 2018, after Google ended their sponsorship. Regardless of the competition, SpaceIL was committed to continue and complete its mission, to land on the Moon and to the advancement of science and technology education in Israel. Working to create an Israeli “Apollo Effect”, SpaceIL is committed to inspiring the next generation in Israel and around the world to choose to study science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Falcon 9

Falcon 9 is a two-stage-to-orbit medium lift launch vehicle designed and manufactured by SpaceX in the United States of America. It is powered by Merlin engines, also developed by SpaceX, burning liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade kerosene (RP-1) propellants. It was named after the Millennium Falcon and the nine engines of the rocket’s first stage. Unlike most rockets, which are expendable launch systems, Falcon 9 is partially reusable, with the first stage capable of re-entering the atmosphere and landing back vertically after separating from the second stage. This feat was achieved for the first time on flight 20 with the v1.2 version in December 2015.

Falcon 9 can lift payloads of up to twenty-three thousand kilograms to low Earth orbit, eight thousand kilograms to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) when expended, and five thousand kilograms to GTO when the first stage is recovered. In 2008, SpaceX won a Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract in NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program to deliver cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) using the Falcon 9 and Dragon capsule. The first mission under this contract was launched in October 2012. SpaceX intends to certify the Falcon 9 to be human-rated for transporting NASA astronauts to the ISS as part of the Commercial Crew Development program.

ITU and the digital divide

space law, , , ,

Digital divide is a term that refers to the gap between demographics and regions that have access to modern information and communications technology, and those that don’t or have restricted access. This technology can include the telephone, television, personal computers and the Internet. Well before the late 20th century, digital divide referred chiefly to the division between those with and without telephone access; after the late 1990s the term began to be used mainly to describe the split between those with and without Internet access, particularly broadband.

The digital divide typically exists between those in cities and those in rural areas; between the educated and the uneducated; between socioeconomic groups; and, globally, between the more and less industrially developed nations. Even among populations with some access to technology, the digital divide can be evident in the form of lower-performance computers, lower-speed wireless connections, lower-priced connections such as dial-up, and limited access to subscription-based content.

The reality of a separate-access marketplace is problematic because of the rise of services such as video on demand, video conferencing and virtual classrooms, which require access to high-speed, high-quality connections that those on the less-served side of the digital divide cannot access and/or afford. And while adoption of smartphones is growing, even among lower-income and minority groups, the rising costs of data plans and the difficulty of performing tasks and transactions on smartphones continue to inhibit the closing of the gap. According to recent studies and reports, the digital divide is still very much a reality today. Proponents for closing the digital divide include those who argue it would improve literacy, democracy, social mobility, economic equality and economic growth.

The International Telecommunication Union

Since 1865, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has been at the centre of advances in communications – from telegraphy through to the modern world of satellites, mobile phones and the Internet. The International Telecommunication Union or ITU (French Union Internationale des Télécommunications), originally the International Telegraph Union (French Union Télégraphique Internationale), is a specialized agency of the United Nations that is responsible for issues that concern information and communication technologies, an extensional term for information technology (IT) that stresses the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications (telephone lines and wireless signals) and computers, as well as necessary enterprise software, middleware, storage, and audiovisual systems, that enable users to access, store, transmit, and manipulate information. It is the oldest among all the fifteen specialised agencies of the United Nations.

Based in Geneva, Switzerland, the ITU coordinates the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promotes international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, works to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, and assists in the development and coordination of worldwide technical standards. The ITU is active in areas including broadband Internet, latest-generation wireless technologies, aeronautical and maritime navigation, radio astronomy, satellite-based meteorology, convergence in fixed-mobile phone, Internet access, data, voice, TV broadcasting, and next-generation networks.

ITU and the digital divide

Mobile phones and Internet access are powerful tools in supporting advances in developing countries. But ITU statistics put into sharp focus the digital divide that continues between countries, and within national borders among various social groups. The need to support the expansion of telecommunications has long been recognized. In 1952, ITU became an official participating organization in the UN Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance.

In 1949, with the creation of the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance (EPTA), the United Nations General Assembly created a mechanism for the participation of specialized agencies – the Technical Assistance Board (TAB). The Board was comprised of the executive heads (or their representatives) of the UN and its specialized agencies and was the forum where technical assistance requests were discussed, progress reports given, and agency programmes presented. The TAB then made recommendations on the total programme to a Technical Assistance Committee (TAC) of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). TAC would approve the overall programme and then the projects would be initiated when multilateral or bilateral instruments were signed. Starting in 1949, “Basic Agreements” were signed between governments and TAB on the general rules governing the provision of technical assistance. Supplementary Agreements were signed between the UN, the specialized agencies and the requesting governments for individual projects.

The aim was to recruit and send experts to developing countries to help in various technological fields, as well as to support the training of local personnel. In 1959, ITU took over the management of its technical assistance schemes for telecommunications, with a department for that purpose created the following year. The UN Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance was merged with the UN Special Fund, forming today’s United Nations Development Programme, or UNDP, which began operation in 1966. ITU’s collaboration with UNDP increased markedly from that period. Alongside the objectives of improving technical, administrative and human resources in developing countries, the goal was to promote the expansion of networks in Africa, Asia and Latin America (as well as regional networks there and in the Asia-Pacific and the Middle East). From the 1970s, projects such as the Pan-African Telecommunications Network (PANAFTEL) and the Middle East and Mediterranean telecommunication master plan (MEDARABTEL) were implemented.

An important step forward was taken in 1982, when the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference held in Nairobi set up the Independent Commission for World-Wide Telecommunications Development. It began work in 1983 and submitted its report in 1985. Officially titled The Missing Link, and also known as the Maitland Report, the report showed how access to telecommunications correlates with economic growth – but also drew international attention to the huge imbalance in such access between developed and developing countries.

In response to the ground-breaking report, ITU held its first World Telecommunication Development Conference in 1985, in Arusha, Tanzania. In 1989, the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference in Nice recognized the importance of placing technical assistance to developing countries on the same footing as its traditional activities of standardization and spectrum management. To this end, it established the Centre for Telecommunication Development (later incorporated into ITU’s Telecommunication Development Bureau in 1991). Bridging the digital divide was confirmed as a priority for ITU at the Marrakesh Plenipotentiary Conference in 2002, which also authorized ITU to take a leading role in the preparations and follow-up of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).

WSIS was the first ever gathering of global leaders to address how best to create a safe and truly inclusive information society. The summit was held in two phases: in 2003 in Geneva and in 2005 in Tunis. Participants came from one hundred and seventy-five countries, including some fifty Heads of State and Government and vice-presidents. Its outcome documents, including the Geneva Plan of Action and the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, address such issues as the use of information technologies for development; cybersecurity; affordable access to communications; infrastructure; capacity building, and cultural diversity.

The summit also resulted in the multi-stakeholder WSIS Forum, held annually since 2009 to review progress in achieving the summit’s goals. As another follow-up to WSIS, the Connect the World series of regional conferences was launched by ITU to mobilize technical, financial and human resources for telecommunication development. The first event was the Connect Africa Summit, hosted by Rwanda in 2007. ITU holds regular seminars and training events, and since 2000 it has organized the annual Global Symposium for Regulators. This provides a unique meeting place for regulators and policy-makers from both developed and developing countries. Efforts to encourage greater participation by developing countries in creating and adopting technical standards are focused on ITU’s Bridging the Standardization Gap programme, established in 2008.

The 1963 Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference

space law, , , ,

Also known as the Space Conference, the 1963 Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference was the first conference on space radiocommunications (according to Article 1.8 of the International Telecommunication Union’s Radio Regulations (RR), space radiocommunication is defined as “any radiocommunication involving the use of one or more space stations or the use of one or more reflecting satellites or other objects in space”) called by ITU. It took place at a time when the first communication satellite successes and the first launchings of manned space vehicles were making serious international co-operation more and more necessary.

The Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference on Space Communications convened by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to allocate frequency bands for space communication purposes began on Monday, October the 7th, 1963, in the Bâtiment électoral, Geneva, and lasted five weeks. More than four hundred delegates from seventy countries took part.

The International Telecommunication Union

Since 1865, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has been at the centre of advances in communications – from telegraphy through to the modern world of satellites, mobile phones and the Internet. The International Telecommunication Union or ITU (French Union Internationale des Télécommunications), originally the International Telegraph Union (French Union Télégraphique Internationale), is a specialized agency of the United Nations that is responsible for issues that concern information and communication technologies, an extensional term for information technology (IT) that stresses the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications (telephone lines and wireless signals) and computers, as well as necessary enterprise software, middleware, storage, and audiovisual systems, that enable users to access, store, transmit, and manipulate information. It is the oldest among all the fifteen specialised agencies of the United Nations.

Based in Geneva, Switzerland, the ITU coordinates the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promotes international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, works to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, and assists in the development and coordination of worldwide technical standards. The ITU is active in areas including broadband Internet, latest-generation wireless technologies, aeronautical and maritime navigation, radio astronomy, satellite-based meteorology, convergence in fixed-mobile phone, Internet access, data, voice, TV broadcasting, and next-generation networks.

Outer space and satellites

The Space Age began on October 4, 1957 with the launch by the Soviet Union of the world’s first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1. Not long after, satellites became used for telecommunications. The passive Echo 1 was launched in 1960 by the United States of America, followed in 1962 by Telstar 1 (a joint French-UK-US project), the first communications satellite. The motion of these satellites had to be tracked as they crossed the sky; a more efficient and economical idea was that of the geostationary communications satellite, first proposed by writer Arthur C. Clarke in 1945. In 1964, following experiments with geosynchronous satellites, the first geostationary satellite was launched.

Like radio-frequency spectrum, the geostationary orbit around Earth is a limited natural resource; both need to be shared fairly and in a way that avoids interference. In 1963, ITU held an Extraordinary Administrative Conference for space communications, which allocated frequencies to the various services. Later conferences made further allocations and put in place regulations governing satellites’ use of orbital slots. As well as linking broadcasting and wired telephone systems, and providing navigation services, satellites are also used in mobile communications. Satellite phones, for example, can be vital in emergencies, or for areas without access to alternative networks. And in 1992, ITU made spectrum allocations for the first time to serve the needs of Global Mobile Personal Communications by Satellite (GMPCS).

The 1963 Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference

The “PARTIAL REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS, GENEVA, 1959” (preamble) states the following: “Recommendation No. 36 of the Ordinary Administrative Radio Conference, Geneva, 1959, recommended that the Administrative Council of the Union should consider the convening, in the latter part of 1963, of an Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference to allocate frequency bands for Space Radiocommunication Purposes”. “The Administrative Council considered this question during its annual session, in 1962, and, at its session in 1963, adopted Resolution No: 524, which, with the prior concurrence of a majority of the Members of the Union, determined the Agenda of the Conference and decided that it should be convened in Geneva on 7th October 1963”. “The Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference accordingly convened on the appointed date, and, in accordance with the provisions of Nos. 60 and 61 of the Convention, revised the relevant portions of the Radio Regulations, Geneva, 1959”.

The main task of the Conference, which was attended by more than four hundred delegates from seventy ITU Member States, was the allocation of radio frequencies for outer space activities and the consequent revision of the Table of Frequency Allocations. Since the Geneva Radio Conference of 1959, the allocation of an adequate number of frequencies for outer space had become an urgent task due to the rapid growth of activity in outer space. The Conference finally allocated, on a shared or exclusive basis, frequencies totalling 6076.462 Mc/s for the various kinds of space services and for radio astronomy, 2800 Mc/s of which were for communication satellites on a shared basis with other services. Thus, while at the 1959 Conference only about one percent of the Table of Frequency Allocations was made available for outer space, about fifteen percent had now been made available.

The Conference also adopted a number of revisions and additions to other parts of the Radio Regulations, mainly concerned with general rules for the assignment and use of frequencies; notification and recording of frequencies in the Master International Frequency Register; the identification of stations; service documents; terms and definitions; and special rules relating to particular services. These revisions and additions were necessitated to make provision for the space services. In addition, the Conference adopted a number of important Resolutions and Recommendations with an eye to future developments in the use of outer space. For example, it recommended that Members and Associate Members of the Union make data available to the appropriate permanent organs of the ITU; that the Administrative Council should annually review the progress of Administrations in space radiocommunications and should, in the light of this review, recommend the convening of an Extraordinary Administrative Conference at a future date to work out further agreements for the international regulation of the use of the frequency bands allocated by the present Conference; and that notification and registration of frequency assignments to space services shall, until revised by a future Conference, be effected in accordance with the procedures adopted by the present Conference.

In addition, considering that the number of flights by space vehicles or manned satellites was likely to increase, one of the most important Resolutions dealt with space vehicles in distress or emergency, noting that the frequency of 20 007 kc/s had been set aside by the Conference for this purpose and resolving that the conventional distress signal used by ships or aircraft (SOS in radiotelegraphy and MAYDAY in radiotelephony) should also be used by spacecraft: “The frequency 20 007 kc/s may also be used, in emergency, in the search for, and rescue of, astronauts and space vehicles”.

Another Recommendation was addressed to the International Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR) pointing out that “the use of satellite transmissions for direct reception by the general public of sound and television broadcasts may be possible in the future” and urged the CCIR to expedite its studies on the technical feasibility of broadcasting from satellites (“that the C.C.I.R. expedite its studies and make early recommendations on Question 241 (IV), Geneva, 1963, in particular, regarding those parts of the question relating to the technical feasibility of broadcasting from satellites, the optimum technical characteristics of the systems to be used, what bands would be technically suitable and whether and under what conditions those bands could be shared between the broadcasting-satellite and terrestrial services”). Thus, an important step was taken towards the future possibility of the general public being able to receive radio and television programmes in their own homes direct from satellites.

A further Recommendation called on the upcoming 1964 ITU Aeronautical Conference to provide high frequency channels for communications for the routine flight of transport airspace vehicles flying between points of the earth surface both within and beyond the major part of the atmosphere: “that frequencies in the HF bands (between 2 850 and 22 000 kc/s) are technically suitable for such communications as well as those frequencies above 100 Mc/s now available to the aeronautical mobile (R) service”.

Finally, a Recommendation was adopted recognizing “that all Members and Associate Members of the Union have an interest in and right to an equitable and rational use of frequency bands allocated for space communications” and recommending to all ITU Members and Associate Member States “that the utilization and exploitation of the frequency spectrum for space communications be subject to international agreements based on principles of justice and equity permitting the use and sharing of allocated frequency bands in the mutual interest of all nations”.

In addition to the work of the Conference, a special meeting was held on October 9 where a direct exchange of live televised messages took place via the United States communication-satellite Telstar.

The International Telecommunication Union

space law, , , , , , ,

Since 1865, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has been at the centre of advances in communications – from telegraphy through to the modern world of satellites, mobile phones and the Internet. The International Telecommunication Union or ITU (French Union Internationale des Télécommunications), originally the International Telegraph Union (French Union Télégraphique Internationale), is a specialized agency of the United Nations that is responsible for issues that concern information and communication technologies, an extensional term for information technology (IT) that stresses the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications (telephone lines and wireless signals) and computers, as well as necessary enterprise software, middleware, storage, and audiovisual systems, that enable users to access, store, transmit, and manipulate information. It is the oldest among all the fifteen specialised agencies of the United Nations.

Based in Geneva, Switzerland, the ITU coordinates the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promotes international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, works to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, and assists in the development and coordination of worldwide technical standards. The ITU is active in areas including broadband Internet, latest-generation wireless technologies, aeronautical and maritime navigation, radio astronomy, satellite-based meteorology, convergence in fixed-mobile phone, Internet access, data, voice, TV broadcasting, and next-generation networks.

The International Telegraph Union

For thousands of years, the quickest method of sending complex messages over long distances was with a courier on horseback. At the end of the 18th century, Claude Chappe (December 25, 1763 – January 23, 1805) inaugurated a network of visual semaphore stations across France (the first practical telecommunications system of the industrial age, making Chappe the first telecom mogul with his “mechanical internet”). Then came the electrical revolution. Experiments were conducted in sending electric signals along wires, and in 1839, the world’s first commercial telegraph service opened in London with a system created by Charles Wheatstone (February 6, 1802 – October 19, 1875), an English scientist and inventor of many scientific breakthroughs of the Victorian era, best known for his contributions in the development of the Wheatstone bridge, originally invented by Samuel Hunter Christie (March 22, 1784 – January 24, 1865), which is used to measure an unknown electrical resistance, and as a major figure in the development of telegraphy. In the United States of America, Samuel Morse (April 27, 1791 – April 2, 1872) used the new Morse code to send his first telegraph message in 1844. Already in 1843, a precursor of the fax machine for transmitting images had been patented in the United Kingdom by Alexander Bain (June 11, 1818 – September 18, 1903).

Telegraph wires soon linked major towns in many countries. A submarine telegraph wire (coated in protective gutta-percha) was laid between Britain and France in 1850, and a regular service inaugurated the following year. In 1858, the first transatlantic telegraph cable was laid. But there was a problem. Where lines crossed national borders, messages had to be stopped and translated into the particular system of the next jurisdiction. To simplify matters, regional agreements began to be forged, and in Europe, representatives of twenty States gathered in Paris at an International Telegraph Conference to find ways to overcome barriers and make services more efficient. They would create a framework to standardize telegraphy equipment, set uniform operating instructions, and lay down common international tariff and accounting rules.

