Outer Space: Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Scientific and Technical Subcommittee, 63rd session, 1047th meeting

Good morning, distinguished delegates. I now declare open the 1047th meeting of the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Distinguished delegates, In line with the agreement endorsed by the Committee at its 68th session in June, this meeting of the Subcommittee will be fully dedicated to the technical presentations on item 6 on the Space debris and item 11 on the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. There will be 13 technical presentations this morning. delegates are reminded that the full schedule of technical presentations is available on the session webpage. Once the technical presentations have concluded, we will suspend the plenary meeting so that the working group on the long-term sustainability of outer space activities can hold its third meeting. Are there any questions or comments on this proposed schedule? I see none. Distinguished delegates, I will now turn to proceed with the dedicated technical presentations. We have four technical presentations under item six on the space debris and eight technical presentations under item 11 on the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. Exceptionally, we have one presentation under item seven. on space system based asset management support, which was originally scheduled for yesterday. Before I move on to the technical presentation, I'd like to advise all the presenters that if they wish to have interactions with the delegates to the question and answer after presentation, they may wish to finish their presentation few minutes beforehand. The first presentation on my list under agenda item six on the space debris is on the Interagency Space Debris Coordination Committee, IADC, role, organization, and outlook by the representative of the United Kingdom. United Kingdom, the floor is yours.

Chair, distinguished delegates, my name is Mamatha Maheswarappa, head of research and development in the office of the chief engineer at the UK Space Agency. I represent the United Kingdom on the Interagency Space Debris Coordination Committee Steering Group alongside Andrew Ratcliffe, the UK Space Agency's Chief Engineer and the current IADC Chair. In my presentation today, I'll provide an overview of the Interagency Space Debris Coordination Committee, the key international forum for global collaboration on space debris mitigation. I'll outline its role, structure, core activities and major outputs, and finally conclude with reflections on the future international cooperation and emerging needs in this area. Next slide, please. As we are all aware, the operational space environment is rapidly evolving and is often described as increasingly congested and contested. The plot on the right, taken from the annual IADC report on the status of the space debris environment, shows launch activity by funding sources, including civil, defense, and commercial. It highlights the sharp rise in the number of objects launched in the recent years. driven in particular by the development of large constellations since 2019, which has contributed to a roughly threefold increase in active satellites since 2014. Alongside this, globally, we have seen a growing number of space actors. Membership and observer participation at UN COPUOS has steadily expanded to more than 100 member states. reflecting the increasing importance of space to national infrastructure, public services and economic growth. This rapid growth and interest in the space domain makes it increasingly important to raise awareness of changes in the space environment and to establish international norms and best practices to minimize the impact of our activities. This is at the core of the IADC's mandate, a committee bringing together leading space agencies to coordinate research and deliver a consensus-based set of mitigation practices. The purpose of IADC is to exchange information and facilitate opportunities for cooperation in space debris research and to identify effective debris mitigation options. Established in 1993 with four founding members, the Committee has grown to include 13 members and three associate members, representing space agencies and authorized governmental or intergovernmental entities. Today, the Committee consists of around 130 delegates from organizations across the world. The committee meets annually at a session hosted by the chair with additional virtual coordination taking place throughout the year. Next slide, please. Next one. The member delegations consist of experts from governments, including government departments, space agencies, regulators, and academia. Industry does not participate directly to ensure impartiality. though Member States draw on their national activities, needs and partnerships to inform research priorities. The work of the Committee is coordinated by the Chair through the Steering Group and the Secretariat, in close collaboration with the Working Group Chairs. Working Group activities are organised and tracked by action items and internal tasks, which may lead to guidelines, reports and other outputs. There are four working groups across which the delegates work. Working Group One on measurements is responsible for monitoring both human-made and natural objects in space. This includes the use of ground-based and space-based measurement techniques such as radar, optical and infrared systems. Working Group Two focuses on environment and database. This group develops models of the meteorite and debris environment around the Earth. Their work covers debris modeling, short and long term evolution of the environment, collision prediction, and overall risk assessment. Working group three addresses protection. This includes the design and development of shielding technologies to protect spacecraft from meteorites and space debris, as well as the associated test methods. Their work also spans across test facilities, hypervelocity impact data and simulation software. Working group four focuses on mitigation. This group studies measures to reduce or prevent the creation of space debris. Their work includes the development of mitigation guidelines and approaches for the removal of objects from orbit. Next slide, please. Over the next few slides, I'll share some insight into the key outputs from the committee. The first major output to highlight is the space debris mitigation guidelines, which was first released in 2002. And since then, they have been revised four times. They're built on three core principles. First, the prevention of explosive or collisional breakups in orbit. Second, the timely removal of spacecraft and upper stages from densely populated orbital regimes at the end of their operational time. And third, the limitation of objects released during routine mission activities. Developed through collaboration and consensus across all IADC member organizations, these guidelines have become the foundation for the UN COPUOS Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines. They've also referenced in the long-term sustainability guidelines and are now widely embedded in national regulatory frameworks for licensed space activities. Key findings include a clear definition of the protected regions, both in low earth orbit and geostationary orbit. They also provide guidance on end-of-life operations, requiring that objects, wherever feasible, conduct a direct re-entry or be maneuvered into a disposal orbit with the shortest practical decay time and never exceeding 25 years. Finally, they support the planning, design and operation of satellite constellations, helping to minimize collision risks both with the constellation and between different constellations during routine activities as well as after post-mission disposal. Next slide, please. The second key product I want to highlight from the committee is our report on the status of the space debris environment. This year marks the fourth annual release of the report presented at the 63rd session of the STSC. The intent of the report is threefold. First, it aims to raise global awareness of the current state and expected changes in the space debris environment and the importance of adopting space debris mitigation practices. Second, it provides evidence to support informed policy and regulatory decisions. And third, the report reflects the unique collaborative effort. It brings together models and datasets contributed by all IADC member organizations, offering a comprehensive picture of the environment. Next slide, please. Key findings from the report highlight important trends as noted earlier. The low Earth orbit environment has changed significantly in recent years. One of the core principles of the space debris mitigation guidelines is the requirement to remove objects from both the lower Earth orbit and geostationary orbit protected regions. This is especially important for orbits where there is no natural disposal mechanism. Finally, while compliance in the geostationary orbits remain high, low Earth orbit shows an improving trend only over the past decade, indicating that further effort is needed to improve compliance across national space activities more broadly. Next slide, please. The final section of the report presents simulations of how the debris population is expected to evolve in the future. The graph illustrates the projected number of objects larger than 10 centimeters in low Earth orbit over the next 200 years based on two scenarios. The first scenario assumes that no further launches take place after a specified cutoff. The second scenario extrapolates current behavior, including present day launch traffic, explosion rates, and disposal success rates. In the chart, the evolution of the objects larger than 10 centimeters is shown with the dark line representing the mean outcome across all simulations. The shaded region illustrates the full range of variation observed within those simulations. I would emphasize that the widespread adoption of the copious and IADC space debris mitigation guidelines and the IADC recommendations for large constellations of satellites continue to remain the most effective method to reduce the long term environmental impacts of global space activity. Next slide, please. Alongside the two outputs of the IADC, we also produce a number of other products such as compilation of existing best practices and lessons learned for environmental remediation missions. Next slide, please. The committee has recently initiated new work looking ahead to future challenges, including mitigation and disposal options for lunar orbits. assessing orbital stability and evaluating disposal approaches such as lunar impact, Earth return and heliocentric trajectories. Second is recommendations to address incompatibility between on-orbit servicing missions and existing IADC mitigation guidelines, including issues related to debris releasing during operations, post-mission disposal success rates and ground safety considerations. Next slide, please. In conclusion, I hope this presentation has provided further insight into the Interagency Space Debris Coordination Committee and its unique standing in the international community. The IADC exists to help inform the community on changes in the space debris environment and identify approaches to mitigate our impact. Our work and outputs are built on global collaboration and coordination of our research. which has led to its high regard and incorporation of the outputs into sources of best practice both nationally and internationally. Thank you, Chair.