On May 17, 1865, the first International Telegraph Convention was signed in Paris by its twenty founding members, and the International Telegraph Union (the first incarnation of ITU) was established to supervise subsequent amendments to the agreement. Only a decade later, the next leap forward in communications occurred with the patenting of the telephone in 1876. At the International Telegraph Conference held in Berlin in 1885, ITU began to draw up international legislation governing telephony.

Gradually, the range of radio signalling increased. The first experimental transmission of the human voice was achieved in 1900 by Reginald Fessenden (October 6, 1866 – July 22, 1932), who also made the world’s first broadcast of voice and music in 1906. However, problems occurred with international connections, as they had done in early telegraphy. The German Government called a Preliminary Radio Conference in Berlin in 1903 with the aim of establishing international regulations for radiotelegraph communications.

This preparatory event was followed in Berlin in 1906 by the first International Radiotelegraph Conference, attended by representatives of twenty-nine nations. It decided that the Bureau of ITU would act as the conference’s central administrator, and the Radiotelegraph Section of the Bureau began operation in May 1907. The 1906 conference produced the International Radiotelegraph Convention with an annex containing the first regulations in this field. These were expanded and revised by numerous subsequent conferences, and became known as the Radio Regulations. Today, given the multitude of wireless services, the regulations include more than one thousand pages of information on how the limited resource of radio-frequency spectrum – as well as satellite orbits – must be shared and used internationally.

Through the 1920s the use of radio grew rapidly, including for popular broadcasting. To improve the efficiency and quality of operation, the 1927 Washington conference allocated frequency bands to the various radio services (fixed, maritime and aeronautical mobile, broadcasting, amateur, and experimental).

The International Telecommunication Union

In 1932 at a conference in Madrid, it was decided that a new name would be adopted to reflect the full range of ITU’s responsibilities: International Telecommunication Union. The new name came into effect in January 1934. At the same time, the International Telegraph Convention of 1865 was combined with the International Radiotelegraph Convention of 1906 to form the International Telecommunication Convention. On November 15, 1947, an agreement between ITU and the newly created United Nations recognized ITU as the specialized agency for telecommunications. The agreement formally entered into force on January 1, 1949.

Outer space and satellites

The Space Age began on October 4, 1957 with the launch by the Soviet Union of the world’s first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1. Not long after, satellites became used for telecommunications. The passive Echo 1 was launched in 1960 by the United States of America, followed in 1962 by Telstar 1 (a joint French-UK-US project), the first communications satellite. The motion of these satellites had to be tracked as they crossed the sky; a more efficient and economical idea was that of the geostationary communications satellite, first proposed by writer Arthur C. Clarke in 1945. In 1964, following experiments with geosynchronous satellites, the first geostationary satellite was launched.

Like radio-frequency spectrum, the geostationary orbit around Earth is a limited natural resource; both need to be shared fairly and in a way that avoids interference. In 1963, ITU held an Extraordinary Administrative Conference for space communications, which allocated frequencies to the various services. Later conferences made further allocations and put in place regulations governing satellites’ use of orbital slots. As well as linking broadcasting and wired telephone systems, and providing navigation services, satellites are also used in mobile communications. Satellite phones, for example, can be vital in emergencies, or for areas without access to alternative networks. And in 1992, ITU made spectrum allocations for the first time to serve the needs of Global Mobile Personal Communications by Satellite (GMPCS).

ITU also looks to the needs of radio-astronomers and other space scientists, who conduct such important work as weather prediction and monitoring the Earth’s environment and climate. Climate change is a major theme of ITU’s work, as are emergency communications such as satellite-based disaster warning systems.

The ITU membership includes hundreds of private-sector organizations, as well as almost two hundred States. The world is becoming ever more reliant on telecommunication technologies, in every aspect of our lives. ITU’s role in supporting the smooth integration, expansion and sharing of each advance is more vital than ever before. ITU will continue to match its priorities and working methods to respond to the rapid changes in the global environment, as it has done for a century and a half.

Sealab and the aquanauts

space law, , ,

In a parallel to the Space Race, the Sealab program was an experimental underwater habitat program developed by the United States Navy (USN) in the 1960s to demonstrate the viability of saturation diving and the human ability to live isolated for long period of times. The knowledge gained from the Sealab missions helped to advance the science of scuba diving and to better understand the psychological and physiological tensions that humans can bear. Over three stages, the Sealab environments descended to greater and greater depths. But with the death of a diver in 1969, officials decided that the risks were too great, and they terminated the program.

“Ironically, the ocean is far more accessible than the stratosphere, and yet, it’s remained more of a mystery than outer space”. From the 1950s into the 1960s, the U.S. and the Soviet Union were engaged in a heated race into space. But they were also eyeing each other’s progress in the development of deep-sea technology for submarine warfare. Sealab I, II, and III were experimental underwater habitats developed to prove the viability of saturation diving. Underwater habitats are underwater structures in which people can live for extended periods and carry out most of the basic human functions of a 24-hour day, such as working, resting, eating, attending to personal hygiene, and sleeping. In this context, “habitat” is generally used in a narrow sense to mean the interior and immediate exterior of the structure and its fixtures, but not its surrounding marine environment. Most early underwater habitats lacked regenerative systems for air, water, food, electricity, and other resources. However, recently some new underwater habitats allow for these resources to be delivered using pipes, or generated within the habitat, rather than manually delivered.

Saturation diving is a diving technique that allows divers to reduce the risk of decompression sickness when they work at great depths for long periods of time. In saturation diving, the divers live in a pressurized environment, which can be a saturation system on the surface, or an ambient pressure underwater habitat when not in the water. Transfer to and from the pressurised surface living quarters to the equivalent depth is done in a closed, pressurised diving bell. This may be maintained for up to several weeks, and they are decompressed to surface pressure only once, at the end of their tour of duty. By limiting the number of decompressions in this way, the risk of decompression sickness is significantly reduced, and the time spent decompressing is minimised.

Aquanaut

An aquanaut (the term derives from the Latin word aqua and the Greek -nautes, by analogy to the similar construction “astronaut”) is any person who remains underwater, breathing at the ambient pressure for long enough for the concentration of the inert components of the breathing gas dissolved in the body tissues to reach equilibrium, in a state known as saturation. Usually this is done in an underwater habitat on the seafloor for a period equal to or greater than twenty-four continuous hours without returning to the surface. The term is often restricted to scientists and academics, though there were a group of military aquanauts during the Sealab program. Commercial divers in similar circumstances are referred to as saturation divers. An aquanaut is distinct from a submariner, in that a submariner is confined to a moving underwater vehicle such as a submarine that holds the water pressure out.

In the 1960s, NASA’s first astronauts tested the limits of human endurance far above the planet. Meanwhile, teams of intrepid divers explored similar boundaries in an equally inhospitable environment here on Earth: the dark, numbingly cold and high-pressure depths of the ocean. The first aquanaut was Robert Sténuit, an underwater archaeologist who spent twenty-four hours on board a tiny one-man cylinder at sixty meters in September 1962 off Villefranche-sur-Mer, on the French Riviera. Alan Shepard (November 18, 1923 – July 21, 1998), the first American to travel into outer space, was an aquanaut. Scientific aquanauts included the crew members (many of them astronauts) of NASA’s NEEMO missions (an acronym for NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations) at the Aquarius underwater laboratory.

Sealab I

Sealab I was lowered off the coast of Bermuda on July 20, 1964 to a depth of sixty meters below the ocean surface. It was constructed from two converted floats and held in place with axles from railroad cars. The experiment involved four divers who were to stay submerged for three weeks. The experiment was halted after eleven days due to an approaching tropical storm.

Sealab I was commanded by Captain George F. Bond (November 14, 1915 – January 3, 1983), a United States Navy physician who was known as a leader in the field of undersea and hyperbaric medicine and the “Father of Saturation Diving”. Sealab I proved that saturation diving in the open ocean was viable for extended periods. The experiment also offered information about habitat placement, humidity, and helium speech descrambling. Sealab I is on display at the Museum of Man in the Sea, in Panama City Beach, Florida, near where it was initially tested offshore before being deployed.

Sealab II

Sealab II was launched in 1965, and unlike Sealab I, it included hot showers and refrigeration. It was placed in the La Jolla Canyon in La Jolla, California, at a depth of sixty-two meters. On August 28, 1965, the first of three teams of divers moved into what became known as the “Tilton Hilton” (because of the slope of the landing site). Each team spent fifteen days in the habitat, but aquanaut/astronaut Scott Carpenter (May 1, 1925 – October 10, 2013) remained below for a record thirty days. In addition to physiological testing, the divers tested new tools, methods of salvage, and an electrically heated dry suit.

They were aided by a bottlenose dolphin (bottlenose dolphins, the genus Tursiops, are the most common members of the family Delphinidae, the family of oceanic dolphin) named Tuffy from the U. S. Navy Marine Mammal Program (NMMP). Aquanauts and Navy trainers attempted, with mixed results, to teach Tuffy to ferry supplies from the surface to Sealab or from one diver to another, and to come to the rescue of an aquanaut in distress.

The U.S. Navy Marine Mammal Program (NMMP) is a program administered by the U.S. Navy which studies the military use of marine mammals – principally bottlenose dolphins and California sea lions – and trains animals to perform tasks such as ship and harbour protection, mine detection and clearance, and equipment recovery. The program is based in San Diego, California, where animals are housed and trained on an ongoing basis. NMMP animal teams have been deployed for use in combat zones, such as during the Vietnam War and the Iraq War.

The program has been dogged by controversy over the treatment of the animals and speculation as to the nature of its mission and training. This has been due at least in part to the secrecy of the program, which was de-classified in the early 1990s. Since the program’s inception, there have been ongoing animal welfare concerns, with many opposing the use of marine mammals in military applications, even in essentially non-combatant roles such as mine detection. The Navy cites external oversight, including ongoing monitoring, in defense of its animal care standards.

A side note from Sealab II was a congratulatory telephone call that was arranged for Carpenter and President Lyndon B. Johnson. Carpenter was calling from a decompression chamber with helium gas replacing nitrogen, so Carpenter sounded unintelligible to operators. The tape of the call circulated for years among Navy divers before it was aired on National Public Radio in 1999.

Sealab III

Four years later, in 1969, Sealab III used a refurbished Sealab II habitat, but was placed in water three times deeper. Five teams of nine divers were scheduled to spend twelve days each in the habitat, testing new salvage techniques and conducting oceanographic and fishery studies. Preparations for such a deep dive were extensive. In addition to many biomedical studies, work-up dives were conducted at the U.S. Navy Experimental Diving Unit at the Washington, D. C. Navy Yard. These “dives” were not done in the open sea, but in a special hyperbaric chamber that could recreate the pressures at depths as great as three hundred meters of seawater.

On February 15, 1969, Sealab III was lowered to one hundred and ninety meters off San Clemente Island, California. The habitat soon began to leak and four divers were sent to repair it, but they were unsuccessful. During the second attempt, aquanaut Berry Louis Cannon died. It was found that his rebreather was missing Baralyme, the chemical necessary to remove carbon dioxide. The Sealab program came to a halt, and although the Sealab III habitat was retrieved, it was eventually scrapped.

Berry L. Cannon

Berry Louis Cannon (March 22, 1935 – February 17, 1969) was an American aquanaut who served on the Sealab II and III projects of the U.S. Navy. The aquanaut died of carbon dioxide poisoning while attempting to repair Sealab III. It was widely reported in the news media that the aquanaut had died of a heart attack. However, the official board of inquiry, held in San Diego from February 28 to March 12, 1969, concluded that Berry Louis Cannon had in fact died of carbon dioxide poisoning.

Today’s U. S. Office of Naval Research (ONR) Undersea Medicine program is a direct descendent of Sealab and seeks to understand the human challenges of undersea exploration in the modern age of biomedical science and technology. The goal is to develop technological and pharmaceutical interventions that both expand the operational envelope and increase survivability in emergency situations such as submarine rescue.

Znamya the Space Mirror

space law, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Znamya, which means “banner” or “flag” in Russian, was a series of Russian experiments developed in the 1990s to study the possibility of sending back radiation from the Sun to illuminate, for example, cities in the Russian Arctic plunged into darkness for much of the year. The space mirror that reflects the Sun’s rays onto the night side of our planet is one of the impressive space projects. To carry out this study, reflectors of increasing size had to be placed in orbit. A first twenty meters in diameter reflector, Znamya 2, was briefly deployed successfully in 1993. But a second attempt in 1999, with a twenty-five meters in diameter reflector, failed and the project was stopped.

The Znamya project started in 1988 when the United States of America proposed to commemorate the 500th anniversary of America’s discovery by organising a solar sailboat race between the Earth and the Moon. The project was unfortunately abandoned by the United States of America, lacking sufficient subsidies. But the Russian project continued its way thanks to the creation of the Space Regatta Consortium (SRC). SRC was formed in 1990 by RSC Energia as a leader and by some other Russian space organizations, and headed by Yu. Semenov, N. Sevastyanov and V. Syromiatnikov. The goal of this project was to pave the way for future solar sail projects but also to test the materials that would be the basis of solar sailboat technology, such as extremely thin metallic films used to build the sail, and to test large deployable structures of thin films formed by centrifugal forces. All this work would have been used for solar sailboats as well as for manufacturing satellites or antennas having this shape.

Krafft Arnold Ehricke

Krafft Arnold Ehricke (March 24, 1917 – December 11, 1984) was a German rocket-propulsion engineer and advocate for space colonization. Born in Berlin, Ehricke believed in the feasibility of space travel from a very young age, influenced by his viewing of the Austrian-German-American filmmaker, screenwriter, and occasional film producer and actor Fritz Lang and the movie Woman in the Moon, often considered to be one of the first science fiction movie. He attended Technical University of Berlin (founded in 1879, it became one of the most prestigious education institutions in Europe) and studied celestial mechanics and nuclear physics. He worked at Peenemünde (during World War II, the area was highly involved in the development and production of the V-2 rocket, until the production’s relocation to Nordhausen) as a propulsion engineer from 1942 to 1945 with Walter Thiel (March 3, 1910 – August 17, 1943), then went to the United States of America with other German rocket scientists and technicians under Operation Paperclip in 1947.

Ehricke promoted a philosophical concept called the “Extraterrestrial Imperative”. This idea refers to Ehricke’s belief that it was the responsibility of humanity to explore outer space and exploit the resources of the Solar System, in order to sustain the development of living beings. “There are no external limits to growth”, Ehricke insisted, because “while the Earth is a closed system, the exploration of outer space opens the universe to humanity”. Krafft Arnold Ehricke is one of the fathers of the concept of Space Reflector (which reflect sunlight on to small spots on the night side of the Earth to provide night time illumination); he wrote about systems called “Lunetta”, “Soletta”, “Biosoletta”, and “Powersoletta”.

Vladimir Syromyatnikov

Vladimir Syromyatnikov (January 7, 1933 – September 19, 2006) is the father of the Znamya project. This Russian space scientist is best known for designing docking mechanisms for manned spacecraft (a vehicle or machine designed to fly in outer space); it was his Androgynous Peripheral Attach System (allowing the joining of two space vehicles; this connection can be temporary, or semi-permanent such as for space station modules) which, in the 1970s, linked the Soviet and American space capsules in the Apollo-Soyuz test flight (the first joint U.S. – Soviet space flight, a symbol of the policy of détente that the two superpowers were pursuing at the time). Vladimir Syromyatnikov also helped design and develop Vostok, the world’s first manned spacecraft, which launched Yuri Gagarin into outer space in 1961. In the 1990s, he updated the design of his docking mechanism for the meeting of the Mir space station and the Atlantis space shuttle. Syromyatnikov’s designs are still used by spacecraft visiting the International Space Station.

Solar sail

Solar sails (also called light sails or photon sails) are a proposed method of spacecraft propulsion using radiation pressure (the pressure exerted upon any surface due to the exchange of momentum between the object and the electromagnetic field) exerted by sunlight on large mirrors.

Znamya 1

Znamya 1 was a ground engineering test model, it never flew in outer space. “In much the way a schoolchild playing with a hand mirror learns to reflect a spot of light from a bright window into the crannies of his room, some scientists believe they can put large, orbiting mirrors above Earth that could illuminate darkened areas below with spots of reflected sunlight that measure tens of miles across”.

Znamya 2

Russian scientists have long hoped to harness the Sun’s light as a relatively cheap way of illuminating Arctic cities in the permanent night of winter. “This should be a marvellous technical demonstration” said James E. Oberg of Houston, an expert on Russian space programs. “It’s an idea they’ve talked about for a long time, and now they will have a chance to see if it works”. Znamya 2 was a 20-metre wide space solar mirror. Originally designed as a prototype of a solar sail propulsion system, Znamya 2 was launched aboard Progress M-15 (a Russian unmanned cargo spacecraft which was launched in 1992 to resupply the Mir space station) from Site 31/6 (a launch site used by derivatives of the R-7 Semyorka missile) at the Baikonur Cosmodrome (a spaceport located in an area of southern Kazakhstan leased to Russia) on October 27, 1992. The reflector was deployed from the end of the Russian Progress spacecraft (a Russian expendable cargo spacecraft) on February 4, 1993, next to the Russian Mir space station (the first modular space station that operated in low Earth orbit from 1986 to 2001).

The mirror deployed successfully, and, when illuminated, produced a five kilometres wide bright spot, which traversed Europe from southern France to western Russia at a speed of eight kilometres per second. The bright spot had a luminosity equivalent to approximately that of a full Moon. Although clouds covered much of Europe that morning, a few ground observers (astronomers on the top of the Alps) reported seeing a flash of light as the beam swept by. The mirror was de-orbited after several hours and burned up in atmospheric re-entry (the movement of an object from outer space into and through the gases of an atmosphere of a planet) over Canada. The main goals of Znamya 2 were to verify the concept of the system, test stability and other characteristics of the structure, control the large thin film structure in the outer space environment, and conduct New Light (Новый Свет) experiment to illuminate the night side of Earth.

Znamya 2.5

Znamya 2.5 was the successor of Znamya 2. The project stood head and shoulders above its predecessor. Znamya 2.5 was to become the world’s first controlled global demonstration of space to Earth beamed solar power. It was deployed on February 5, 1999. The slightly concave membrane had a diameter of twenty-five meters and was expected to produce a bright seven-kilometres in diameter spot, with a luminosity equivalent to that of ten full Moon, which could be controlled by fixing it on one spot for a long time. The membrane was expected to unfold and be held unfolded by centrifugal forces. This demonstration could have significantly accelerated the global acceptance and reality of Solar Power Satellites.

According to the Russian scientist who has been called “the architect of the Znamya project”, Vladimir Syromyatnikov, the space mirror failed because of incompetence. At first all went well, the undocking of the Progress supply craft from the Mir space station went perfectly. It moved to about one hundred meters away from Mir and stopped. Looking out the windows of Mir, the cosmonauts could see the Progress hanging in outer space some way off. The folded-up space mirror was in eight drums attached to the circumference of the Progress. To unfurl the mirror, the craft had to be spun on its axis. So the thrusters were commanded to fire. But just as the Progress spacecraft was being spun to begin the deployment of the foil mirror, an extra, unwanted, command was sent to the craft telling it to deploy an antenna usually used for communication during docking manoeuvres. The antenna extended and immediately became entangled in the foil. For a while controllers at mission control just outside Moscow were blissfully unaware as the partially deployed space mirror started to crumple. Then they looked with horror at the television pictures being beamed back from Mir.

Znamya 3

Znamya 3 was intended to be a scaled-up version of the previous two Znamya, with a diameter of sixty to seventy meters. It was never built, as the project was abandoned after the failure of Znamya 2.5.

Environmental issues

During the Znamya project, many complaints have been addressed from amateur astronomy and environmental communities. Russian space officials have been receiving complaints from astronomers and environmentalists that Znamya will pollute the night sky with unwanted light. The leaders of the project have answered that artificial illumination will only be conducted over infrastructure-poor cities and industrial zones in regions of the world that experience long polar nights and that space power releases very little waste heat and no carbon dioxide.

Space Object

The term Object in reference to outer space was first used in 1961 in General Assembly Resolution 1721 (XVI) titled International cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space to describe any object launched by States into outer space. Professor Bin Cheng, a world authority on International Air and Space Law, has noted that members of the COPUOS during negotiations over the space treaties treated spacecraft and space vehicles as synonymous terms. The Space Object can be considered as the conventional launcher, the reusable launcher, the satellite, the orbital station, the probe, the impactor, the space telescope… The five UN treaties talk about Space Objects.

Article X of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967) states that “In order to promote international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, in conformity with the purposes of this Treaty, the States Parties to the Treaty shall consider on a basis of equality any requests by other States Parties to the Treaty to be afforded an opportunity to observe the flight of space objects launched by those States”. Also, under the Outer Space Treaty, Space Object implicates liability, registration, and a prohibition on the placement of weapons of mass destruction into outer space. The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1968), especially its Article 5, talks about Objects Launched into Outer Space. Under the Rescue and Return Agreement, we should also note that the term defines whether a State can request or send back a Space Object found in its territory, as well as the extent to which a State may be compensated for the effort.

The Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972) talks about Space Objects and so is the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1972) which specifies in its Article I (b) that “The term space object includes component parts of a space object as well as its launch vehicle and parts thereof”. Under the Liability Convention, we notice that Space Object defines the extent to which a State can apply a theory of liability in seeking compensation or restitution for damage caused to other objects in outer space, on the surface of the Earth, or aircraft in flight. Under the Registration Convention, a State party must register its Space Objects in order to assign nationality to a Space Object. Finally, Article 3 2. of the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1984) states that “Any threat or use of force or any other hostile act or threat of hostile act on the Moon is prohibited. It is likewise prohibited to use the Moon in order to commit any such act or to engage in any such threat in relation to the Earth, the Moon, spacecraft, the personnel of spacecraft or man-made space objects”.

The Paris Convention of 1919 (formally, the Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation) was the first international convention to address the political difficulties and intricacies involved in international aerial navigation. It deals with the notion of aircraft and states in its Article 30 that “All State aircraft other than military, customs and police aircraft shall be treated as private aircraft and as such shall be subject to all the provisions of the present Convention”. The Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention, established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a specialized agency of the UN charged with coordinating and regulating international air travel. It talks about aircrafts and corroborates the definition of an aircraft enacted in the Paris Convention (and adds the notion of Pilotless aircraft in its Article 8 and thus, opens the horizons of flying objects). An Aircraft can be defined as “any machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air other than the reactions of the air against the Earth’s surface”. Hence the fact that a Space Object causing damage triggers international liability under the 1972 Liability Convention, that a Space Object requires registration by the 1975 Registration Convention, and that a Space Object effectively triggers application of much of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty & the 1968 Rescue Agreement, none of the Five Space Law Conventions define precisely what a Space Object is (and Space Object represent specific meanings under different treaties).

According to the COPUOS (Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, Fifty-seventh session, Vienna, April 2018, on The definition and delimitation of outer space, Suborbital flights and the delimitation of air space vis-à-vis outer space: functionalism, spatialism and state sovereignty, A Submission by the Space Safety Law & Regulation Committee of the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety), a spacecraft should be capable of moving in outer space (either orbital or suborbital) without any support from the air, and should have a power source not dependent upon external oxygen. Professor Bin Cheng describes a Space Object as a man-made object that is launched or is intended to be launched into outer space. Several States have redefined Space Object in their national law using terms of art and/or through licensing and registration regimes under national law (Austria, Belgium, China, Spain, etc.).

What is called “the functionalist approach” – concerning the definition of a Space Object – takes as reference point the functions or activities of the vehicles. In order to answer the question “Is it a space craft or an aircraft?” one would ask: “Do the vehicle’s functions resemble to those of an aircraft or of a spacecraft?” Functionalists believe that a suborbital vehicle should be classified as an aircraft when the purpose that it fulfils is inherent to aviation activities, while it is deemed to be a spacecraft when it serves space-related purposes. The functionalist theory shares common grounds with what is called “the spatialist approach” (based on the environment where the activity is taking place); it examines whether the collision risks of the vehicles are higher among aircraft or space craft according to the location within which the vehicle operates. Another theory, which is closely linked to the spatialist approach, is “the aerodynamic-lift theory”. It proposes the demarcation between air space and outer space at eighty-three kilometres above the surface of the Earth (or in general between eighty and ninety kilometres), as this is the point after which the aircraft functions cannot be maintained, for the density of the atmosphere is not sufficient to support vehicles that have not achieved circular velocity (the air lift is virtually nil at that altitude). We can say that what can’t be considered an aircraft is a spacecraft. Space object can be described as any object launched into orbit from Earth, the Moon or other celestial bodies to travel to, in or through outer space, all artificial objects likely to find or evolve in outer space without the bearing strength of the air. A notional innovation came along with the Aerospace Object.

As a conclusion, we can consider Znamya objects to be space objects; the legal regime of space objects have applied to Znamya satellites. It would also be interesting to focus on environmental legal issues concerning that type of project.

woodpecker

Intelsat

space law, , , , , , , , ,

Intelsat, one of the world’s largest fleet of commercial satellites, is a communications satellite services provider. Intelsat was founded in 1964 to own and operate the worldwide commercial satellite communications system. Originally formed as International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (ITSO), it was from 1964 to 2001 an intergovernmental consortium owning and managing a constellation of communications satellites providing international broadcast services. President John F. Kennedy instigated the creation of INTELSAT with his speech to the United Nations on the 25th of September 1961. Less than a year later, John F. Kennedy signed the Communications Satellite Act of 1962.

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962

Arthur C. Clarke’s October 1945 article, “Extraterrestrial Relays”, in Wireless World, is generally considered to be the first description of geosynchronous communications satellites. His satellites orbited the Earth in twenty-four hours – the same rate as the Earth revolves – and would therefore appear stationary. Clarke hypothesized that three of these “geosynchronous” (synchronized with the Earth) satellites, each fixed over a specific longitude on the equator, would be sufficient to provide communications services for the entire globe, except for the poles. The satellites would be used for broadcasting – especially television broadcasting.

Several of Clarke’s assumptions turned out to be false – or at least premature. His satellites would have been huge – weighing hundreds of tons rather than hundreds of kilograms. He assumed the station would be manned because the vacuum tubes would have to be changed on a regular basis. Clarke powered his satellite with solar steam boilers, but imagined solar-electric devices (solar cells?) in the near future. Transistors were simply unknown to him and solar cells were not well understood. He also assumed the three basic locations for geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) satellites would be over land masses, rather than over oceans, to maximize broadcast coverage.

Seventeen years after Clarke’s article, on August 31, 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed the Communications Satellite Act, which had been debated since the beginning of the year. Just a few weeks before, on July 10, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) had launched Telstar 1. The Act aimed to join together private communication companies in order to make satellites more obtainable. The two most notable commercial entities involved in the build-up to the Communications Satellite Act were AT&T and Hughes Aircraft Corporation.

The Act states that “The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to establish, in conjunction and in cooperation with other countries, as expeditiously as practicable a commercial communications satellite system, as part of an improved global communications network, which will be responsive to public needs and national objectives, which will serve the communication needs of the United States and other countries, and which will contribute to world peace and understanding”. Communications satellite system is defined as “a system of communications satellites in space whose purpose is to relay telecommunication information between satellite terminal stations, together with such associated equipment and facilities for tracking, guidance, control, and command functions as are not part of the generalized launching, tracking, control, and command facilities for all space purposes”.

It then declares that “The new and expanded telecommunication services are to be made available as promptly as possible and are to be extended to provide global coverage at the earliest practicable date. In effectuating this program, care and attention will be directed toward providing such services to economically less developed countries and areas as well as those more highly developed, toward efficient and economical use of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum, and toward the reflection of the benefits of this new technology in both quality of services and charges for such services”.

Then it enounces that “In order to facilitate this development and to provide for the widest possible participation by private enterprise, United States participation in the global system shall be in the form of a private corporation, subject to appropriate governmental regulation. It is the intent of Congress that all authorized users shall have non-discriminatory access to the system; that maximum competition be maintained in the provision of equipment and services utilized by the system; that the corporation created under this chapter be so organized and operated as to maintain and strengthen competition in the provision of communications services to the public; and that the activities of the corporation created under this chapter and of the persons or companies participating in the ownership of the corporation shall be consistent with the Federal antitrust laws”.

Finally, the Communications Satellite Act affirms that “It is not the intent of Congress by this chapter to preclude the use of the communications satellite system for domestic communication services where consistent with the provisions of this chapter nor to preclude the creation of additional communications satellite systems, if required to meet unique governmental needs or if otherwise required in the national interest”.

The Act established the Communications Satellite Corporation (COMSAT). Agencies from different countries joined the COMSAT and formed the International telecommunication Consortium (Intelsat). Intelsat established a global commercial communications network. The Act governs all nongovernmental wire and wireless telecommunication. The Act established the Federal Communications Commission.

The International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (ITSO)

The International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (ITSO) is an intergovernmental organization today charged with overseeing the public service obligations of Intelsat. The International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (ITSO) began on August 20, 1964. The 1964 agreement was an interim arrangement on a path to a more permanent agreement. The permanent international organization was established in 1973, following inter-nation negotiations from 1969 to 1971.

It incorporated the principle set forth in Resolution 1721 (XVI) of the United Nations General Assembly which states the following: “The General Assembly, Believing that communication by means of satellites should be available to the nations of the world as soon as practicable on a global and non-discriminatory basis; Convinced of the need to prepare the way for the establishment of effective operational satellite communication, 1. Notes with satisfaction that the International Telecommunication Union plans to call a special conference in 1963 to make allocations of radio frequency bands for outer space activities; 2. Recommends that the International Telecommunication Union consider at that conference those aspects of space communication in which international co-operation will be required; 3. Notes the potential importance of communication satellites for use by the United Nations and its principal organs and specialized agencies for both operational and informational requirements; 4. Invites the Special Fund and the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance, in consultation with the International Telecommunication Union, to give sympathetic consideration to requests from Member States for technical and other assistance for the survey of their communication needs and for the development of their domestic communication facilities, so that they may make effective use of space communication; 5. Requests the International Telecommunication Union, consulting as appropriate with Member States, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and other specialized agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations, such as the Committee on Space Research of the International Council of Scientific Unions, to submit a report on the implementation of these proposals to the Economic and Social Council at its thirty-fourth session and to the General Assembly at its seventeenth session; 6. Requests the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, as it deems appropriate, to review that report and submit its comments and recommendations to the Economic and Social Council and to the General Assembly. 1085th plenary meeting, December 20, 1961”.

Originally established in 1973 as Intelsat, the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization was restructured in 2001. The restructuring led to the creation of a private entity, Intelsat S.A. and to the continuation of the intergovernmental organization with a new acronym (ITSO). Today, ITSO’s mission is to “act as the supervisory authority of Intelsat Ltd.; ensure the performance of Core Principles for the provision of international public telecommunications services, with high reliability and quality; and promote international public telecommunication services to meet the needs of the information and communications society”. The Core Principles of the Organization include, maintaining global connectivity and coverage; providing public telecommunications services, including capacity and price protection guarantees to “Lifeline Connectivity Obligation (LCO)” customers; providing domestic public telecommunications services between areas that are isolated or separated by geographic or natural barriers or high seas; and ensuring non-discriminatory access to Intelsat, Ltd.’s communications system.

Intelsat I

Intelsat I (nicknamed Early Bird for the proverb “The early bird catches the worm”) was the first commercial communications satellite to be placed in geosynchronous orbit, on April 6, 1965. It was built by the Space and Communications Group of Hughes Aircraft Company (later Hughes Space and Communications Company, and now Boeing Satellite Systems) for COMSAT, which activated it on June 28. It was based on the satellite that Hughes had built for NASA to demonstrate that communications via synchronous-orbit satellite were feasible. Its booster was a Thrust Augmented Delta (Delta D). After a series of manoeuvres, it reached its geosynchronous orbital position over the Atlantic Ocean, where it was put into service. In April 1964, the company ordered the first Intelsat I commercial telecommunications satellite from the manufacturer Hughes. The utilisation of this new telecommunications system has involved the realization of ground stations (or Earth stations) in other countries, the definition of common technical protocols, and the harmonisation of pricing.

It helped provide the first live TV coverage of a spacecraft splashdown, that of Gemini 6 in December 1965. Originally slated to operate for eighteen months, Early Bird was in active service for four years, being deactivated in January 1969, although it was briefly activated in June of that year to serve the Apollo 11 flight when the Atlantic Intelsat satellite failed. It was deactivated again in August 1969 and has been inactive since that time, although it remains in orbit. The Early Bird satellite was the first to provide direct and nearly instantaneous contact between Europe and North America, handling television, telephone, and telefacsimile transmissions. It was fairly small and weighed thirty-five kilograms.

COMSAT

space law, , , , , , , ,

COMSAT (Communications Satellite Corporation) was a global telecommunications (the transmission of signs, signals, messages, words, writings, images and sounds or information of any nature by wire, radio, optical or electromagnetic systems) company, based in the United States of America from 1963 to 2007.

COMSAT

COMSAT was the historical leading operator of telecommunications satellites (an artificial satellite that relays and amplifies radio telecommunications signals via a transponder; it creates a communication channel between a source transmitter and a receiver at different locations on Earth). It was created in 1962 by the Kennedy administration to develop a private space telecommunications industry. It was a pioneer in the development of international space communications and launched the first geostationary orbit telecommunications satellite, Intelsat I. The Communications Satellite Act of 1962 entrusted a new private company, COMSAT, independent of telecommunications players like AT&T, whose Kennedy administration was wary of, to develop space telecommunications. COMSAT, which became the leading operator of telecommunications satellites, was under the supervision of the US telecommunications regulator, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

It then became a representative of the United States of America and a major player in the international telecommunications organizations Intelsat and Inmarsat (maritime telecommunications). In the mid-1970s, the US telecommunications regulatory authorities opened the telecommunications field to competition, forcing COMSAT to find new markets. The company launched with IBM Satellite Business Systems to give private companies direct access to space communications. COMSAT developed the domestic space telecommunications market with the Comstar geostationary satellite series (a family of four U.S. geostationary orbit communications satellites developed by COMSAT to meet the needs of U.S. long-distance home telephone telecommunications).