Thanks the UK very much for her presentation. If anyone want to contact to the group, she'll be around for half this morning, right? And The second presentation on my list is on the near-Earth space observation activities at Ukraine in 2025 by the representative of Ukraine. Ukraine, you have the floor, please.

Distinguished delegates, I would like to present for your attention a report on the state of near-Earth space observation at Ukraine in 2025. As before, our main efforts were focused on the following areas: observations of spacecraft and space debris for Ukrainian Space Monitoring and Analysis System, international cooperation, and NEOS observations. Nowadays, the main role in observations of near-Earth space is played by the optical sensors of the State Space Agency of Ukraine, modernized or created throughout 2016-2029. The Space Observation Center of SMAS continues its operation. The main results of its activities you are able to witness on the slide. Despite Russian aggression and all difficulties that arose because of that, Ukraine still continues to cooperate with various space agencies, governments and international organizations in the field of observing space debris and other objects in near-Earth space. One of the most important activities was the observation campaign for the targeted reentry of the ESA's Rumba spacecraft. This is already the second spacecraft from the Cluster-2 series, which targeted reentry we have participated in. Optical sensors of the State Space Agency of Ukraine and cooperating organizations observed this spacecraft throughout the campaign. The results obtained were highly praised by representatives of the European Space Agency. Our NEO observations continue to remain roughly constant. It's also worth noting that this year Ukrainian telescopes were able to contribute to the confirmation of over a hundred new NEO discoveries. Thus, Ukraine continues to develop its near-Earth space observation capabilities at the same level as in the previous years, despite all the problems associated with ongoing military operations. And thank you for your attention.

Thank you very much for your presentation. Before we continue with the technical presentation under the agenda item six on the spread debris, we will now have a presentation under item seven on the space system based assessment management support. The presentation is on using the institute group diagnostic of the ionospheric plasma for short term prediction of the earthquakes experienced on the satellite cloud track by the University of Ukraine, Ukraine, Yeduflo.

Good morning, distinguished delegates. My name is Sergiy Harashilov. I am the deputy director for research at the Institute of Technical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the State Space Agency of Ukraine. It is my honor today to present the work of our team led by Professor Shovalov on a topic that bridges space science and earthquake prediction. The central goal of our research was to explore whether earthquakes can be localized in space and time along a satellite's ground track. We approach this by analyzing in situ probe diagnostics of the ionospheric plasma. Why the ionosphere? because it's a remarkably sensitive indicator of external inputs. It reacts to influences from above, solar radiation, heliospheric disturbances, magnetic storms, and it also responds from below to processes in the lithosphere. Importantly, its responses lag behind events from above, but they precede events from below. This is crucial. Earthquakes are not sudden. They begin with stress and strain building in the lithosphere, cracks forming, and eventually rock failures. The ionosphere gives us a window into this incipient stage. Satellite monitoring of the ionospheric plasma has provided us with measurements that reveal important connections between earthquake initiation processes and variation in plasma parameters. Traditionally, onboard diagnostics relied on electric Langmuir probes and retarding potential ion analyzers. which measure the temperature and density of electrons and ions. These instruments allowed researchers to identify ionospheric precursors of earthquakes, local disturbances in plasma parameters observed as maxima in temperature and density distributions of charged particles. However, it is important to remember that the ionospheric plasma is a partially ionized gas. The density of neutron particles is several orders of magnitude greater than that of charged particles. This means that to fully understand the ionospheric behavior, plasma monitoring should be complemented with information about neutral particle temperature and density. To address this need, our research team developed a novel satellite instrument, the electric pressure probe. This device provides direct information on local values of neutral particle temperature and density in the ionospheric plasma, opening new possibilities for earthquake precursor studies and advancing satellite-based plasma diagnostics. We tested this innovation on board the Ukrainian Sich-2 satellite. Such to carry two instruments, a cylindrical electric length, your probe and our new electric pressure probe. Unlike similar satellites, such to provide it simultaneous measurements of both neutral particle and electron temperature and density analyzing. Analyzing these results, we were able to expand the set of earthquake precursors. In addition to electron and ion temperature and density, we now include neutral particle temperature and density, the electron energy gain rate, and the electric field strength in the ionospheric plasma. A striking finding emerged. The geographic coordinates of earthquake epicenters coincided with the coordinates of maxima in these precursor parameters along the satellite orbit. In other words, the epicenter is essentially the projection of the maximum point in the precursor distributions onto the ground track. We confirm this across multiple missions, DEMETER, CSES, and CH2 satellites. Here you see the positions of maxima in electron, ion, and neutral particle distributions connected with dashed line to the epicenters of detected earthquakes. This table shows relative values of precursor parameters. Notice that the electron energy gain rate stands out as the most sensitive additional precursor. And now let's talk about timing. This table. This table shows the time from precursor detection to the first shock, 18 minutes for Demeter, 24 hours for CSIS, and 33 hours for CH2. How do we predict this? We use relaxation times of electron and neutral particle temperatures from the maximum disturbed values back to undisturbed levels. Two models were applied, a powerful law and exponential law of plasma cooling. The actual first shock occurred between 4.1 hours and 7.69 hours after the predicted time. Accuracy depends directly on how precisely we measure disturbed and undisturbed plasma temperatures. So what is the procedure for short time earthquake prediction prediction along a satellite ground track? It involves five steps. First, monitoring ionospheric plasma to determine neutral particle and electron temperature and density in both undisturbed and disturbed states to identifying the location and time of maxima in this distribution along the orbit. Three, determining the geographic coordinates of the epicenter from those maxima. Four, calculating relaxation times of neutral particle and electron temperatures. And finally, predicting the first shock time using these relaxation time. The prediction range is from 30 minutes to two days. And to improve accuracy, we recommend using data from three or four CubeSats in a common orbit. Distinguished delegates, our research demonstrates that the ionosphere is not only a passive medium, but an active messenger of a seismic processes combining traditional plasma diagnostics with our innovative electrical pressure probe provides additional capabilities for earthquake prediction from space. Thank you, chair.