In the early 1980s and less successfully, the company began to satellite broadcast television programs. The society then began to suffer from problems of profitability and struggled to keep up with the competition. It diversified successfully in the leisure industry but its profits collapsed in the late 1990s. The company, which had refocused on its initial business, was bought in 1998 by Lockheed Martin (an American global aerospace, defense, security and advanced technologies company with worldwide interests; it was formed by the merger of Lockheed Corporation with Martin Marietta in March 1995) and dissolved in 2000.

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962

Arthur C. Clarke’s October 1945 article, “Extraterrestrial Relays”, in Wireless World, is generally considered to be the first description of geosynchronous communications satellites. His satellites orbited the Earth in twenty-four hours – the same rate as the Earth revolves – and would therefore appear stationary. Clarke hypothesized that three of these “geosynchronous” (synchronized with the Earth) satellites, each fixed over a specific longitude on the equator, would be sufficient to provide communications services for the entire globe, except for the poles. The satellites would be used for broadcasting – especially television broadcasting.

Several of Clarke’s assumptions turned out to be false – or at least premature. His satellites would have been huge – weighing hundreds of tons rather than hundreds of kilograms. He assumed the station would be manned because the vacuum tubes would have to be changed on a regular basis. Clarke powered his satellite with solar steam boilers, but imagined solar-electric devices (solar cells?) in the near future. Transistors were simply unknown to him and solar cells were not well understood. He also assumed the three basic locations for geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) satellites would be over land masses, rather than over oceans, to maximize broadcast coverage.

Seventeen years after Clarke’s article, on August 31, 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed the Communications Satellite Act, which had been debated since the beginning of the year. Just a few weeks before, on July 10, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) had launched Telstar 1. The Act aimed to join together private communication companies in order to make satellites more obtainable. The two most notable commercial entities involved in the build-up to the Communications Satellite Act were AT&T and Hughes Aircraft Corporation.

The Act states that “The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to establish, in conjunction and in cooperation with other countries, as expeditiously as practicable a commercial communications satellite system, as part of an improved global communications network, which will be responsive to public needs and national objectives, which will serve the communication needs of the United States and other countries, and which will contribute to world peace and understanding”. Communications satellite system is defined as “a system of communications satellites in space whose purpose is to relay telecommunication information between satellite terminal stations, together with such associated equipment and facilities for tracking, guidance, control, and command functions as are not part of the generalized launching, tracking, control, and command facilities for all space purposes”.

It then declares that “The new and expanded telecommunication services are to be made available as promptly as possible and are to be extended to provide global coverage at the earliest practicable date. In effectuating this program, care and attention will be directed toward providing such services to economically less developed countries and areas as well as those more highly developed, toward efficient and economical use of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum, and toward the reflection of the benefits of this new technology in both quality of services and charges for such services”.

Then it enounces that “In order to facilitate this development and to provide for the widest possible participation by private enterprise, United States participation in the global system shall be in the form of a private corporation, subject to appropriate governmental regulation. It is the intent of Congress that all authorized users shall have non-discriminatory access to the system; that maximum competition be maintained in the provision of equipment and services utilized by the system; that the corporation created under this chapter be so organized and operated as to maintain and strengthen competition in the provision of communications services to the public; and that the activities of the corporation created under this chapter and of the persons or companies participating in the ownership of the corporation shall be consistent with the Federal antitrust laws”.

Finally, the Communications Satellite Act affirms that “It is not the intent of Congress by this chapter to preclude the use of the communications satellite system for domestic communication services where consistent with the provisions of this chapter nor to preclude the creation of additional communications satellite systems, if required to meet unique governmental needs or if otherwise required in the national interest”.

The Act established the Communications Satellite Corporation (COMSAT). Agencies from different countries joined the COMSAT and formed the International telecommunication Consortium (INTELSAT). INTELSAT established a global commercial communications network. The Act governs all nongovernmental wire and wireless telecommunication. The Act established the Federal Communications Commission.

Intelsat I

Intelsat I (nicknamed Early Bird for the proverb “The early bird catches the worm”) was the first commercial communications satellite to be placed in geosynchronous orbit, on April 6, 1965. It was built by the Space and Communications Group of Hughes Aircraft Company (later Hughes Space and Communications Company, and now Boeing Satellite Systems) for COMSAT, which activated it on June 28. It was based on the satellite that Hughes had built for NASA to demonstrate that communications via synchronous-orbit satellite were feasible. Its booster was a Thrust Augmented Delta (Delta D). After a series of manoeuvres, it reached its geosynchronous orbital position over the Atlantic Ocean, where it was put into service. In April 1964, the company ordered the first Intelsat I commercial telecommunications satellite from the manufacturer Hughes. The utilisation of this new telecommunications system has involved the realization of ground stations (or Earth stations) in other countries, the definition of common technical protocols, and the harmonisation of pricing.

It helped provide the first live TV coverage of a spacecraft splashdown, that of Gemini 6 in December 1965. Originally slated to operate for eighteen months, Early Bird was in active service for four years, being deactivated in January 1969, although it was briefly activated in June of that year to serve the Apollo 11 flight when the Atlantic Intelsat satellite failed. It was deactivated again in August 1969 and has been inactive since that time, although it remains in orbit. The Early Bird satellite was the first to provide direct and nearly instantaneous contact between Europe and North America, handling television, telephone, and telefacsimile transmissions. It was fairly small and weighed thirty-five kilograms.

In August 1964, the International Telecommunications Satellite Consortium (Intelsat) was created with fifteen Member States. COMSAT, which represented the United States of America, supported the construction and management of satellites.

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962

space law, , , , , ,

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962 is a U.S. federal statute. The Act is the successor to the Radio Act of 1927. The object of the Act is to deal with the issue of commercialization of space communications and to establish a commercial communications system utilizing space satellites which will serve American needs and those of other countries and contribute to world peace and understanding.

The law of the United States of America

The law of the United States of America comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the most important is the United States Constitution (the supreme law of the United States), the foundation of the federal government of the United States of America. The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of Acts of Congress (a statute enacted by the United States Congress; it can either be a Public Law, relating to the general public, or a Private Law, relating to specific institutions or individuals), treaties ratified by the Senate (the upper chamber of the United States Congress, which along with the United States House of Representatives – the lower chamber – comprises the legislature of the United States of America), regulations promulgated by the executive branch (the organ exercising authority in and holding responsibility for the governance of a political entity; the executive “executes” and “enforces” law), and case law (a set of past rulings by tribunals that meet their respective jurisdictions’ rules to be cited as precedent – in common law legal systems, precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts; these interpretations are distinguished from statutory law, which are the statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies, and regulatory law, which are regulations established by executive agencies based on statutes) originating from the federal judiciary (one of the three branches of the federal government of the United States of America organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government). The United States Code is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law.

The Code of Laws of the United States of America (variously abbreviated to Code of Laws of the United States, United States Code, U.S. Code, U.S.C., or USC) is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes of the United States of America. It contains fifty-three titles. The main edition is published every six years by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives, and cumulative supplements are published annually. The official version of those laws not codified in the United States Code can be found in United States Statutes at Large.

The United States Statutes at Large, commonly referred to as the Statutes at Large and abbreviated Stat., are an official record of Acts of Congress and concurrent resolutions passed by the United States Congress. Each act and resolution of Congress is originally published as a slip law, which is classified as either public law (abbreviated Pub.L.) or private law (Pvt.L.), and designated and numbered accordingly. At the end of a Congressional session, the statutes enacted during that session are compiled into bound books, known as “session law” publications. The session law publication for U.S. Federal statutes is called the United States Statutes at Large. In that publication, the public laws and private laws are numbered and organised in chronological order. Federal statutes are published in a three-part process, consisting of slip laws, session laws (Statutes at Large), and codification (United States Code).

Federal law originates with the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to enact statutes (a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a city, state, or country) for certain limited purposes, like regulating interstate commerce for example. The United States Code is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes. Many statutes give executive branch agencies the power to create regulations, which are published in the Federal Register (the official journal of the federal government of the United States of America that contains government agency rules, proposed rules, and public notices) and codified into the Code of Federal Regulations (the codification of the general and permanent rules and regulations, sometimes called administrative law, published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government of the United States of America). Regulations generally also carry the force of law under the Chevron doctrine. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), was a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court set forth the legal test for determining whether to grant deference to a government agency’s interpretation of a statute which it administers. Chevron is the Court’s clearest articulation of the doctrine of “administrative deference”, to the point that the Court itself has used the phrase “Chevron deference” in more recent cases. Many lawsuits turn on the meaning of a federal statute or regulation, and judicial interpretations of such meaning carry legal force under the principle of stare decisis (the principle by which judges are bound to precedents).

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962

Arthur C. Clarke’s October 1945 article, “Extraterrestrial Relays”, in Wireless World, is generally considered to be the first description of geosynchronous communications satellites. His satellites orbited the Earth in twenty-four hours – the same rate as the Earth revolves – and would therefore appear stationary. Clarke hypothesized that three of these “geosynchronous” (synchronized with the Earth) satellites, each fixed over a specific longitude on the equator, would be sufficient to provide communications services for the entire globe, except for the poles. The satellites would be used for broadcasting – especially television broadcasting.

Several of Clarke’s assumptions turned out to be false – or at least premature. His satellites would have been huge – weighing hundreds of tons rather than hundreds of kilograms. He assumed the station would be manned because the vacuum tubes would have to be changed on a regular basis. Clarke powered his satellite with solar steam boilers, but imagined solar-electric devices (solar cells?) in the near future. Transistors were simply unknown to him and solar cells were not well understood. He also assumed the three basic locations for geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) satellites would be over land masses, rather than over oceans, to maximize broadcast coverage.

Seventeen years after Clarke’s article, on August 31, 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed the Communications Satellite Act, which had been debated since the beginning of the year. Just a few weeks before, on July 10, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) had launched Telstar 1. The Act aimed to join together private communication companies in order to make satellites more obtainable. The two most notable commercial entities involved in the build-up to the Communications Satellite Act were AT&T and Hughes Aircraft Corporation.

The Act states that “The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to establish, in conjunction and in cooperation with other countries, as expeditiously as practicable a commercial communications satellite system, as part of an improved global communications network, which will be responsive to public needs and national objectives, which will serve the communication needs of the United States and other countries, and which will contribute to world peace and understanding”. Communications satellite system is defined as “a system of communications satellites in space whose purpose is to relay telecommunication information between satellite terminal stations, together with such associated equipment and facilities for tracking, guidance, control, and command functions as are not part of the generalized launching, tracking, control, and command facilities for all space purposes”.

The Communications Satellite Act of 1962 then declares that “The new and expanded telecommunication services are to be made available as promptly as possible and are to be extended to provide global coverage at the earliest practicable date. In effectuating this program, care and attention will be directed toward providing such services to economically less developed countries and areas as well as those more highly developed, toward efficient and economical use of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum, and toward the reflection of the benefits of this new technology in both quality of services and charges for such services”.

Then it enounces that “In order to facilitate this development and to provide for the widest possible participation by private enterprise, United States participation in the global system shall be in the form of a private corporation, subject to appropriate governmental regulation. It is the intent of Congress that all authorized users shall have non-discriminatory access to the system; that maximum competition be maintained in the provision of equipment and services utilized by the system; that the corporation created under this chapter be so organized and operated as to maintain and strengthen competition in the provision of communications services to the public; and that the activities of the corporation created under this chapter and of the persons or companies participating in the ownership of the corporation shall be consistent with the Federal antitrust laws”.

Finally, speaking about the Communications Satellite Act of 1962, the Communications Satellite Act affirms that “It is not the intent of Congress by this chapter to preclude the use of the communications satellite system for domestic communication services where consistent with the provisions of this chapter nor to preclude the creation of additional communications satellite systems, if required to meet unique governmental needs or if otherwise required in the national interest”.

The Act established the Communications Satellite Corporation (COMSAT). Agencies from different countries joined the COMSAT and formed the International telecommunication Consortium (INTELSAT). INTELSAT established a global commercial communications network. The Act governs all nongovernmental wire and wireless telecommunication. The Act established the Federal Communications Commission. That is what we can say about the Communications Satellite Act of 1962.

The Partial Test Ban Treaty

space law, , , ,

The Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) is the abbreviated name of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, which prohibited all test detonations of nuclear weapons except for those conducted underground. The treaty, also commonly known as the Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT), had three main aspects: (1) prohibiting nuclear weapons tests or other nuclear explosions under water, in the atmosphere, or in outer space, (2) allowing underground nuclear tests as long as no radioactive debris falls outside the boundaries of the nation conducting the test, and (3) pledging signatories to work towards complete disarmament, an end to the armaments race, and an end to the contamination of the environment by radioactive substances.

Negotiations initially focused on a comprehensive ban, but this was abandoned due to technical questions surrounding the detection of underground tests and Soviet concerns over the intrusiveness of proposed verification methods. The impetus for the test ban was provided by rising public anxiety over the magnitude of nuclear tests, particularly tests of new thermonuclear weapons (hydrogen bombs), and the resulting nuclear fallout. A test ban was also seen as a means of slowing nuclear proliferation and the nuclear arms race. The PTBT was signed by the governments of the Soviet Union (Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko), United Kingdom (British Foreign Secretary Lord Home), and United States of America (US Secretary Dean Rusk) in Moscow on August 5, 1963 before being opened for signature by other countries. The treaty formally went into effect on October 10, 1963. Since then, more than one hundred other States have become party to the Treaty.

Historical background

The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic bombs marked the end of World War II and the beginning of the nuclear age. As tensions between East and West settled into a Cold War, scientists in the United States of America, the Great Britain, and the Soviet Union conducted tests and developed more powerful nuclear weapons. In 1959, radioactive deposits were found in wheat and milk in the northern United States of America. As scientists and the public gradually became aware of the dangers of radioactive fallout, they began to raise their voices against nuclear testing. Leaders and diplomats of several countries sought to address the issue.

In May 1955, the United Nations Disarmament Commission brought together the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, and the Soviet Union to begin negotiations on ending nuclear weapons testing. Conflict soon arose over inspections to verify underground testing. The Soviet Union feared that on-site inspections could lead to spying that might expose the Soviets’ vastly exaggerated claims of the number of deliverable nuclear weapons. As negotiators struggled over differences, the Soviet Union and the United States suspended nuclear tests – a moratorium that lasted from November 1958 to September 1961.

John F. Kennedy had supported a ban on nuclear weapons testing since 1956. He believed a ban would prevent other countries from obtaining nuclear weapons, and took a strong stand on the issue in the 1960 presidential campaign. Once elected, President Kennedy pledged not to resume testing in the air and promised to pursue all diplomatic efforts for a test ban treaty before resuming underground testing. He envisioned the test ban as a first step to nuclear disarmament. President Kennedy met with Soviet Premier Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961, just five weeks after the humiliating defeat of the US-sponsored invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. Khrushchev took a hard line at the summit. He announced his intention to cut off Western access to Berlin and threatened war if the United States or its allies tried to stop him. Many US diplomats felt that Kennedy had not stood up to the Soviet premier at the summit and left Khrushchev with the impression that he was a weak leader.

After the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev realized that they had come dangerously close to nuclear war. Both leaders sought to reduce tensions between their two nations. As Khrushchev described it, “The two most powerful nations had been squared off against each other, each with its finger on the button”. JFK shared this concern, once remarking at a White House meeting, “It is insane that two men, sitting on opposite sides of the world, should be able to decide to bring an end to civilization”. In a series of private letters, Khrushchev and Kennedy reopened a dialogue on banning nuclear testing. In his commencement address at American University on June 10, 1963, Kennedy announced a new round of high-level arms negotiations with the Russians. He boldly called for an end to the Cold War. “If we cannot end our differences” he said, “at least we can help make the world a safe place for diversity”. The Soviet government broadcast a translation of the entire speech, and allowed it to be reprinted in the controlled Soviet press.

The treaty

The treaty starts with the following preamble: “The Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, hereinafter referred to as the Original Parties, Proclaiming as their principal aim the speediest possible achievement of an agreement on general and complete disarmament under strict international control in accordance with the objectives of the United Nations which would put an end to the armaments race and eliminate the incentive to the production and testing of all kinds of weapons, including nuclear weapons, Seeking to achieve the discontinuance of all test explosions of nuclear weapons for all time, determined to continue negotiations to this end, and desiring to put an end to the contamination of man’s environment by radioactive substances, Have agreed as follows”.

Article I of the TREATY BANNING NUCLEAR WEAPON TESTS IN THE ATMOSPHERE, IN OUTER SPACE AND UNDER WATER, SIGNED AT MOSCOW, ON AUGUST 5, 1963, states that “1. Each of the Parties to this Treaty undertakes to prohibit, to prevent, and not to carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, at any place under its jurisdiction or control: (a) in the atmosphere; beyond its limits, including outer space; or under water, including territorial waters or high seas; or (b) in any other environment if such explosion causes radioactive debris to be present outside the territorial limits of the State under whose jurisdiction or control such explosion is conducted. It is understood in this connection that the provisions of this subparagraph are without prejudice to the conclusion of a treaty resulting in the permanent banning of all nuclear test explosions, including all such explosions underground, the conclusion of which, as the Parties have stated in the Preamble to this Treaty, they seek to achieve. 2. Each of the Parties to this Treaty undertakes furthermore to refrain from causing, encouraging, or in any way participating in, the carrying out of any nuclear weapon test explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, anywhere which would take place in any of the environments described, or have the effect referred to, in paragraph 1 of this Article”.

Article II of the Partial Test Ban Treaty continues by affirming that “1. Any Party may propose amendments to this Treaty. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary Governments which shall circulate it to all Parties to this Treaty. Thereafter, if requested to do so by one-third or more of the Parties, the Depositary Governments shall convene a conference, to which they shall invite all the Parties, to consider such amendment. 2. Any amendment to this Treaty must be approved by a majority of the votes of all the Parties to this Treaty, including the votes of all of the Original Parties. The amendment shall enter into force for all Parties upon the deposit of instruments of ratification by a majority of all the Parties, including the instruments of ratification of all of the Original Parties”.

Article III of the Partial Test Ban Treaty enounces that “1. This Treaty shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign this Treaty before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article may accede to it at any time. 2. This Treaty shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification and instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Governments of the Original Parties the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which are hereby designated the Depositary Governments. 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by all the Original Parties and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. 4. For States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited subsequent to the entry into force of this Treaty, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession. 5. The Depositary Governments shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification of and accession to this Treaty, the date of its entry into force, and the date of receipt of any requests for conferences or other notices. 6. This Treaty shall be registered by the Depositary Governments pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations”.

Finally, Article IV of the Partial Test Ban Treaty declares that “This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty three months in advance”.

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT)

Thirty-three years later, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Signed by seventy-one nations, including those possessing nuclear weapons, the treaty prohibited all nuclear test explosions including those conducted underground. Though it was signed by President Bill Clinton, the United States Senate rejected the treaty by a vote of fifty-one to forty-eight. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), a multilateral treaty that bans all nuclear explosions, for both civilian and military purposes, in all environments, was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on September 10, 1996, but has not entered into force, as eight specific States have not ratified the Treaty. That is what we can say about the Partial Test Ban Treaty.

Starfish Prime or the legality of high-altitude nuclear explosions

space law, , , , , , , , , , , ,

High-altitude nuclear explosions are the result of nuclear weapons testing. Nuclear weapons tests are experiments carried out to determine the effectiveness, yield, and explosive capability of nuclear weapons. Throughout the twentieth century, most nations that developed nuclear weapons tested them. During the heart of the Cold War, the United States of America and the former Soviet Union launched and detonated a combined total of over twenty thermonuclear weapons in the upper-atmosphere and near space region of Earth in an effort to test the effects of launching an offense as well as countering an offense.

Testing nuclear weapons (high-altitude nuclear explosions) can yield information about how the weapons work, as well as how the weapons behave under various conditions and how personnel, structures, and equipment behave when subjected to nuclear explosions. Nuclear testing has often been used as an indicator of scientific and military strength, and many tests have been overtly political in their intention; most nuclear weapons states publicly declared their nuclear status by means of a nuclear test. A nuclear weapon is an explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission (fission bomb) or from a combination of fission and fusion reactions (thermonuclear bomb). Both bomb types release large quantities of energy from relatively small amounts of matter.

Several such tests (high-altitude nuclear explosions) were performed at high altitudes by the United States of America and the Soviet Union between 1958 and 1962. The familiar immediate effects of low-altitude nuclear explosions are flash, blast, and prompt radiation. Effects are significantly different for explosions above most of the atmosphere. Since blast is the shock wave transmitted through air, this is attenuated with height and is absent for explosions beyond the atmosphere. Flash is the visible and infrared light pulse from the fireball formed from heated air. With higher altitude, the fireball formation is significantly altered with consequent effects on flash. Prompt radiation includes ionising radiation from the nuclear reactions in the warhead and decay of fission products left by the explosion. These radiations, particularly neutron radiation, are significantly attenuated by the atmosphere for low altitude bursts. For explosions above most of the atmosphere, ranges of prompt radiation effects are greater than for atmospheric bursts.

Operation Hardtack I

Operation Hardtack I was, when speaking about high-altitude nuclear explosions, a series of thirty-five nuclear tests conducted by the United States of America from April 28 to August 18 in 1958 at the Pacific Proving Grounds (a number of sites in the Marshall Islands and a few other sites in the Pacific Ocean at which the United States of America conducted nuclear testing between 1946 and 1962).

HARDTACK-Teak was an exoatmospheric (pertaining to, or occurring in the nearby region of space outside the Earth’s atmosphere) high altitude nuclear weapon test performed during Operation Hardtack I. It was launched from Johnston Island on a Redstone missile. On August 1, 1958, it detonated at an altitude of seventy-seven kilometres.

Operation Argus

Operation Argus was a series of United States of America low-yield, high-atmosphere nuclear weapons tests and missile tests secretly conducted during August and September 1958 over the South Atlantic Ocean. The ARGUS tests took eleven days from start to finish with the first launch on August 27 and the final launch on September 6. They were performed by the Defense Nuclear Agency, in conjunction with the Explorer 4 space mission.

The tests were proposed as a means to verify the Christofilos effect, which argued that high-altitude nuclear detonations would create a radiation belt in the extreme upper regions of the Earth’s atmosphere. Such belts would be similar in effect to the Van Allen radiation belts: “Such radiation belts were viewed as having possible tactical use in war, including degradation of radio and radar transmissions, damage or destruction of the arming and fuzzing mechanisms of ICBM warheads, and endangering the crews of orbiting space vehicles that might enter the belt”.

Christofilos effect

The Christofilos effect refers to the entrapment of charged particles along magnetic lines of force that was first predicted in 1957 by the Greek physicist Nicholas Christofilos (December 16, 1916 – September 24, 1972). Christofilos suggested the effect had defensive potential in a nuclear war, with so many beta particles (electrons) becoming trapped that warheads flying through the region would see electrical currents so great that their trigger electronics would be damaged. The concept that a few friendly warheads could disrupt an enemy attack was so promising that a series of new nuclear tests was rushed into the schedule before a testing moratorium came into effect in late 1958. These tests demonstrated that the effect was not nearly as strong as predicted, and not enough to damage a warhead. However, the effect is strong enough to be used to black out radars and disable satellites.

Kapustin Yar

The Soviets detonated four high-altitude tests in 1961. Kapustin Yar was a Russian rocket launch and development site in Astrakhan Oblast, between Volgograd and Astrakhan. It was established by the Soviet Union on May 13, 1946 and in the beginning used technology, material and scientific support from defeated Germany. Numerous launches of test rockets for the Russian military were carried out at the site, as well as satellite and sounding rocket launches.

Starfish Prime and high-altitude nuclear explosions

Operation Fishbowl was a series of high-altitude nuclear tests in 1962 that were carried out by the United States as a part of the larger Operation Dominic nuclear test program. Flight-test vehicles were designed and manufactured by Avco Corporation. The Operation Fishbowl nuclear tests were originally planned to be completed during the first half of 1962 with three tests named Bluegill, Starfish and Urraca.

Starfish Prime was a July 9, 1962 high-altitude nuclear test conducted by the United States of America, a joint effort of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the Defense Atomic Support Agency. It was launched from Johnston Island, and was the largest nuclear test conducted in outer space and one of five conducted by the United States of America in outer space. A Thor rocket (the first operational ballistic missile deployed by the U.S. Air Force) carrying a W49 (an American thermonuclear warhead, used on the Thor, Atlas, Jupiter, and Titan I ballistic missile systems) thermonuclear warhead (manufactured by Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory) and a Mk. 2 re-entry vehicle was launched from Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean, about one thousand five-hundred kilometres west-southwest of Hawaii. The explosion took place at an altitude of four-hundred kilometres, above a point thirty kilometres southwest of Johnston Island. It produced a yield equivalent to one and a half megatons of TNT.

The Starfish test was one of five high-altitude tests grouped together as Operation Fishbowl within the larger Operation Dominic, a series of tests in 1962 begun in response to the Soviet announcement on August 30, 1961 that they would end a three-year moratorium on testing. In 1958 the United States had completed six high-altitude nuclear tests, but the high-altitude tests of that year produced many unexpected results and raised many new questions.

On July 9, 1962, at 09:00:09 Coordinated Universal Time (the primary time standard by which the world regulates clocks and time), the Starfish Prime test was detonated at an altitude of four hundred kilometres. Starfish Prime caused an electromagnetic pulse (EMP), which was far larger than expected, so much larger that it drove much of the instrumentation off scale, causing great difficulty in getting accurate measurements. The Starfish Prime electromagnetic pulse also made those effects known to the public by causing electrical damage in Hawaii, about one thousand and five hundred kilometres away from the detonation point, knocking out about three hundred streetlights, setting off numerous burglar alarms and damaging a telephone company microwave link.

Soviet Project K nuclear tests – High-altitude nuclear explosions

The Soviet Union’s K project nuclear test series were all high altitude tests fired by missiles from the Kapustin Yar launch site in Russia across central Kazakhstan toward the Sary Shagan test range. The worst effects of a Soviet high-altitude test occurred on October 22, 1962 (during the Cuban missile crisis) when a three hundred kilotons missile-warhead detonated near Jezkazgan at an altitude of three hundred kilometres. Although the weapons used in the K Project were much smaller (up to three hundred kilotons) than the United States of America’ Starfish Prime test of 1962, the damage caused by the resulting EMP was much greater because the K Project tests were done over a large populated land mass, and at a location where the Earth’s magnetic field was greater.

The legality of high-altitude nuclear explosions

Sputnik 1 was launched on October 14, 1957 and proceeded to orbit the Earth blithely unconcerned with the political boundaries below. It was apparent that space activities had international implications. Concerning the United Nations, the question of space activities was first raised in 1957 in the context of the debate on disarmament. In 1958, the Question on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space was placed on the agenda of the General Assembly. The thirteenth session of the General Assembly, held in 1958, provided a forum for the debate on Questions of the Peaceful Use of Outer Space. During this session, the term peaceful was used as an antonym to military. Sweden appealed to fellow Member States to any military use whatsoever and the Soviet Union put forward a proposal to ban the use of outer space for military purposes. The General Assembly adopted resolution 1348 (XIII), which recognized the common aim of humankind that outer space should be used for peaceful purposes only.

The General Assembly stated that it wished to avoid the extension of present national rivalries into the field of outer space, that the exploration and exploitation of outer space shall be done for the benefit of mankind, considered that such co-operation will promote mutual understanding and the strengthening of friendly relations among people. To ensure those objectives, the 792nd plenary meeting decided to establish an ad hoc (Latin, For this, for this special purpose; Committee formed for a specific task or objective) Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space composed of the representatives of Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Czechoslovakia, France, India, Iran, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Sweden, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Arab Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, which would only officially truly start with the 1472 (XIV)’s resolution – December 12, 1959 – on INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION IN THE PEACEFUL USES OF OUTER SPACE.

In 1959, the Committee would be launched by twenty-four Member States. It has considerably expanded since then and is today one of the largest United Nations Committees. In addition to the Member States, several International Organisations, both governmental and non-governmental, have an observer status in the COPUOS and its subcommittees. In particular, the European Union is an ad hoc observer.

The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) was set up by the General Assembly in 1959 to govern the exploration and use of space for the benefit of all humanity: for peace, security and development. The Committee was tasked with reviewing international cooperation in peaceful uses of outer space, studying space-related activities that could be undertaken by the United Nations, encouraging space research programmes, and studying legal problems arising from the exploration of outer space. The Committee was instrumental in the creation of the five treaties and five principles of outer space. International cooperation in space exploration and the use of space technology applications to meet global development goals are discussed in the Committee every year. Owing to rapid advances in space technology, the space agenda is constantly evolving. The Committee provides a unique platform at the global level to monitor and discuss these developments. The Committee has two subsidiary bodies: the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee, and the Legal Subcommittee, both established in 1961.

Its first session was held in May and June of 1959 and produced a useful account of current activities in outer space. Some of the suggestions of this session provided a basis for follow-up action later in the United Nations. However, only thirteen of the eighteen countries on the Committee attended this session. Czechoslovakia, Poland and the Soviet Union refused to attend, expressing dissatisfaction with the composition of the Committee. India and the United Arab Republic also did not attend. There is widespread interest in the United Nations in fostering international co-operation in outer space for two basic reasons: first, to maximize co-operation between the two major space Powers despite their political differences; and second, to encourage the increased peaceful uses of outer space to benefit all countries irrespective of the stage of their economic or scientific development. Countries realize that activities going forward in outer space – satellites helping to forecast the weather, to increase communications, to improve navigational conditions, to test for radioactivity, to do basic research – will all make their impact on everyone on this earth with increasing force.

If the Soviet Union was able on October 4, 1957 to orbit Sputnik 1, the first space object, it meant that it would also be able to use intercontinental ballistic missiles (an intercontinental ballistic missile or ICBM, is a guided ballistic missile with a minimum range of five thousand five hundred kilometres primarily designed for nuclear weapons delivery – delivering one or more thermonuclear warheads) against its adversaries, in particular the United States of America. The question of the militarization of outer space is a very delicate issue, the subject being highly strategic, and States not easily agreeing on it, often leaving room for further misunderstandings. Since a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly of December 13, 1958, it was desired to see outer space used exclusively for peaceful purposes. The General Assembly stated that it wished to avoid the extension of present national rivalries into the field of outer space, that the exploration and exploitation of outer space shall be done for the benefit of mankind, considered that such co-operation will promote mutual understanding and the strengthening of friendly relations among people. The Partial Test Ban Treaty, signed on August 5, 1963, also prohibits nuclear weapons testing in the atmosphere, beyond its limits, including outer space, or underwater, including territorial waters or high seas. This text has the merit of enacting prohibitions that extend as much to areas under the jurisdiction of States as to spaces removed from the sovereignty of States. It is also important to mention that resolution 1884 (XVIII), calling upon States to refrain from placing in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction or from installing such weapons on celestial bodies, was adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly on October 17, 1963.

The Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT)

The Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) is the abbreviated name of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, which prohibited all test detonations of nuclear weapons except for those conducted underground. The PTBT was signed by the governments of the Soviet Union, United Kingdom, and United States of America in Moscow on August 5, 1963 before being opened for signature by other countries. The treaty formally went into effect on October 10, 1963. Since then, one hundred and twenty other states have become party to the treaty. Ten states have signed but not ratified the treaty. Article I states that “Each of the Parties to this Treaty undertakes to prohibit, to prevent, and not to carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, at any place under its jurisdiction or control: (b) in any other environment if such explosion causes radioactive debris to be present outside the territorial limits of the State under whose jurisdiction or control such explosion is conducted. It is understood in this connection that the provisions of this subparagraph are without prejudice to the conclusion of a Treaty resulting in the permanent banning of all nuclear test explosions, including all such explosions underground, the conclusion of which, as the Parties have stated in the Preamble to this Treaty, they seek to achieve; (a) in the atmosphere; beyond its limits, including outer space; or under water, including territorial waters or high seas”.

Space Laws and high-altitude nuclear explosions

Article IV of the 1967 Treaty distinguishes the legal regime for the whole of outer space and special limits concerning the Moon and other celestial bodies. It states that “States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. The Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on celestial bodies shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration of the Moon and other celestial bodies shall also not be prohibited”. It refers to a total demilitarization of outer space and prohibits weapons of mass destruction, that is to say, atomic, bacteriological, chemical or equivalent effect. We can also think of environmental modification techniques for military or hostile purposes, as envisaged since the Convention of May 18, 1977, which prohibits the use of such weapons. The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), formally the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, is an international treaty prohibiting the military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects. It opened for signature on May 18, 1977 in Geneva and entered into force on October 5, 1978. The Convention bans weather warfare, which is the use of weather modification techniques, such as cloud seeding, for the purposes of inducing damage or destruction. The Convention on Biological Diversity of 2010 would also ban some forms of weather modification or geoengineering.

This ban on certain armaments, particularly on Earth orbits, is obviously one of the most important for security on Earth. Recall that the Treaty of Outer Space (1967) was adopted at a time when arms limitation agreements were at the heart of diplomatic concerns, especially those of the two superpowers (The Treaty of Tlatelolco, signed on February 14, 1967, is the conventional name given to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean; the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, signed on July 1, 1968, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament; the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) were two rounds of bilateral conferences and corresponding international treaties involving the United States of America and the Soviet Union, the Cold War superpowers, on the issue of arms control. The two rounds of talks and agreements were SALT I and SALT II and negotiations commenced in Helsinki, Finland, in November 1969). The total demilitarization of the Moon and celestial bodies is also provided for in the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (entered into force on July 11, 1984).

Article 3 of the Moon Agreement of 1979 states that “States Parties shall not place in orbit around or other trajectory to or around the Moon objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction or place or use such weapons on or in the Moon. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on the Moon shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration and use of the Moon shall also not be prohibited”.

Concerning high-altitude nuclear explosions, there are questions about the interpretation of the term peaceful: either non-military (broad interpretation) or non-aggressive (narrow interpretation). The United States of America prefers the narrow interpretation and constructs its argument by explaining that it is necessary to retain the right of self-defence, as expressed both in customary law and in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. Chapter VII, Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations concerning “Action with respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression” states that “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security”.