Thank you very much for your presentations. Is there any question? I see none. So the presentation on my list under agenda item six of the is on the international standard developments activities as supporting the orbital debris mitigation and sustainability by the observer for the International Organization of Standardization, ISO. ISO, you have the floor, please.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and distinguished delegates. Today I will update you on recent progress we've made with the international space standards development community. I will begin by defining what a standard is, its relationship within the broader context of regulations, best practices, and norms. Next, we will examine standards for comprehensive and reliable space data exchange and requirements for space operations and orbital debris mitigation. From there, we will discuss how international standards support the goals of both the UN LTS guidelines and potential goals of the new UN SSA expert group ably chaired by the UAE. Chair, in the context of space standards development, a standard codifies a consensus view of the best way to do something. providing a reference framework and a common language to facilitate trade and operations. International standards are created by a global pool of subject matter experts who prioritize shared views of terminology, technical knowledge, and performance and interface requirements that are verifiable and well-suited for contractual mechanisms. At the UN COPUOS level, Make sure I got the right stand here. Standards are often confused with state actor regulations, commercial best practices and expected norms of behavior. As shown on the right, a standard occupies a unique place in our global space governance framework. Standards are quite different from commercial aspirational best practices. education guidelines, national regulations and treaties. To further compare the many types of space governance, I encourage you to visit the UN USA site at the website shown above. As you may recall, the LTS guidelines often explicitly call for international standards to facilitate space safety and sustainability. As shown by the green regions on this chart, CCSDS and ISO have already published many standards that address LTS guidance. ISO was established 79 years ago to promote standards for international trade, communications, and manufacturing. ISO has held general consultative status within the United Nations Economic and Social Council, or ECOSOC, since its formation. Most UN agencies working on technical activities have liaison status with ISO. ISO is an independent non-governmental organization made-up of members from national standards bodies of 175 countries. NSBs facilitate and manage standards development for their respective countries. Working collaboratively with and within ISO, NSBs identify stakeholders and subject matter experts, coordinate stakeholder inputs, and receive requests for new standards. ISO is the world's largest standards developer of international standards, with 25,000 standards in publication today. ISO members drive decisions and select appropriate actions for these international standards. ISO operates on a consensus basis with each participating country receiving a single vote. ISO is not dominated by interest groups. Composed of 11 space member agencies. I'm sorry. Also established in 1947, ISO Technical Committee 20 is one of the most prolific ISO technical committees in international standardization. With 691 published standards and 100 more in active development, ISO TC 20 maintains a significant, highly relevant presence in the aerospace industry. Within TC20, two subcommittees developing space standards are SC13, Space Data and Information Transfer Systems, and SC14, Space Systems and Operations, highlighted in red on the bottom right. Now composed of 11 member agencies, 33 observer agencies, and 141 industrial associates, the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, or CCSDS, operates TC-20 Subcommittee 13 to develop international space data message standards. Those developed by his navigation working group are particularly relevant to the long-term sustainability of space activities as they allow the sharing of points of contact information, attitude, conjunction, orbit, maneuver, uncertainty, spacecraft physical parameters, reentry, and tracking information. Three additional standards that we are very excited about are in development to convey comprehensive launch and fragmentation information and to allow seamless combinations of multiple data message types. Flight safety relies on the seamless, secure, and integral exchange of data between space systems. This table maps the CCSDS standards for space traffic coordination and management. The green sections indicate standards that are already published. The blue items covering events, fragmentation, and launch data messages are currently in development, while the pink shaded regions identify potential candidates for future standardization. ISO TC 20 Subcommittee 14 develops standards that capture best practices for space systems and operations. All disciplines of SC 14's eight working groups are relevant to long-term sustainability of space activities. That said, most space debris mitigation standards are developed in working groups three, which is operations, four, the environment, and seven, orbital debris mitigation. These standards comprehensively address all facets of debris mitigation, including mission design, spacecraft design, testing, launch, operations, disposal, and human casualty risk. I am pleased to be able to participate in the new SSA expert group chaired by the UAE. Already, there has been much discussion about the critical need to exchange contact information, a phone book of sorts, for spacecraft operators and SSA centers and governments. But those working in space operations and SSA know that this is a necessary but insufficient step. Research has shown that government heads up notifications and space situational awareness, SSA, have been largely ineffective for flight safety and sustainability because of the lack of space data sharing and the use of outdated astrodynamics algorithms. To address these gaps and prevent collisions, spacecraft operators and SSA centers have been augmenting contact information and government heads up conjunction notifications. with ephemeris, maneuver plans, air information, improved space weather modeling, and spacecraft size information for more than 20 years. To ensure the sustainability of spacecraft activities, we must face many challenges. On the basis of scientific research, we know that current space safety practices, procedures, and SSA knowledge are incomplete and often ineffective. The new SSA expert group offers an opportunity to work within the global space community to address these critical shortfalls by enabling the sharing of points of contact information. As the expert group explores the who, what, where, when, how, and why of the global approach to improving space safety and sustainability, Space standards are one of the important elements that help solve the how we can address these challenges. To remind us of the criticality of making substantive progress in space safety and sustainability, this new video depicts the number of tracked space objects versus the orbit regime and time on the lower right hand side. The increase in space traffic over the last 10 years highlights the pressing need to share space data prioritize space traffic coordination and supports debris mitigation and space environment remediation efforts ISO and CCS DS space standards can enable and empower all of these vital efforts and we welcome our continued collaborative partnership with un copious and the SSA expert group thank you for your kind attention chair and distinguished delegates.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The last presentation on my list under agenda item six on the space derby is on the space team, Sat-1, or STS-1, a CubeSat for the next generation by the representative of Austria. So the floor is yours, Austria. This is the next slide.

Good morning. Good morning. Today I will present our nanosatellite project named Space Team Sat-1, in short STS-1, and the considerations that our team had to make in connection to the space debris mitigation. I am a member of TU Wien Space Team, which is a student association with around 200 members that work on various projects related to aerospace and space technology. Currently we have the following ongoing projects. First, where new members in teams of three to four persons build a small rocket from scratch. Lamar with an aim to build a bi-liquid rocket powered with ethanol and liquid oxygen that could reach the height of nine kilometers. CanSat, a project where a specially built rocket is used to deploy can-sized satellites built by student teams. Across Austria, that builds a hydrogen powered plane that will make an autonomous flight from border to border across Austria, and the STS-1 project which I will I'm here to present to you. STS-1 is a nano satellite that has dimensions of 10 by 10 by 12 cubic centimeters and has the following payload in terms of various sensors. We have a temperature sensor to measure the internal temperature of satellite, an accelerometer to measure the acceleration of our CubeSat, magnetometer to measure the magnetic field of Earth, ultraviolet light sensor to measure the intensity of sunlight, two cameras to make photos of Earth, and a dosimeter to measure the radiation levels in orbit. We have Raspberry Pi computational modules that is used to gather the data and perform the necessary computations. And to stabilize the orientation of the CubeSat, we use hysteretic rods and a permanent magnet. All of the components are the ordinary electronics components, which are easily accessible. However, their usage obviously restricts the possible mission time, as those components are not really space graded. Our main mission objectives are to develop and build a working satellite, and to later operate it using our own ground station. With this, we want to provide School students with a platform that allows them to conduct small research projects in space utilizing the sensors available on the CubeSat. Besides that, we will make photos of the Earth using our onboard cameras. And the collected data during the course of the mission will be made publicly available. Our satellite will operate at the altitude of 500 kilometers, and we expect an orbit period of about 94 minutes. which makes it visible from Vienna about two to three times per day. We expect that first one, two months after the launch will be dedicated to the commissioning phase. And since it's first CubeSat developed by our team, a special attention is made to a general radio frequency communication tasks, as they are a backbone of our operations. Educational mission will consist in gathering the computational code written by students, validating it, transmitting to a satellite, and executing it there, and receiving the results. Apart from this, as our satellite operates in amateur frequency band, we would gladly invite the amateur community to receive the data from STS-1 and to participate in the first communication challenge. In between the educational and amateur missions, we would merely gather the data obtained from the sensors. Now from our perspective, STS-1 is a satellite, but some considerations should be made, taken into account, that it remains as such and does not become a space debris. This will be the topic I will cover in the remaining time. So after successful launch and satellite deployment, STS-1 will wait for 45 minutes and will power up all of the necessary subsystems. If the battery voltage is within the usable range, the satellite will attempt to deploy the antenna by burning the wire that attaches it to the body of the satellite. If necessary, this operation repeats until canceled. Then STS-1 will transmit beacons every 30 seconds that will provide us with information that the satellite operates nominally. After the successful communication from ground, the antenna deployment mechanism is stopped And at this point, we start the commissioning phase and check the all sensors operate correctly and the internal memory works as expected. To keep the satellite operational and not to become a space debris, the following protections measures are in place. The battery cell is protected by tracking its temperature and allowing charging only in the operational temperature range. It has an integrated current interrupt device that prevents too big current to flow during charging or discharging of the battery. The battery is protected from small external objects by surrounding PCBs and the battery holder. And it is guarded from under and over voltage conditions. It is possible that the high energy particle hits a transistor inside and permanently opens it, and that could lead to a catastrophic damage of the said transistor and/or the integrated circuit it is part of. Such an event is called latch-up, and we employ some special measures to protect our electronics against it. Besides that, we have circuits that are called watchdogs that check if other subsystems operate nominally. And if that is not the case, the malfunction system would be subjected to a reset. As there is no propulsion system, our mass budget is constant, so we don't need to take any special care about it. We expect no parts to be released during the normal operation, so no contribution to existing amount of space debris will be made. And our analysis shows that all of our risks that is this regards are stemming from the decision to include the battery pack. The prevention of space debris generation is mainly focused in protecting the battery, and there are two main possibilities here, a fragmentation by battery explosion, and malfunction of the battery. And the measures to prevent them were discussed earlier and to repeat them in brief, we need to protect from excessive charge and discharge current and not operate at elevated temperature and outside of nominal voltage range. Our expected orbit time is between 19 and 29 months, and we estimated the probability of on-orbit collision with a space object bigger or equals than 10 centimeters to be in between one to 300,000 and one to 44,000, which means it is rather unlikely that STS-1 will be hit by some external object. Smaller objects were not considered in the estimation, as they will not prevent the post-mission disposal of the satellite by re-entry. After the mission is done, the satellite will be disposed via uncontrolled re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere. We are automatically compliant with the regulation to limit the orbital lifetime below 24 years. Our deployment starting conditions are such that no active disposal maneuver is necessary. And as no hazardous materials are used, no harm will take place during the reentry and nothing could be damaged on the ground as our satellite will not survive the reentry. And for the end of the mission, we envision two possibilities. Either a critical malfunction occurs that is manifested that no beacons are received on the ground or the satellite makes a reentry into the atmosphere. And in case of the specific sensor is broken, it will be determined in the telemetry data. We expect the full orbit lifetime to be around two to four years. And at the end of the mission, the CubeSat will be passivated by turning the maximum power consumption and by deactivation of the transmission in order not to interfere with other satellites. To conclude, I presented to you our small satellite that will carry an educational mission, and I hope I was able to convince you that it is unlikely that it will become a space debris. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you very much for your presentation. Thank you very much. The first presentation on my list under agenda item 11 on the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. on the recent measurement and unintended electromagnetic radiation from large satellite constellations by the Institute of Germany. Germany, you have the floor, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, distinguished delegates, dear colleagues, in this presentation, I address a new phenomenon discovered in large satellite constellations, which may significantly affect radio astronomical research. Radio emissions from satellites have been a problem for radio astronomy since a long time. Physics dictates that radio antennas emit their signal not only into the bore sight direction, but a small portion is also emitted into other directions. Radio astronomy antennas will receive such unwanted emissions, which then superpose on the faint astronomical signal and hence degrade the observations. Radio astronomy is especially susceptible for interference by airplanes or satellites, which are visible to radio telescopes over large distances in the direct line of sight. On the picture at the left of slide two, One can see an observation of one of the strongest astronomical sources in the sky in a hydroxyl line in comparison to the signal of a radio communication satellite, providing an idea of the scales. No astronomical signal can be measured at the transmission frequencies of the satellite. The new challenge for radio astronomy comes from the huge increase in satellite launches since about 2019. In addition, the target of satellite broadband communication using commercial handsets requires very strong satellite communication signals and additional frequency bands allocated to the satellite services. Both further impacts radio astronomy observations. Other than for terrestrial radio sources, there is no escape by operating radio telescopes at remote sites. Another challenge is the aggregate radiation from electrical operators on board satellites. It is again a consequence of the laws of physics that any electrical device produces unintended electromagnetic radiation. The amount depends on the quality of the electronics and is regulated for many electrical appliances in order to mitigate their mutual interference. Soon after the increase in satellite launches, radio astronomers realized that the unintended radiation from large satellite constellations might become a problem as such radiation received by the radio telescopes aggregates with the number of satellites. To test this, a campaign to measure the unintended radiation onboard satellites was initiated by concerned radio astronomers. The LOFAR telescope was used to point to a fixed position in the sky. Then the signals from satellites crossing the field of view was measured. For the majority of them, a signal was received at the predicted position of the satellites, which are shown as red dots in the movie on the right side of slide five. The radiation was measured at a frequency far from the carrier frequency of the communication signal. Further investigations indicated that most of the radiation was not the result of reflections of terrestrial emissions, but intrinsic to the satellites. It was hence coined unintended electromagnetic radiation or UMR. To investigate To investigate the potential impact of UMR on radio astronomy, a calculation can be made by treating it like typical satellite emissions. For those, methods from ITU-R recommendations can be applied. The expected data loss at a typical radio astronomy station is then estimated using simulations. According to ITU-R recommendations, the emissions of any satellite system in bands allocated to the radio astronomy service should not cause a data loss exceeding a threshold of 2%. For a typical constellation in 2023 with only 4,400 satellites, this threshold corresponds to an average field strength of a single satellite of 10 dB microvolt per meter. For comparison, CISPR standard 32B for multimedia household equipment is approximately 10 times higher. The measured radiation for satellites which exhibited UMR exceeded the threshold for the electric field strength by a factor between 5 and 30. This means that if every satellite in the example satellite constellation of only 4,400 satellites would emit UMR at the measured level in 2023, and the UMR would be treated like normal unwanted emission in the radio astronomy service band, ITU-R interference thresholds would be exceeded by a significant factor. The same group of astronomers made similar observations in 2024 to find that now all observed satellites showed UMR in the radio astronomy band. The radiation detected from the older satellite version was consistent with the older observations, while for the next generation of satellites, an increase by a factor of five to 32 was observed. as indicated in the cumulative diagram on the right side of slide nine. Further studies by other groups using different radio telescopes confirm all these results. Zeng et al. 2025 use multiple arguments, including polarization measurements to show that the observed radiation is intrinsic to the satellites and confirm the onset of the additional UMR at lower frequencies for the later generation of satellites. Grigal 2025 concludes that a major target of low frequency radio astronomy, the observation of the epoch of reionization might be fundamentally threatened. From the studies presented here, it can be concluded that UMR is a major concern for radio astronomy. Its reduction may hence be included in the targets when defining space sustainability goals. The pathway towards this is, however, somewhat unclear, as it is disputed which domain the study of UMR might fall into. As an electromagnetic compatibility problem, it may not be considered to be subject to the regulation of radio services. On the other hand, the radio regulations provide some guidance, such as in Article 15.12, addressing harmful interference from the operation of electrical operators or installations of any kind. So, which regulatory body is responsible? A clarification of this question is desirable. Distinguished delegates and colleagues, I would like to summarize. Since first documented in 2023, several studies confirmed the phenomenon called UMR, the emission of unintended radiation from satellites in large satellite constellations. It appears that younger generations of satellites for which UMR is being observed exhibit stronger radiation of this type and over wider frequency bands. Such emission may strongly impact astronomical research, especially given the still increasing number of satellites. As a consequence, regulatory measures to address the unwanted impact of UMR might be explored. Mr. Chairman, distinguished delegates, dear colleagues, I thank you for your attention. Do not hesitate to contact me if there are any questions.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The second presentation on my list is on the contribution of the GSI to the long-term sustainability of the space activities in Brazilian context by the representative of Brazil, Brazilian.