Speaking about high-altitude nuclear explosions, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Act of 1958 also refers to the peaceful purposes of research and outer space, stating that “The Congress hereby declares that it is the policy of the United States that activities in space should be devoted to peaceful purposes for the benefit of all mankind”. The United States of America has always considered the action of reconnaissance satellites (a reconnaissance satellite or intelligence satellite, commonly, although unofficially, referred to as a spy satellite, is an Earth observation satellite or communications satellite deployed for military or intelligence applications) to be both military and peaceful. The Soviet Union, for its part, quickly defended the idea that certain activities are prohibited, even for the State acting under conditions of self-defence, based for example on the Geneva Protocol of 1925 on the use of biological weapons (the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, usually called the Geneva Protocol, is a treaty prohibiting the use of chemical and biological weapons in international armed conflicts. It was signed at Geneva on June 17, 1925 and entered into force on February 8, 1928. It was registered in League of Nations Treaty Series on September 7, 1929), the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Manufacture, Stockpiling and Use of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons (the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction, usually referred to as the Biological Weapons Convention, was the first multilateral disarmament treaty banning the production of an entire category of weapons. The Convention was the result of prolonged efforts by the international community to establish a new instrument that would supplement the 1925 Geneva Protocol. The Geneva Protocol prohibits use but not possession or development of chemical and biological weapons) or the Environmental Modification Convention of May 18, 1977 on Environmental Changes for hostile purposes. The Soviet Union has also come to recognize the peacebuilding function of reconnaissance satellites.

To summarise on high-altitude nuclear explosions, all areas of outer space are devoid of certain weapons, in this case weapons of mass destruction, whether for storage, experimentation or even more use; on the other hand, certain areas, in this case the Moon and the celestial bodies, generally exclude all military activity: all weapons are prohibited in certain areas and certain weapons are prohibited in all zones. This conclusion makes it possible to develop or envisage certain military activities in outer space without the right being able to give an unambiguous answer to the question of the lawfulness of these activities. That is what we can say about high-altitude nuclear explosions.

Valentina Tereshkova becomes the First Woman in Space

space law, , , , , , , , , ,

Valentina Tereshkova is the first woman to have flown in outer space on June 16, 1963. Born on March 6, 1937 in Maslennikovo, a village near the Volga River about three hundred kilometres northeast of Moscow, Tereshkova was, in order to join the Cosmonaut Corps, honorarily inducted into the Soviet Air Force (the official designation of one of the air forces of the Soviet Union) and thus, also became the first civilian to fly in space. She has been selected from more than four hundred applicants and five finalists to pilot Vostok 6 on June 16, 1963. She is known to have pronounced the following sentence: “If women can be railroad workers in Russia, why can’t they fly in space?”.

Before the recruitment of Valentina Tereshkova as a cosmonaut, Valentina Tereshkova was a textile-factory assembly worker and an amateur skydiver. After the dissolution of the first group of female cosmonauts in 1969, she became a prominent member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, holding various political offices. She remained politically active following the collapse of the Soviet Union and is regarded as a hero in post-Soviet Russia and much of the world. Having orbited Earth forty-eight times, Tereshkova remains the only woman ever to have been on a solo space mission.

Vostok 6 and Valentina Tereshkova

Vostok 6 was the first human spaceflight to carry a woman, cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova, into outer space. The spacecraft was launched on June 16, 1963. While Vostok 5 had been delayed by technical problems, Vostok 6’s launch proceeded with no difficulties. Data collected during the mission provided better understanding of the female body’s reaction to spaceflight. Like other cosmonauts on Vostok missions, Tereshkova maintained a flight log, took photographs, and manually oriented the spacecraft. Her photographs of the horizon from space were later used to identify aerosol layers within the atmosphere. The mission, a joint flight with Vostok 5 (a joint mission of the Soviet space program together with Vostok 6; as with the previous pair of Vostok 3 and Vostok 4 the two Vostok spacecraft came close to one another in orbit and established a radio link), was originally conceived as being a joint mission with two Vostok each carrying a female cosmonaut, but this changed as the Vostok program experienced cutbacks as a precursor to the retooling of the program into the Voskhod program (the second Soviet human spaceflight project; two one-day manned missions were flown using the Voskhod spacecraft and rocket, one in 1964 and one in 1965, and two dogs flew on a 22-day mission in 1966). Vostok 6 was the last flight of a Vostok 3KA spacecraft (the spacecraft used for the first human spaceflights, launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome using Vostok 8K72K launch vehicles).

After the flight of Yuri Gagarin in 1961, Sergey Korolyov, the chief Soviet rocket engineer, came up with the idea of putting a woman in outer space. Tereshkova was considered a particularly worthy candidate, partly due to her proletarian background, and because her father was a war hero. Training included weightless flights, isolation tests, centrifuge tests, rocket theory, spacecraft engineering, one hundred and twenty parachute jumps and pilot training in MiG-15UTI jet fighters. The group spent several months in intensive training, concluding with examinations in November 1962, after which four remaining candidates were commissioned Junior Lieutenants in the Soviet Air Force. Tereshkova, Irina Solovyova and Valentina Ponomaryova were the leading candidates, and a joint mission profile was developed that would see two women launched into space, on solo Vostok flights on consecutive days in March or April 1963.

The State Space Commission nominated Tereshkova to pilot Vostok 6. On the morning of June 16, 1963, Tereshkova and her backup Irina Solovyova were both dressed in spacesuits and taken to the launch pad by bus. Following the tradition set by Gagarin, Tereshkova also urinated on the bus tire, becoming the first woman to do so. After completing her communication and life support checks, she was sealed inside the Vostok. After a two-hour countdown, Vostok 6 launched faultlessly, and Tereshkova became the first woman in outer space. Although Tereshkova experienced nausea and physical discomfort for much of the flight, she orbited the Earth forty-eight times and spent almost three days in outer space. With a single flight, she logged more flight time than the combined times of all American astronauts who had flown before that date.

Vostok 6 was the final Vostok flight and was launched two days after Vostok 5 which carried Valery Bykovsky into a similar orbit for five days, landing three hours after Tereshkova. The two vessels approached each other within five kilometers at one point, and Tereshkova communicated with Bykovsky and with Khrushchev by radio. Even though there were plans for further flights by women, it took nineteen years until the second woman, Svetlana Savitskaya, flew into outer space.

Astronauts, cosmonauts, spationauts…

An astronaut could be described as a person who travels beyond Earth’s atmosphere, or a trainee for spaceflight. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, an astronaut is “a person who has been trained for travelling in space”. It is interesting to notice that, without going into details about the different terms used to refer to any person flying in a space object, there are already differences on the conception of the term astronaut. It can either be someone traveling beyond Earth’s atmosphere or someone training to travel beyond Earth’s atmosphere. Considering the fact that the frontier between Earth’s atmosphere and outer space is still subject to debate, what could be the term used to refer to someone flying on suborbital flights? Could we call any human flying on a space object an astronaut? We would therefore need to define, what some national space laws already do, at an international level, what is a space object.

According to which country the person flying/travelling to outer space or training to do so is, terms change. This originality of language, even though we are today witnessing a terminological neutralization echoing the international relationships’ gradual smoothing, especially between the United States of America and former URSS, illustrates the highly geopolitical, spatiopolitical and historical aspects of space conquest. Let’s not forget that Space Age started during the International Geophysical Year not as any scientific project but as a demonstration of strength by the superpowers of the time, and soon after continued as a military project (US military space’s budget is today still at least twice that of the civilian budget). Depending upon which space object or spacecraft the person will fly/travel on, different names will be used. The United States of America use the term astronaut. Former URSS and today’s Russia use the term cosmonaut. Europe uses the term spationaut. China uses the term taikonaut. India uses the term vyomanaut. Some African artists and politics have used the term afronaut. Some private companies have proposed the term touronaut to define a space tourist. After the flights of Valentina Tereshkova (URSS), Sally Ride (United States of America) or Claudie Haigneré (France), the terms cosmonette, astronette and spationette were proposed. We sometimes also find the words robonaut, moonnaut or lunanaut/lunarnaut, and bionaut (those working in the American Earth system science research facility located in Oracle, Arizona).

Valentina Tereshkova and the legal status of humans in outer space

The status of astronauts is enounced and organised both in the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (entered into force on October 10, 1967) and the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (entered into force on December 3, 1968).

Article V of the Outer Space Treaty states that “States Parties to the Treaty shall regard astronauts as envoys of mankind in outer space and shall render to them all possible assistance in the event of accident, distress, or emergency landing on the territory of another State Party or on the high seas. When astronauts make such a landing, they shall be safely and promptly returned to the State of registry of their space vehicle. In carrying on activities in outer space and on celestial bodies, the astronauts of one State Party shall render all possible assistance to the astronauts of other States Parties. States Parties to the Treaty shall immediately inform the other States Parties to the Treaty or the Secretary-General of the United Nations of any phenomena they discover in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, which could constitute a danger to the life or health of astronauts”.

In this article from the Magna Carta of space, different elements appear. The first one is the ethical notion of envoys of mankind in outer space. It means that in outer space, even though there is still a need to define where it starts from, astronauts are seen as representatives of humanity. It doesn’t mean that they will change or lose their nationality but simply that their actions are undertaken in the name of mankind. Given the fact that the Outer Space Treaty (1967) was signed during the Cold War, this notion of mankind is crucial; States and the UN have wanted to sacralise outer space and make it a supranational environment. As the traditional law of the sea requires it, astronauts must be helped, rescued or assisted, regardless of the international situation, their nationality or origin. As we explained earlier, astronauts depend on the State of registry of their space vehicle; let’s imagine that in a case of emergency, as seen in the 2013′ movie Gravity (where astronaut Ryan Stone is brought back on Earth via a Chinese Shenzou), the person would be returned to the State of registry of his/her space vehicle with which he/her travelled beyond Earth’s atmosphere or started his/her mission. Astronauts have also a duty to assist other astronauts. Finally, there is an international duty of supervision by observation according to which “States Parties to the Treaty shall immediately inform the other States Parties to the Treaty or the Secretary-General of the United Nations of any phenomena they discover in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, which could constitute a danger to the life or health of astronauts”.

The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1968) came to complement the dispositions of the Outer Space Treaty’s Article V and states, Article 1, that “Each Contracting Party which receives information or discovers that the personnel of a spacecraft have suffered accident or are experiencing conditions of distress or have made an emergency or unintended landing in territory under its jurisdiction or on the high seas or in any other place not under the jurisdiction of any State shall immediately: (a) Notify the launching authority or, if it cannot identify and immediately communicate with the launching authority, immediately make a public announcement by all appropriate means of communication at its disposal; (b) Notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who should disseminate the information without delay by all appropriate means of communication at his disposal”.

Article 3 enounces that “If information is received or it is discovered that the personnel of a spacecraft have alighted on the high seas or in any other place not under the jurisdiction of any State, those Contracting Parties which are in a position to do so shall, if necessary, extend assistance in search and rescue operations for such personnel to assure their speedy rescue. They shall inform the launching authority and the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the steps they are taking and of their progress”. This article talks about extending assistance, which is an interesting concept. The following articles treat about space objects and technical details.

Article 10 of the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1979) enounces that “States Parties shall adopt all practicable measures to safeguard the life and health of persons on the Moon. For this purpose they shall regard any person on the Moon as an astronaut within the meaning of article V of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and as part of the personnel of a spacecraft within the meaning of the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space. States Parties shall offer shelter in their stations, installations, vehicles and other facilities to persons in distress on the Moon”.

Article 11 of the SPACE STATION – Agreement between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and OTHER GOVERNMENTS signed at Washington January 29, 1998 (on which we will soon come back in a new article), states that “Each Partner has the right to provide qualified personnel to serve on an equitable basis as Space Station crew members. Selections and decisions regarding the flight assignments of a Partner’s crew members shall be made in accordance with procedures provided in the MOUs and implementing arrangements. The Code of Conduct for the Space Station crew will be developed and approved by all the Partners in accordance with the individual Partner’s internal procedures, and in accordance with the MOUs, A Partner must have approved the Code of Conduct before it provides Space Station crew. Each Partner, in exercising its right to provide crew, shall ensure that its crew members observe the Code of Conduct”. That is what we can say about Valentina Tereshkova.

united kingdom

Telstar 1

space law, , , , , ,

Telstar 1, launched by NASA’s Thor-Delta rocket (the Thor-Delta, also known as Delta DM-19 or just Delta, was an early American expendable launch system used for twelve orbital launches in the early 1960s. A derivative of the Thor-Able, it was a member of the Thor family of rockets, and the first member of the Delta family) on July 10, 1962, was the first commercially funded satellite to be ever launched. It was the satellite that allowed the first live broadcast of television images between the United States of America and Europe. Developed by AT&T Inc., an American multinational conglomerate holding company headquartered at Whitacre Tower in Downtown Dallas, Texas, the world’s largest telecommunications company, the second largest provider of mobile telephone services, and the largest provider of fixed telephone services in the United States of America through AT&T Communications, Telstar 1 was an experimental telecommunications satellite, the first launched in a commercial setting and financed largely privately.

Developed by Bell Telephone Laboratories for AT&T, Telstar 1 was the world’s first active communications satellite and the world’s first commercial payload in space. It demonstrated the feasibility of transmitting information via satellite, gained experience in satellite tracking and studied the effect of Van Allen radiation belts on satellite design. The satellite was spin-stabilized to maintain its desired orientation in space. Power to its onboard equipment was provided by a solar array, in conjunction with a battery back-up system. It was intended to test the use of a satellite for long distance communications: telephony and television. Several large Earth stations were built on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, including Pleumeur-Bodou in France (Pleumeur-Bodou Ground Station was an early ground station in north-west France, and one of the first in the world; a ground station, Earth station, or Earth terminal is a terrestrial radio station designed for extraplanetary telecommunication with spacecraft, constituting part of the ground segment of the spacecraft system, or reception of radio waves from astronomical radio sources), to carry out these tests. The satellite, launched by a Delta rocket (an American versatile family of expendable launch systems that has provided space launch capability in the United States of America since 1960; there have been more than three hundred Delta rockets launched, with a ninety-five percent success rate) from Cape Canaveral on July 10, 1962, worked satisfactorily until February 21, 1963.

Telstar 1 was essentially an experimental satellite designed to test a new telecommunication system, but it was also a scientific satellite carrying a radiation measuring instrument. The design of the satellite was largely influenced by the limited launch capabilities of the available rocket as well as the size of the nose cone (the forwardmost section of a rocket, guided missile or aircraft). Telstar 1 weighed seventy-seven kilograms and had a spherical shape, eight-eight centimetres in diameter, on which were visible seventy-two facets, mainly occupied by photovoltaic panels. The transmission of information, by radio, television or telephone, was until then via the wireless network or cable links. The satellite served as a relay between terrestrial antennas; it improved the quality of transmissions and helped increase the coverage area. Telstar 1 operated in a low-Earth orbit and was tracked by the ground stations in Maine and France. Each ground station had a large microwave antenna mounted on bearings, to permit tracking the satellite during the approximately half-hour period of each orbit when it was overhead. The signals from Telstar 1 were received and amplified by a low-noise “maser” (Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation), the predecessor of the modern laser.

The idea of transmitting various information through satellites was ancient. Already in October 1945, Arthur C. Clarke (December 16, 1917 – March 19, 2008), a British science fiction writer, published an article talking about it in the specialized magazine Wireless World Magazine. His idea was to take advantage of the immensity of outer space to transmit information, using a satellite system for this purpose. During the Cold War years, the shock caused by the successful launch by the Soviets of the first man-made artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, increased the United States of America’s interest in the development of aerospace research. Soon after Sputnik 1, the Americans began their attempts to launch communication satellites. These circled the planet in elliptical or circular orbits and aimed to improve telecommunication services such as telephones, radio and television.

Although operational for only a few months and relaying television signals of a brief duration, Telstar 1 immediately captured the imagination of the world. The first images, those of President John F. Kennedy and of singer Yves Montand from France, along with clips of sporting events, images of the American flag waving in the breeze and a still image of Mount Rushmore, were precursors of the global communications that today are mostly taken for granted.

In November 1962, a stratospheric nuclear explosion, as it was practiced at the time, destroyed by its radiations the electronics of the satellite. Starfish Prime was a July 9, 1962 high-altitude nuclear test conducted by the United States of America, a joint effort of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the Defense Atomic Support Agency. It was launched from Johnston Island, and was the largest nuclear test ever to be conducted in outer space. A Thor rocket (the first operational ballistic missile deployed by the U.S. Air Force) carrying a W49 (an American thermonuclear warhead, used on the Thor, Atlas, Jupiter, and Titan I ballistic missile systems) thermonuclear warhead (manufactured by Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory) and a Mk. 2 re-entry vehicle was launched from Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean, about one thousand five-hundred kilometres west-southwest of Hawaii. The explosion took place at an altitude of four-hundred kilometres, above a point thirty kilometres southwest of Johnston Island. It produced a yield equivalent to one and a half megatons of TNT.

How are today’s satellites managed? What is their legal status?

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

The nature of activities undertaken in space is such that cooperation is essential: satellites can’t be launched without different ground stations following the trajectory of the launcher, the continuous observation of the Sun can’t be realized (considering the rotation of Earth) without a cooperation between multiple operators, and telecommunications can be exchanged audibly only if there is an agreement on the distribution of frequencies; space technology therefore necessarily passes through a fairly elaborated cooperation. In telecommunications, it’s the International Telecommunication Union or IUT which deals with inter-state cooperation. Telecommunication includes any transmission or reception of signs, signals, images, images, sounds or intelligence of any kind, by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems.

The International Telecommunication Union, which manages space telecommunications (equitable and rational distribution of terrestrial frequencies and the specific application for geostationary orbit), is a specialized agency of the United Nations (UN) that is responsible for issues that concern information and communication technologies; it is the oldest among all the fifteen specialised agencies of UN. The ITU coordinates the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promotes international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, works to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, and assists in the development and coordination of worldwide technical standards. ITU’s mission is to harmonize the development of telecommunications resources so as to make the best use of the technologies they offer, particularly in space; it recognizes the sovereign right of each State to regulate its telecommunications.

The freedom of use of orbits and frequencies

Near-Earth space is formed of different orbital layers. Terrestrial orbits are limited common resources and inherently repugnant to any appropriation: they are not property in the sense of law. Orbits and frequencies are res communis (a Latin term derived from Roman law that preceded today’s concepts of the commons and common heritage of mankind; it has relevance in international law and common law). It’s the first-come, first-served principle that applies to orbital positioning, which without any formal acquisition of sovereignty, records a promptness behaviour to which it grants an exclusive grabbing effect of the space concerned. Geostationary orbit is a limited but permanent resource: this de facto appropriation by the first-comers – the developed countries – of the orbit and the frequencies is protected by Space Law and the International Telecommunications Law. The challenge by developing countries of grabbing these resources is therefore unjustified on the basis of existing law. Denying new entrants geostationary-access or making access more difficult does not constitute appropriation; it simply results from the traditional system of distribution of access rights. The practice of developed States is based on free access and priority given to the first satellites placed in geostationary orbit.

The geostationary orbit is part of outer space and, as such, the customary principle of non-appropriation and the 1967 Space Treaty apply to it. The equatorial countries have claimed sovereignty, then preferential rights over this space. These claims are contrary to the 1967 Treaty and customary law. However, they testify to the concern of the equatorial countries, shared by developing countries, in the face of saturation and seizure of geostationary positions by developed countries. The regime of res communis of outer space in Space Law (free access and non-appropriation) does not meet the demand of the developing countries that their possibilities of future access to the geostationary orbit and associated radio frequencies are guaranteed. New rules appear necessary and have been envisaged to ensure the access of all States to these positions and frequencies.

Satellites (Telstar 1) are space objects

The term Object in reference to outer space was first used in 1961 in General Assembly Resolution 1721 (XVI) titled International cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space to describe any object launched by States into outer space. Professor Bin Cheng, a world authority on International Air and Space Law, has noted that members of the COPUOS during negotiations over the space treaties treated spacecraft and space vehicles as synonymous terms. The Space Object can be considered as the conventional launcher, the reusable launcher, the satellite, the orbital station, the probe, the impactor, the space telescope… The five UN treaties talk about Space Objects. Article X of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967) states that “In order to promote international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, in conformity with the purposes of this Treaty, the States Parties to the Treaty shall consider on a basis of equality any requests by other States Parties to the Treaty to be afforded an opportunity to observe the flight of space objects launched by those States”.

Also, under the Outer Space Treaty, Space Object implicates liability, registration, and a prohibition on the placement of weapons of mass destruction into outer space. The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1968), especially its Article 5, talks about Objects Launched into Outer Space. Under the Rescue and Return Agreement, we should also note that the term defines whether a State can request or send back a Space Object found in its territory, as well as the extent to which a State may be compensated for the effort. The Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972) talks about Space Objects and so is the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1972) which specifies in its Article I (b) that “The term space object includes component parts of a space object as well as its launch vehicle and parts thereof”. Under the Liability Convention, we notice that Space Object defines the extent to which a State can apply a theory of liability in seeking compensation or restitution for damage caused to other objects in outer space, on the surface of the Earth, or aircraft in flight. Under the Registration Convention, a State party must register its Space Objects in order to assign nationality to a Space Object.

Finally, Article 3 2. of the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1984) states that “Any threat or use of force or any other hostile act or threat of hostile act on the Moon is prohibited. It is likewise prohibited to use the Moon in order to commit any such act or to engage in any such threat in relation to the Earth, the Moon, spacecraft, the personnel of spacecraft or man-made space objects”. The Paris Convention of 1919 (formally, the Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation) was the first international convention to address the political difficulties and intricacies involved in international aerial navigation. It deals with the notion of aircraft and states in its Article 30 that “All State aircraft other than military, customs and police aircraft shall be treated as private aircraft and as such shall be subject to all the provisions of the present Convention”. The Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention, established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a specialized agency of the UN charged with coordinating and regulating international air travel. It talks about aircrafts and corroborates the definition of an aircraft enacted in the Paris Convention (and adds the notion of Pilotless aircraft in its Article 8 and thus, opens the horizons of flying objects). An Aircraft can be defined as “any machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air other than the reactions of the air against the Earth’s surface”. Hence the fact that a Space Object causing damage triggers international liability under the 1972 Liability Convention, that a Space Object requires registration by the 1975 Registration Convention, and that a Space Object effectively triggers application of much of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty & the 1968 Rescue Agreement, none of the Five Space Law Conventions define precisely what a Space Object is (and Space Object represent specific meanings under different treaties).

According to the COPUOS (Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, Fifty-seventh session, Vienna, April 2018, on The definition and delimitation of outer space, Suborbital flights and the delimitation of air space vis-à-vis outer space: functionalism, spatialism and state sovereignty, A Submission by the Space Safety Law & Regulation Committee of the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety), a spacecraft should be capable of moving in outer space (either orbital or suborbital) without any support from the air, and should have a power source not dependent upon external oxygen. Professor Bin Cheng describes a Space Object as a man-made object that is launched or is intended to be launched into outer space. Several States have redefined Space Object in their national law using terms of art and/or through licensing and registration regimes under national law (Austria, Belgium, China, Spain, etc.). What is called “the functionalist approach” – concerning the definition of a Space Object – takes as reference point the functions or activities of the vehicles. In order to answer the question “Is it a space craft or an aircraft?” one would ask: “Do the vehicle’s functions resemble to those of an aircraft or of a spacecraft?”.

Functionalists believe that a suborbital vehicle should be classified as an aircraft when the purpose that it fulfils is inherent to aviation activities, while it is deemed to be a spacecraft when it serves space-related purposes. The functionalist theory shares common grounds with what is called “the spatialist approach” (based on the environment where the activity is taking place); it examines whether the collision risks of the vehicles are higher among aircraft or space craft according to the location within which the vehicle operates. Another theory, which is closely linked to the spatialist approach, is “the aerodynamic-lift theory”. It proposes the demarcation between air space and outer space at eighty-three kilometres above the surface of the Earth (or in general between eighty and ninety kilometres), as this is the point after which the aircraft functions cannot be maintained, for the density of the atmosphere is not sufficient to support vehicles that have not achieved circular velocity (the air lift is virtually nil at that altitude). We can say that what can’t be considered an aircraft is a spacecraft. Space object can be described as any object launched into orbit from Earth, the Moon or other celestial bodies to travel to, in or through outer space, all artificial objects likely to find or evolve in outer space without the bearing strength of the air.

Concluding remarks on Telstar 1

Telecommunications satellites, whose transmission capacity and lifespan have increased very rapidly, are nowadays required for fixed or mobile telephony, television, radio or computer data transfer. That is what we can say about Telstar 1.

Stratobus or the legal status of High Altitude Platform Stations

space law, , , , , , , , , , ,

In April 2016, Thales Alenia Space and its partners officially announced the launch of the Stratobus program, a stratospheric airship whose concept has been widely talked about because of its particularities and positioning between the drone (General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper, Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk, etc.) and the satellite. Stratobus is a High-altitude platform station or High-Altitude Pseudo-Satellite (HAPS), “a missing link between drones and satellites”. Article 1.66A of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)’s Radio Regulations (the Radio Regulations contains the complete texts as adopted by the World Radiocommunication Conference – Geneva, 1995 – WRC-95 – and subsequently revised and adopted by World Radiocommunication Conferences, including all Appendices, Resolutions, Recommendations and ITU-R Recommendations incorporated by reference) states that a high altitude platform station is “A station located on an object at an altitude of twenty to fifth kilometres and at a specified, nominal, fixed point relative to the Earth”. High Altitude Pseudo-Satellites, or HAPS, are platforms that float or fly at high altitude like conventional aircrafts but operate more like satellites – except that rather than working from outer space, they can remain in position inside the atmosphere for weeks or even months, offering continuous coverage of the territory below.

Stratobus is an autonomous stratospheric platform concept (a satellite bus or spacecraft bus is a general model on which multiple-production satellite spacecraft are often based. The bus is the infrastructure of the spacecraft, usually providing locations for the payload, typically space experiments or instruments) halfway between the satellite and the drone. Stratobus will not replace satellites but aims simply at complementing the global satellite coverage. Stratobus will be a multi-mission platform for both civilian and military applications. This project, selected by the French Ministry of Industry and Digital Technology as part of the New Industrial France, is being realized by five French industrialists and two foreign partners. Thales Alenia Space, a Franco-Italian aerospace manufacturer formed after the Thales Group bought the participation of Alcatel in the two joint-ventures between Alcatel and Leonardo, Alcatel Alenia Space and Telespazio, Europe’s largest satellite manufacturer, is managing the industrial part of the project.

This platform will weigh five tons and will be located at an altitude of about twenty kilometres (a position above the area dedicated to air traffic and jet streams, fast flowing, narrow, meandering air currents in the atmosphere); it will be able to accommodate payloads of two hundred and fifty kilograms (with a power of five kilowatts). Stratobus will be one hundred and forty meters long, thirty-two meters at its maximum diameter with a volume of eighty-five thousand cubic meters. Its lifespan in the stratosphere will be five years. The project is certified by the Pégase competitiveness cluster (a French aerospace competitiveness cluster certified in 2007 and located geographically in the Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur region) responsible for launching the airship sector in France and by the Techtera competitiveness cluster for textile innovations.

Detached from its three cables, it can take off from a platform the size of a football field, be piloted from a mobile station and be controlled the rest of the time from a fixed command post. It does not requires heavy installations (hard tracks for drones or launch pads for satellites). Its rise is done vertically and reaches its altitude in four hours, and its descent is done gradually in six hours towards its point of launch where it must be recovered and moored. The descent is piloted but in the future, it could be made by a drone that retrieves it and brings it back to the launching point. It is required to evolve autonomously and permanently in the lower layer of the stratosphere, an area of the atmosphere between twelve and fifty kilometres in altitude. Its zone of evolution is particularly prone to the surrounding weather conditions with cold temperatures, a very present ozone, gusts of wind, a significant sunlight and heating components and aggressive ultraviolet rays. But if the external conditions are hard, this zone also has advantages since there is no air traffic, the aeronautical regulation is non-existent (which makes it possible to write it by taking into account the specificities of the machine) and its altitude allows it to have a vision on five hundred kilometres.

In the field of observation, Stratobus will be mainly used for applications related to: the surveillance of sensible industrial sites (the oil industry is very interested in the project because it could identify a threat whatever the weather conditions, thanks to a radar payload, complemented by sensors in the visible and infra-red domains, with an image resolution of up to ten centimetres) or frontiers (it is quite possible to deploy four to five Stratobus to monitor a thousand kilometres of borders all year round and all the time), the detection in anticipation of maritime piracy (in this area, Stratobus will be able to spot a suspect ship two hundred kilometres away, warn the competent authorities and anticipate the risks of piracy, especially on oil rigs), and the management of the environment (relief erosion, marine pollution detection, weather measurements, maritime traffic management).

In the field of telecommunications, Stratobus could be used to: reduce the digital divide in geographical areas where Internet is not yet accessible (desert areas in Africa for example), strengthen the GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) in case of major events such as the Olympic Games, and restore Internet and telephone connections in a nominal way for better management of humanitarian action during natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, etc. Finally, in terms of navigation, Stratobus could offer the possibility to increase GPS coverage on areas of heavy traffic.

The ideal operating zone for the Stratobus would be between the two tropics, where the winds are the weakest. This allows it to be as effective as possible without having to tap into its resources to ensure better stability. Although Europe and the Middle East are excluded from this area, there is still a large part of Africa, the Middle East and Asia, where Stratobus could be deployed. Complementary to drones and satellites, its development does not represent a duplicate but aims to fill a capacity gap that exists between the two systems mentioned above. If the satellite is known for its reliability and accuracy, it has a reduced permanence on zones (apart from geostationary satellites). On the drone side, while its permanence is important compared to traditional aircraft, it remains limited compared to the Stratobus and its vulnerability is also questioned since it must deal with the air-to-surface defense systems, the enemy aircraft and the possibility to be hacked in flight.

The airship project led by Thales Alenia Space will begin its development phase in 2019. No need for a launcher for this balloon inflated with helium that rises alone, then moves thanks to four electric motors powered by photovoltaic cells. This could appeal to civilian and military observation and surveillance applications, especially since Stratobus can stay above a point for a year. While the unit price is approaching twenty million euros, project managers aim to produce a few dozen devices a year. “The first small-scale technology demonstrators should fly in late 2019” says Guy Boullenger, the project director. The first qualifying flight of a full-size model would occur in 2022, the date of the beginning of the commercialization of this machine, opening the way to its industrialization. “The review that has been conducted today allows us to say that critical technologies are under control” says Jean-Pierre Prost, the technical manager of project Stratobus. A design phase during which the characteristics of the device have been adjusted somewhat. Many other firms are also developing vehicles, payloads and services. The vehicles can be considered as a valuable way of establishing applications that complement satellites while also accelerating space technologies through early, high-altitude flight testing.

Space Object

The term Object in reference to outer space was first used in 1961 in General Assembly Resolution 1721 (XVI) titled International cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space to describe any object launched by States into outer space. Professor Bin Cheng, a world authority on International Air and Space Law, has noted that members of the COPUOS during negotiations over the space treaties treated spacecraft and space vehicles as synonymous terms. The Space Object can be considered as the conventional launcher, the reusable launcher, the satellite, the orbital station, the probe, the impactor, the space telescope… The five UN treaties talk about Space Objects. Article X of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967) states that “In order to promote international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, in conformity with the purposes of this Treaty, the States Parties to the Treaty shall consider on a basis of equality any requests by other States Parties to the Treaty to be afforded an opportunity to observe the flight of space objects launched by those States”. Also, under the Outer Space Treaty, Space Object implicates liability, registration, and a prohibition on the placement of weapons of mass destruction into outer space. The Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1968), especially its Article 5, talks about Objects Launched into Outer Space. Under the Rescue and Return Agreement, we should also note that the term defines whether a State can request or send back a Space Object found in its territory, as well as the extent to which a State may be compensated for the effort. The Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972) talks about Space Objects and so is the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (1972) which specifies in its Article I (b) that “The term space object includes component parts of a space object as well as its launch vehicle and parts thereof”.

Under the Liability Convention, we notice that Space Object defines the extent to which a State can apply a theory of liability in seeking compensation or restitution for damage caused to other objects in outer space, on the surface of the Earth, or aircraft in flight. Under the Registration Convention, a State party must register its Space Objects in order to assign nationality to a Space Object. Finally, Article 3 2. of the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1984) states that “Any threat or use of force or any other hostile act or threat of hostile act on the Moon is prohibited. It is likewise prohibited to use the Moon in order to commit any such act or to engage in any such threat in relation to the Earth, the Moon, spacecraft, the personnel of spacecraft or man-made space objects”. The Paris Convention of 1919 (formally, the Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation) was the first international convention to address the political difficulties and intricacies involved in international aerial navigation. It deals with the notion of aircraft and states in its Article 30 that “All State aircraft other than military, customs and police aircraft shall be treated as private aircraft and as such shall be subject to all the provisions of the present Convention”.

The Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention, established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a specialized agency of the UN charged with coordinating and regulating international air travel. It talks about aircrafts and corroborates the definition of an aircraft enacted in the Paris Convention (and adds the notion of Pilotless aircraft in its Article 8 and thus, opens the horizons of flying objects). An Aircraft can be defined as “any machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air other than the reactions of the air against the Earth’s surface”. Hence the fact that a Space Object causing damage triggers international liability under the 1972 Liability Convention, that a Space Object requires registration by the 1975 Registration Convention, and that a Space Object effectively triggers application of much of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty & the 1968 Rescue Agreement, none of the Five Space Law Conventions define precisely what a Space Object is (and Space Object represent specific meanings under different treaties).

According to the COPUOS (Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, Fifty-seventh session, Vienna, April 2018, on The definition and delimitation of outer space, Suborbital flights and the delimitation of air space vis-à-vis outer space: functionalism, spatialism and state sovereignty, A Submission by the Space Safety Law & Regulation Committee of the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety), a spacecraft should be capable of moving in outer space (either orbital or suborbital) without any support from the air, and should have a power source not dependent upon external oxygen. Professor Bin Cheng describes a Space Object as a man-made object that is launched or is intended to be launched into outer space. Several States have redefined Space Object in their national law using terms of art and/or through licensing and registration regimes under national law (Austria, Belgium, China, Spain, etc.). What is called “the functionalist approach” – concerning the definition of a Space Object – takes as reference point the functions or activities of the vehicles. In order to answer the question “Is it a space craft or an aircraft?” one would ask: “Do the vehicle’s functions resemble to those of an aircraft or of a spacecraft?”. Functionalists believe that a suborbital vehicle should be classified as an aircraft when the purpose that it fulfils is inherent to aviation activities, while it is deemed to be a spacecraft when it serves space-related purposes.