Mr. Chair, distinguished delegates, it is a great privilege to address this subcommittee on behalf of the Institutional Security Office of the Presidency of the Republic of Brazil, the GSI, to briefly present its contributions to the long-term sustainability of space activities in the Brazilian context. Although the GSI's involvement in the space sector began in 2017, We have assumed a central role as coordinator of the Brazilian Space Program Development Community, CDPEB. Our presence here today reaffirms Brazil's commitment to the long-term sustainability of space activities and to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. To begin with, I would like to emphasize that the GSI's mission in the Brazilian space sector is strictly one of coordination and support. We do not see ourselves as protagonists of the program, but rather as a facilitator of dialogue at the highest level among the main stakeholders in its execution. These include the Brazilian Space Agency, AEB, the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, MCTI, the National Institute for Space Research, INPE, the Ministry of Defense, MD, and the Air Force Command, COMAER. Our role is to carry out the institutional coordination necessary to help these and other relevant actors achieve their strategic objectives and overcome complex technical, regulatory and organizational challenges. The CDPEB, created by a presidential decree in 2018, is one of the main instruments for this national coordination as a high level collegiate body It brings together representatives from ministries, academic institutions, and the private sector. Since its creation, the committee has established 24 technical groups, 22 of which have already been completed. These groups have addressed a wide range of essential topics, including governance, space infrastructure, launch vehicles, regulatory frameworks, public policies, financing of the Brazilian space program, human resource management, communication, and international agreements. Notably, The two groups whose work has been completed most recently, TG21 and TG22, dealt respectively with the governance of the defense and the strategic communications satellite system, SSDC, and the regulation of the space activities law, law 14946 of 2024. The results of this work are being implemented at the federal level, increasing the legal and administrative certainty necessary for the development of the sector. As already noted, two technical groups are currently still in operation in this context. TG23 has advanced internal technical reflections on the resilience and sustainability of the space service that support critical social and economic activities. Its efforts include analytical work on dependency management, vulnerability assessment, and identification of technological paths related to positioning, navigation and timing applications with a view to increasing the robustness, redundancy and long-term continuity of this service. The work is conducted in a strictly technical and exploratory manner, focusing on the development and mapping of existing capabilities, as well as alignment with international best practice discussed in this subcommittee. In addition, our current efforts include ongoing work within the scope of TG 24, which is tasked with reviewing the National Space Activities Program, PNAI, through a proactive approach to monitoring and adjusting national initiatives. In the wake of the growth and institutional strengthening of the Brazilian space program, ALADA, Brazilian Aerospace Projects Company, is now a concrete reality. Its mission is to integrate and boost the commercialization of products, service, and projects, aiming at the development of the aerospace sector for the benefit of Brazilian society. Aladas activities cover the governance and management of aerospace projects of national interest, ensuring the representation of the Brazilian state and promoting the development and integration of the national industry, as well as the commercialization of aerospace products and service derived from its projects, including the use of research laboratories, telemetry service and launch related products. These activities are intrinsically linked to the long term sustainability of space activities as they promote a resilient business oriented ecosystem that reduce dependence of the federal budget and ensures the continuous reinvestment of resource in this space program. In addition to its coordinating role, the GSI carries out independent initiatives to promote the Brazilian space ecosystem in a responsible manner through, for example, the Space on the Agenda series. This initiative includes the preparation and dissemination of monthly newsletters, and the holding of webinars and seminars dedicated to this dissemination of strategic topics among which geopolitics space weather and the era of new space stand out Another milestone in the GSI efforts in this area is our recent cooperation agreement with the Secure World Foundation carried out in conjunction with the Brazilian Space Agency, AEB, to lead the translation into Portuguese of the 2024 edition of the manual for new actors in space, which will benefit from the valuable collaboration of the AEB in reviewing the work to ensure the highest level of accuracy and technical alignment of the translated content. This initiative is deeply strategic for the long-term sustainability of Brazilian space activities. By removing language barriers, it broadens Brazilian society's knowledge of the benefits of space technology, such as precision agriculture, environmental monitoring, and disaster management. We believe that when the population understands how space technology impacts and improves their daily lives, popular support for the space program tends to increase. This support is essential because governments are much more likely to maintain and increase long-term investments when they have the support of their citizens. Therefore, democratizing knowledge is a key factor for sustainability, ensuring that Brazil remains a responsible and committed player in the global space arena for future generations. In conclusion, Brazil, through the coordination of the CDPB and collaborative work among the main stakeholders in the national space sector, is building a safe, sustainable and inclusive space program. We remain firmly committed to the guidelines for the long-term sustainability of space activities and to the principle that alters Outer space is the domain of all humanity. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The third presentation on my list is on the engineering practices on the reusable rocket technologies in China. A case study of the landscape to Q3 maiden flight. by the representative of China, China.

Thank you, Chair. Distinguished delegates, it's my honor to have the floor to represent land space and China addressing this technical presentation about the most recent engineering practices on the reusable rocket technology in China, supporting the long term sustainability of the outer space. I work at land space, as general manager for quality and safety and a member of the China Space Debris Technical Subcommittee. My presentation today will cover four sections, a brief introduction to launch space, an overview of the Zhuque-3 vehicle, details about its maiden flight and the first stage recovery attempt and the key technology validated.

Not working.

Okay. Landspace founded in 2015 with headquarters in Beijing was China's first commercial rocket company who has obtained all necessary launch licenses. And Landspace is committed to independently mastering the key technology across the R&D, manufacturing, testing, and launch operations. Just to highlight that, on December 3rd, 2025, Landspace launched the first reusable vehicle in China. the ZQ3Y1, which is as neutral, completed its orbital mission with full success and conducted the very first attempt for the vertical recovery of a first stage boost in China. Our vision is to develop a full reusable launch system to make space flight as routine as air travel. Therefore, we are driven by technological innovation, safety and reliability. To support this vision, Landspace has built full in-house capability across the entire value chain. Landspace operates today a comprehensive network of facility across China, including the headquarter in Beijing and the centers in Xi'an and Shanghai, two manufacturing bases and one launch space on launch site in Jiuquan, which is northwest of China. So far, launch space have developed a launch vehicle family with liquid oxygen, the rocket family, which was powered by launch space all proprietary series rocket engines. ZQ-2 was the world's first methane fueled rocket to orbit and ZQ-3 is China's first orbit class reusable launch vehicle with recovery capability. The ZQ-3 is a two-stage launch vehicle designed for high frequency, low cost space access. Its key features including a cluster of nine engines first stage, a vacuum optimized engine plus RCS system second stage, mid structure by stainless steel in particular the propellant tanks. And it's equipped with four sides of grid fins and four landing legs enabling the vertical takeoff and the vertical landing capability. The rocket stands for 76 meters tall with a diameter up to five, 4.5 meters, a takeoff mass of 660 tons and a thrust of 900 tons. The payload fairing is 5.2 meters in diameter to provide more space for payloads and is capable to delivering payloads up to 21 tons to low orbit and 18 tons in downrange recovery mode. Prior to the maiden flight, Landspace has conducted successfully two VTOL flight tests of ZQ3 prototypes in January and September of 2024. Both tests demonstrated very high landing accuracy, precise speed control, and minimal attitude deviations. The ZQ3 maiden vehicle stands for 66 meters tall. With a lift off mass of 560 tons, generating over 750 tons of thrust designed for over 20 reuse cycles. The middle flight targets 200 kilometers low as orbit. The first stage is in downrange recovery mode with landing zone located approximately 390 kilometers from the launch site. This slide shows the complete vision mission profile of the Q3 maiden flight. The orbital mission was executed flawless with all critical maneuvers performed as planned and all system operating stably. Well, the first stage recovery mission anomaly occurred after landing burn ignition. We analyze this in detail later. Prior to the launch, we conducted extensive testing, including a static fire test, landing leg deployment verification, a firing operation rehearsals in October 2025. Therefore, the integrated launch procedure and vehicle readiness was validated before the final preparation for flight. The launch campaign, including a final assembly, RCS fueling, transfer to the pad, and pre-launch rehearsals. All verification was successful. On December 3rd, 2025, ZQ-3Y1 lifted off, marking China's first orbital launch of a reusable vehicle with a recovery attempt. In terms of the orbital launch mission, the second stage achieved a high precise orbital insertion, all system performed reliably. It successfully completed a 1,400 second long coasting phase and a critical re-ignition test, which is essential for future deep space missions. The stage was safely passivated at the end of the mission and safely decayed on January 30, 2026 to the South Pacific Ocean. During the return, the first stage executed all planned maneuvers, gliding, attitude adjustment, grid fin control, reentry burn and deceleration. However, an anomaly occurred after landing burn ignition. The first stage turned into a rock and preventing a soft landing. First stage debris impacted approximately 40 meters from the landing pad center. By far, not any other reusable booster has got this close to a landing on its first flight. Co-recovery technology was validated and we are refining the landing sequence for the next attempt. Although the soft landing was not achieved, the mission validated numerous key technologies. including a new lifting body aerodynamic configuration with streak wings, a cluster nine engine propulsion system, stainless steel laser welded propellant tanks, pyrotechnic free stage separation, foldable grid fins for reentry control, and an integrated high precision GNC system as shown in the table. The ZQ-3 features an innovative oval aerodynamic configuration that integrates symmetrically mounted wings, foldable grid fins, and streamlined landing leg fairings. This configuration enables the vehicle to transition from a conventional ballistic return trajectory to a lifting body return profile. effectively reducing the propellant consumption during the return phase and enhancing the payload capacity in reusable launch mode. The nine engine cluster propulsion system is the first time application in China and was validated through the maiden flight mission. It integrated advanced technologies such as high flow propellant delivery, dual cryogenic tank pressure control and propellant management, fully sub-cooled propellant loading with anti-freeze control and precision manufacturing using 3D digital pipeline techniques. LAM Space introduced the high performance stainless steel laser welded propellant tank in ZQ-3 design and production. This reduces the production cost by 80% and shortens the manufacturing cycle by 40%. The mission validated also the GNC technology, including the high precision recovery and navigation, real time in time, in flight trajectory planning and tracking. Convex optimization based closed loop terminal guidance, adaptive high precision attitude control during the reentry. This enhancing the landing accuracy, robustness and the operational flexibility of reusable launch vehicles. For reliability and cost efficiency, ZQ3 employs industry grade power link real time Ethernet for that communication, automotive grade multi-core processors for recovery algorithms, a triple redundant high performance avionics and unified ground testing and launch control system. This approach lays a robust foundation for the future high frequency launch operations. The prior technique free stage separation technology on ZQ-3 was also a first time application in China. It significantly enhances the system testability and validation capability on the ground, thereby improving the overall launch reliability. Furthermore, deployable grid fin system represents a key technology breakthrough for reusable launch vehicle in China. We are right now optimizing the recovery workflow and we are confident in achieving a successful first stage recovery in the next flight of ZQ3. Looking forward, we are planning a second recovery attempt in Q2 this year and followed by a reuse of the recovered first stage in Q4. These steps will further mature our reusable launch system at launch space and in China. In conclusion, Landspace is committed to advanced reusable rocket technology for lowering the launch cost and increasing the access to space. We thank the office and subcommittee for the opportunity to share our progress with colleagues worldwide. We look forward to continued international collaboration in the peaceful use of outer space. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The fourth presentation on my list is on the building sustainable space future capacity development, education and gender inclusion by the representative of Brazil. Brazil, you have the floor, please.