The functionalist theory shares common grounds with what is called “the spatialist approach” (based on the environment where the activity is taking place); it examines whether the collision risks of the vehicles are higher among aircraft or space craft according to the location within which the vehicle operates. Another theory, which is closely linked to the spatialist approach, is “the aerodynamic-lift theory”. It proposes the demarcation between air space and outer space at eighty-three kilometres above the surface of the Earth (or in general between eighty and ninety kilometres), as this is the point after which the aircraft functions cannot be maintained, for the density of the atmosphere is not sufficient to support vehicles that have not achieved circular velocity (the air lift is virtually nil at that altitude). We can say that what can’t be considered an aircraft is a spacecraft. Space object can be described as any object launched into orbit from Earth, the Moon or other celestial bodies to travel to, in or through outer space, all artificial objects likely to find or evolve in outer space without the bearing strength of the air. A notional innovation came along with the Aerospace Object.

Aerospace Object

What if the vehicle is a hybrid Aerospace Object, one capable of achieving lift and thereby flying in air space (on ascent, descent, or both), and also traveling into and through outer space? Thus, a vehicle like the former NASA Space Shuttle might be considered a Space Object during its launch and ascent supported by rockets, and during the orbital flight, then an aircraft during descent and landing. Arguably, parts of Air Law and Space Law would both apply to such an aerospace vehicle. Certain rules of Air Law might apply from launch to landing, while certain rules of Space Law would apply during the time the object was in air space. The American Space Shuttle, used for the maintenance of satellites, the transport of men and equipment or replenishment of the International Space Station, raised the problem of mixed objects: mid-air and mid-space, the Space Shuttle was launched vertically and returned horizontally. It was a mix between an aircraft and a spacecraft. The COPUOS proposed the following definition: “An aerospace object could be defined as an object which is capable both of travelling through outer space and of using its aerodynamic properties to remain in airspace for a certain period of time” (Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee, Forty-sixth session, Vienna, 2007, Matters relating to the definition and delimitation of outer space, Analytical summary of the replies to the questionnaire on possible legal issues with regard to Aerospace Objects). With the intense development of suborbital flights (Virgin Galactic) and Space Tourism, we’re sure to see questions raise about the technical and legal distinctions between Space and Aerospace Objects.

High Altitude Platform Stations (Stratobus)

HAPS are aircraft, usually unmanned airships or airplanes. Stratospheric flights above fifteen kilometres altitude were already made in the 1930s, in balloons with pressurized gondolas, manned by pioneers such as the Swiss Auguste Piccard. In the 1990 and 2000 decades, several projects were launched in order to explore the potential application of high altitude platforms for telecommunications and remote sensing. Large projects were started in the United States of America, Japan and South Korea. A remarkable fact for the HAPSs concept was the initial definition of a frequency band for its telecommunications services on the World Radiocommunication Conference 1997 (WRC-97), organised by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), which deals with the regulation of the use of radio frequencies. At this conference, the term “High Altitude Platform Station” (HAPS) has been established, defined as a telecommunications station located at an altitude of twenty to fifty kilometres and at a specified fixed point relative to the Earth. This fact shows that, at the time, there was a growing interest in HAPS utilisation as a complement to terrestrial and satellite-based communications network. Over the years, several terms have been used for this type of aircraft, such as: “High Altitude Powered Platform”, “High Altitude Aeronautical Platform”, “High Altitude Airship”, “Stratospheric Platform”, “Stratospheric Airship” and “Atmospheric Satellite”. The term “High Altitude Long Endurance” (HALE), which has sometimes been used to label HAPS, is generally more associated with conventional unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), with service ceiling of about eighteen kilometres, as the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk. Currently, the expression “High Altitude Platform” (HAP), adopted by the ITU, has been the most commonly used. The most common types of aircraft used as HAPS are: aeroplanes, airships and balloons.

The main HAPS applications are in telecommunications and remote sensing, both civilian and military. In the area of telecommunications some of the advantages of HAPSs in relation to terrestrial networks (relay towers) are larger coverage area, less interference caused by obstacles (buildings, ground elevations) and shorter time to deployment. Compared to satellites, HAPSs have the advantages of lower latency (transmission delay) and the possibility of return for maintenance or payload reconfiguration. For remote sensing, HAPSs have as an important advantage over satellites, mainly the low orbit ones, and the ability to remain continuously over an area for very long periods (persistence). Another advantage is to permit better resolution images, because they are closer to the covered areas. Designing aircraft to operate in the stratosphere as HAPS imposes major technological challenges, with the main ones being: lightweight structures, energy generation and storage, thermal management, operation at low altitude and reliability. Some aspects of each of these challenges will be discussed next. The HAPS projects, both aeroplanes and airships, are optimised for the stratosphere conditions, at altitudes close to twenty kilometres, where the thin air is relatively calm and the wind speed is low.

Another important aspect to be considered in HAPS operations is the coordination with the airspace control organisations. Most of the time of flight of a HAPS is above the air control altitude limit, usually defined at twenty kilometres. The launch and recovery phases, which occur at lower altitudes, should be planned in conjunction with the airspace control agency, with the definition of specific segregated areas for that operation. The integration of unmanned aircraft in not segregated airspace is a subject not yet regulated, mainly due to the issue of avoiding air collisions (“sense and avoid”). Aspects in the field of International Law related to the overflight of other countries also need to be analysed. From 2013, Airbus Defence and Space, Thales Alenia Space, Google and Facebook began investing in HAPS projects mainly aimed to supply Internet in areas without telecommunications infrastructure, bringing new hope to achieve the establishment of a HAPS industry. The future of HAPSs will be driven mainly by the evolution of technologies of potential competitors, such as microsatellites constellations, and the availability of financial resources to overcome the HAPS technological challenges.

Concluding remarks on Stratobus

As a conclusion, we can believe that those “geostationary aircraft” will be considered aircraft and will fall under aircraft legal status. That is what we can say about Stratobus.

The Conclusion of Treaties in Public International Law

space law, ,

Let’s have a look at the Conclusion of Treaties. Public International Law aims at regulating relations within the International Society. It is only concerned by relations between subjects of International Law, that is to say, mainly States and, more recently, international organisations. According to the Vienna Convention, “Treaty means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation”. It therefore only concerns inter-State treaties. The 1969 Vienna Convention governs treaties between States and international organisations or treaties between organisations. In practice, some commitments can be taken verbally (agreements, conventions, pacts, charters, protocols, concordats, exchange of letters, Modus vivendi, etc.) and the Vienna Convention will not apply to them.

Treaties

When talking about the Conclusion of Treaties, treaties can be defined as “The expression of concordant will of two or more subjects of International Law with a view to producing legal effects subject to International Law”. First of all, the expression “concordant will” takes on the expression of consensualism or consensus. However, international law does not require that the wills be simultaneous. “Two or more subjects of international law”: this allows to include international organizations or other international entities. “In order to produce legal effects”: it underlines the vocation of treaties to create rights and vocations. However, the treaties do not always have this vocation to create synallagmatic rights and obligations: some treaties have only declarative values, for example the prohibition to appropriate outer space or the Antarctic territory. “Subject to international law”: this indicates that the treaty will be subject to the specific regime of international law. The international judge must assess whether a particular question falls under international law or domestic law. There are many criteria for classifying international treaties and the first criterion is the quality of the parts. The second criterion is the number of parties (the bilateral or multi-lateral treaty, with a small number of parties, or the multilateral treaty, concerning a large number of parties exceeding at least one continent). In terms of form, it should be noted that this definition is extremely cautious.

A treaty could also be defined as an “international agreement attributable to two or more subjects of international law, by which the parties are bound, and which must be performed in good faith”. The word “conventional” has essentially appeared in the nineteenth century. It developed very quickly as a privileged instrument of regulation. It has played an essential role for decolonized countries who saw in treaties ways to legally fight back imposed and unfair customary laws. On the technical side, it is thought that the development of the treaty comes from the fact that it is a written right, a text whose proof is easy and the techniques relatively simple. Treaties have also the virtue of allowing States to negotiate on the occasion of discussions to defend or assert their conflicting or contradictory interests. Treaties are usually used to pacify inter-States relationships. Some authors believe that treaties have existed since the First Agricultural Revolution.

The conclusion of treaties

The conclusion of treaties can be decomposed in three stages: a “negotiation” until States reach a consensus, the application of the treaty which may be partial because of the “reservation” (reservation means a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State), and the “entry into force” of the treaty. The law on the negotiators is defined by the Constitutional Law of each State and it is generally the head of state, prime minister or foreign affairs minister who has the authorization to negotiate treaties. But it is obvious that all treaties, especially technical ones, can’t be negotiated by these people alone. That’s why the term “plenipotentiary” is used: “one who has full power to do a thing; a person fully commissioned to act for another. A term applied in Public International Law to ministers and envoys of the second rank of public ministers”. The plenipotentiary people are given letters that engage their State. These letters are presented at the Head of the host State. Letters of full power are signed by the President and usually signed by the Prime minister. Public International Law usually distinguishes between “letters of full power” and simple power letters (the margin of the negotiator is limited). “Full Powers” is a term in international law and is the authority of a person to sign a treaty or convention on behalf of a sovereign state. Persons other than the head of state, head of government or foreign minister of the state must produce Full Powers in order to sign a treaty binding their government. Such a person is called a plenipotentiary.

Jus tractatuum (or sometimes jus tractandi) is a Legal Latin term commonly used in Public International Law and Constitutional Law that refers to the right to conclude treaties. It is usually referred to in English as “treaty-making power”. As defined in Article 6 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, every state possesses the capacity to conclude treaties. International organizations as well as subnational entities of federal states may have treaty-making power as well. Jus tractatuum is linked to the concept of international legal personality. Article 8 on the SUBSEQUENT CONFIRMATION OF AN ACT PERFORMED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION of the Vienna Convention states that “An act relating to the conclusion of a treaty performed by a person who cannot be considered under article 7 as authorized to represent a State for that purpose is without legal effect unless afterwards confirmed by that State”. There is a practice of recusing representatives who have acted outside their capacity.

Then comes, in the Conclusion of Treaties, the “drafting phase”. The text will be organised and legislators will have the right to modify or enrich it. The negotiations take usually a lot of time in order to satisfy all the parties. Sometimes, parties try to reach a global compromise by giving satisfaction on a part of the text and pressuring so that another part will remain intact of any modification. Despite this technique, negotiations usually take a lot of time.

In the Conclusion of Treaties, once we have agreed on the text, we move to the “adoption phase” and at this level, during this phase, we use what is called the “authentication procedure”. Article 10 on the AUTHENTICATION OF THE TEXT of the Vienna Convention affirms that “The text of a treaty is established as authentic and definitive: (a) By such procedure as may be provided for in the text or agreed upon by the States participating in its drawing up; or (b) Failing such procedure, by the signature, signature ad referendum or initialling by the representatives of those States of the text of the treaty or of the Final Act of a conference incorporating the text”. The term “authentication” refers to the procedure by which the text of a treaty is adopted as authentic and definitive. Once the treaty has been authenticated, States can no longer unilaterally change its provisions. If the States which participated in the elaboration of the treaty do not agree on the procedure to be followed in order to adopt the authentic text, the treaty will normally be authenticated by the signature, the signature ad referendum or the initialling of the text by the representatives of these States.

The parties, in the Conclusion of Treaties, agree on the drafting which reflects their intentions. It is the signature of the negotiators who will authenticate the text. For some numbers of conventions, we will organize a special ceremony (for example, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, also called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty). In general, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Prime minister deal with these conventions. For multilateral treaties, other procedures are used for negotiations; the negotiators use their initials which will have to be confirmed by the signature of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. For other treaties, the “ad referendum signature technique” is used. Here, the plenipotentiaries sign but request a confirmation from their minister. Article 12 on the CONSENT TO BE BOUND BY A TREATY EXPRESSED BY SIGNATURE of the Vienna Convention affirms that “The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by the signature of its representative when: (a) The treaty provides that signature shall have that effect; (b) It is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect; or (c) The intention of the State to give that effect to the signature appears from the full powers of its representative or was expressed during the negotiation. For the purposes of paragraph 1: (a) The initialling of a text constitutes a signature of the treaty when it is established that the negotiating States so agreed; (o) The signature ad referendum of a treaty by a representative, if confirmed by his State, constitutes a full signature of the treaty”.

The credibility of treaties

When analysing the Conclusion of Treaties, states entering into international agreements have at their disposal several tools to enhance the strength and credibility of their commitments, including the ability to make the agreement a formal treaty rather than soft law, provide for mandatory dispute resolution procedures, and establish monitoring mechanisms. There are usually three parts in a treaty: the “preamble”, which contains a list of all contracting parties and an enumeration of all the purposes of the treaty and its object. This preamble is generally used for the interpretation of the treaty. The “articles” contained in the treaty; traditionally we distinguish the articles from the “final provisions”, dispositions concerning signature, ratification, accession, entry into force, etc. For example, PART VIII on the FINAL PROVISIONS of the Vienna Convention declares in its Article 81 on Signature that “The present Convention shall be open for signature by all States Members of the United Nations or of any of the specialized agencies or of the International Atomic Energy Agency or parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, and by any other State invited by the General Assembly of the United Nations to become a party to the Convention, as follows: until 30 November 1969, at the Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Austria, and subsequently, until 30 April 1970, at United Nations Headquarters, New York”. Article 82 on RATIFICATION states that “The present Convention is subject to ratification. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations”. Article 83 on ACCESSION affirms that “The present Convention shall remain open for accession by any State belonging to any of the categories mentioned in article 81. The instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations”. The third and last part of the treaty is the “annexes, protocols and declarations” which make it possible not to overload the text, for example an annex which provides for a jurisdiction or a technical annex which does not concern a priori what consult the treaty.

Let’s now look at how States will be bound to a treaty. To become a party to a treaty, a State must express its consent to be bound by the treaty. Such consent can be expressed in a variety of ways. In this respect, Public International Law provides for different modalities. It is up to the domestic law to make a choice between these modalities. A State can be bound by the “signature”, the “ratification” or the “accession”.

Signature Subject to Ratification, Acceptance or Approval

The question, when speaking about the Conclusion of Treaties, is whether the signature involves legal obligations for the State? The signature is not neutral, it necessarily produces effects. In principle, it takes ratification before the signature can achieve its full strength. This obligation obeys two fundamental principles: pacta sunt servanda (Latin for “agreements must be kept”), which means that every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith, and bona fides (good faith implementation of the provisions contained in the treaties).

Where the signature is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, the signature does not establish the consent to be bound. However, it is a means of authentication and expresses the willingness of the signatory state to continue the treaty-making process. The signature qualifies the signatory state to proceed to ratification, acceptance or approval. It also creates an obligation to refrain, in good faith, from acts that would defeat the object and the purpose of the treaty. Article 18 on the Obligation not to defeat the object and purpose of a treaty prior to its entry into force of the Vienna Convention states that “A State is obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty when: (a) it has signed the treaty or has exchanged instruments constituting the treaty subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, until it shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty; or (b) it has expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, pending the entry into force of the treaty and provided that such entry into force is not unduly delayed”.

Ratification

Ratification defines the international act whereby a state indicates its consent to be bound to a treaty if the parties intended to show their consent by such an act. In the case of bilateral treaties, ratification is usually accomplished by exchanging the requisite instruments, while in the case of multilateral treaties the usual procedure is for the depositary to collect the ratifications of all states, keeping all parties informed of the situation. The institution of ratification grants states the necessary time-frame to seek the required approval for the treaty on the domestic level and to enact the necessary legislation to give domestic effect to that treaty. “Ratification, acceptance, approval and accession mean in each case the international act so named whereby a State establishes on the international plane its consent to be bound by a treaty. The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by ratification when: (a) the treaty provides for such consent to be expressed by means of ratification. Unless the treaty otherwise provides, instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession establish the consent of a State to be bound by a treaty upon: (a) their exchange between the contracting States; (b) their deposit with the depositary; or c) their notification to the contracting States or to the depositary, if so agreed”.

Accession

Accession is the act whereby a state accepts the offer or the opportunity to become a party to a treaty already negotiated and signed by other states. It has the same legal effect as ratification. Accession usually occurs after the treaty has entered into force. The Secretary-General of the United Nations, in his function as depositary, has also accepted accessions to some conventions before their entry into force. The conditions under which accession may occur and the procedure involved depend on the provisions of the treaty. A treaty might provide for the accession of all other states or for a limited and defined number of states. In the absence of such a provision, accession can only occur where the negotiating states were agreed or subsequently agree on it in the case of the state in question. Article 15 on the Consent to be bound by a treaty expressed by accession of the Vienna Convention declares that “The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by accession when: (a) the treaty provides that such consent may be expressed by that State by means of accession; (b) it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that such consent may be expressed by that State by means of accession; or (c) all the parties have subsequently agreed that such consent may be expressed by that State by means of accession”. That is what we can say about the Conclusion of Treaties.