My name is Aline Veloso. I'm from Brazil Space Agency. I work as a coordinator of competence and technology development. I go talk about how capacity development, education, and gender inclusion can help to build a sustainable space future. So I start asking why people matters in this space sustainability. So space sustainability is often discussed in technical or environment terms. However, for a long term sustainability of space activity depends on fundamentally on people. So how we educate them, how we develop skills and how is given access to participate. Human capital inclusion are not a secondary issues. They are strategic assets for space sector. So, the space activity highly qualified, multidisciplinary, and adaptable professional. So, and however, many countries in Brazil face challenges such as a shortage of specialized workforce, and even access to education. lack of diversity in these teams and space careers. Addressing those challenges requires a systematic and scalable educational solution aligned with national and international space strategies. As a solution for that, the Brazilian Space Agency launched in 2021 an educational platform called AB Escola Virtual, or AB Virtual School. This platform has a mission to strengthen human capital for space activity through 100% free and open access platform, distance education. Our main focus was in the Brazilian public, so our classes started just in Portuguese. But even in Portuguese we see we could spread the use we have using our our our audio words. And our tag challenges it was student and teacher, undergrad and graduate students, professional researchers and public servants. And And we have now over 31,000 registered users in our platform. We have a strong participation of students. The majority of the user profession are students, but we have teachers and researchers as well. The major education level is undergraduate students, incomplete students from undergrads and also undergrad graduated students. As I say, the measure of our public is in Brazil, is 95% from Brazil. But we have 5% of those 31,000 around the world. So each dot means use our platform. That's demonstrated even in Portuguese, the classes in Portuguese. We have international reach. And we try to have some cooperation to collaboration for help us translate our material for another language. And now in March, we go have our first class in English. This class will be focused on space economy. This initiative represents a strategic step towards expanding international reach, global cooperation, and aligning emerging themes in global space agenda. Another question, we start to think how we can improve people in the space area. is equal gender, promote equal gender in the sector. So despite the progress, we know the space sector is structurally gender unbalanced. We have underrepresentation of women technical and leadership roles. early dismisses of girls from STEM pathways, especially in space. This imbalance limited talent development, innovation capacity, and long-term sustainability. But it's important to know the gender equality is not a social goal, but also a strategic requirement aligned with UN sustainable development goal and the international principle of responsible and sustainable space activities. So Brazil have programs called Girls in Space, in Portuguese means Meninas no Espaco. This program is institutional in set from Brazil space and the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte. We encouraging girls, I mean ages from the elementary school through university to go in the space career, choose those area for study and have a career as well. So for now, we have over 6,000 students, all from public school. Many of those students is from Rio Grande do Norte, this state. This is a state in northwest of Brazil. So we over 35 cities in the States and start to go in other states from Brazil as well. And in that we have a goal there even for educational outreach activity, promoting target girls, young woman, and work together with our platform and school, university, government. So gender inclusion must be continued systematically to generate a lasting impact. So education and inclusion work together. So Brazil's space agency experience shows that our open education platform in race inclusion initiatives and inclusion policy for human capital development. So our platform is scale, accessible, and continue as the girls space promote equality, focus, and social transformation. Together, they support a development of diversity, qualified, and resilient space work. for space workforce. So, space sustainability doesn't not beginning of it or in space actually beginning school and digital platform and public policies here in the earth. and by investing, so by investing simultaneously in capacity building and gender inclusion, the Brazilian space agencies contribute a future that is innovation, inclusive, and sustainable at a global scale. That's it. Thank you all.

Thank you very much for your presentation. So the fifth presentation on my list is on the long-term sustainability of outer space, International Academy of Astronautics contribution by the observers for the International Academy of Astronautics, IAA. IAA, you have the floor, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Secretary General of the International Academy of Astronautics, I am pleased to report to the UN corpus on the activity on long-term sustainability of outer space. And specifically about space traffic management and the planetary defense, the moon far side protection, And I will conclude with the city. The Academy was founded in 1960 as an independent organization. And it was recognized by the United Nations at New York in 1995. and its membership comprise 1,250 academicians and associate members from 95 countries, including 83 member states of COPUOS. The mission of the Academy is to advance innovation, promote international cooperation, and recognize leaders. And in those areas, we have a lot of activity. The membership is organized with individual record, and it include the 50 academicians that we elect each year, and 50 associate members also that came from in the family after a ballot that is sent to 95 countries. The following is the in this activity we make 25 to 30 symposia in year and we have about we publish a journal named Acta Astronautica which is identified as the number one in space for the moment among 100 journals. And last year in 2025, we record 1.7 million of download of articles. We have We publish many cosmic studies. We are about 90 at the moment, close, and we cover all the subjects that are in our aim. The activity include direct component on long-term sustainability of outer space, as the space traffic management and including space debris, space situational awareness and planetary defense. It also include lunar and planetary protection and several other area. We have established a space traffic management committee in 2006. and we already published two cosmic studies in 2006 and 2018. We cover many subjects and for instance, we have six studies in preparation and each study is generally a two year work for a multinational team. And you see that from that list that we cover a lot of area in the space traffic management. We have, for instance, several conferences, one of them in Austin, Texas on space traffic management. And this one is held for 12 year and also the space situation awareness. that is also organized for the last five years. Planetary Defense Conference was held during a very long series, a little more than one decade. And the last one was a few months ago in Stellenbosch in South Africa. This cover three to 400 participants. And we have in that area a lot of subject to cover. And it go from technical to economic and political. One point amazing is that we have a treat exercise, which is one of the highlight of the event. And this exercise show difficulty to cover the problem of impact with millions of people concerned. We have the Moon far side protection planetary defense is a subject that is fully integrated in our activity. And for instance, we have here a list of the topics covered by the the planetary Defense now we have the moon far side protection and this was established in 2021 and there is committee conference cover in that area and like cosmology astrobiology City the search for extraterrestrial intelligence and the planetary Defense the following one is also the IAEA is also involved in several other activity and for again for the long term sustainability. And I would mention one particularly that is held for ten years or a little more than ten years. And this is on space system as a critical infrastructure conferences that were that were held in Mamaya in Romania. We also, as you see, have a new activity with the friends and so on. Recently, we have more activity in the city. And the reason is that we have for the last 15 or 20 years, activity in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, but we also publish position paper that is named Declaration of Principle Concerning the Conduct of Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. And we publish one in 1989 and one in 2010. Those were endorsed by the United Nations. We recently prepare a new version that include the modern constellation of the situation to be totally in light with the current activity in the world. And this declaration has been submitted to the United Nations very recently, and we hope that it will be accepted and recognized also by several other international organizations. I thank you very much for your attention. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The sixth presentation on my list is on the lunar dust as a long-term sustainability challenge by the observer for all of mankind. You have the floor, please.

Thank you, Chair. Distinguished delegates and representatives, my name is Michelle Hanlon. I'm a space lawyer and the executive director of the Center for Air and Space Law at the University of Mississippi in the United States. I'm speaking today on behalf of For All Moonkind, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to protecting sites of outstanding value to humanity in outer space and advancing responsible, sustainable activity on the moon and beyond. In this technical presentation, I will focus on plume surface interactions as a scientific, technical, and governance challenge for the long-term sustainability of deep space missions. Apollo 17 commander Gene Cernan, the last human to walk on the moon, warned that dust is probably one of our greatest inhibitors to a normal operation on the moon. This was not a metaphor, it was a lived experience. Astronauts consistently reported that lunar regolith abraded equipment and suits, degraded thermal systems, compromised seals, and interfered with visibility and mobility. That lived experience frames today's discussion, how plume-driven regolith transport becomes a long-term sustainability challenge as lunar activity increases in scale, frequency, and proximity. The scientific and technical subcommittee has recognized the growing number of missions to the moon and beyond and the need for early consideration of long-term sustainability in deep space activities. It has also noted the new challenges will emerge as exploration becomes more active and that this area would benefit from further work and discussion within the LTS framework. Plume surface interactions fall squarely within that category. Lunar dust or regolith is a layer of unconsolidated material formed by billions of years of micrometeoroid impacts. Unlike terrestrial dust, lunar regolith is sharp, angular, abrasive, and adhesive, both mechanically and electrostatically. Dust becomes particularly hazardous when it is transported. While natural processes move some regolith, decades of studies show that the dominant transport mechanism by far is the landing and subsequent ascending of spacecraft. This is the plume effect, rocket exhaust interacting with loose regolith to produce high velocity ejecta. During the final moments of landing, exhaust gases form a pressurized region beneath the spacecraft, accelerating horizontally and lifting regolith into a fast moving sheet. Fine particles can reach hundreds of thousands of meters per second. Larger particles move more slowly, but still with damaging kinetic energy. The type and degree of damage forecast will be catastrophic for functional hardware on the moon. The scouring effects of the spray may ruin surface coatings, reflective blankets and optics, and the injection of dust into mechanical joints may cause increased friction, jamming, and mechanical wear. In the absence of an atmosphere, these particles travel until they strike something, and modeling shows that some can leave the surface entirely. Fine particles can enter ballistic trajectories that intersect orbital altitudes, posing risks to spacecraft in low lunar orbit and planned infrastructure such as the proposed Gateway. These effects scale with lander mass and mission frequency and accumulate over time. Apollo 12 provides clear operational evidence of the plume effect. During the final phase of descent, exhaust interaction with the lunar surface generated a dense dust cloud that obscured surface visibility. Astronaut Pete Conrad reported that the dust was so pervasive, he could not determine what lay beneath the lunar module. The Apollo 12 lunar module landed more than 200 meters away from Surveyor 3, a robotic mission that landed on the lunar surface two years before. Yet components of Surveyor 3 that were returned to Earth showed clear evidence of sandblasting, pitting, cracking, and dust implantation attributed to ejecta from the landing. Surveyor 3 was exposed only to the fringes of the plume as it was partially shielded by terrain. Even so, its surface suffered hundreds of micro craters and penetrations from high velocity lunar particles. Analysis concluded that this damage significantly under represents the effects of direct plume exposure and that impacts would increase substantially for the larger landers planned today. For context, the Apollo lunar module had a landing mass of about five tons. Future landers are expected to weigh four to eight times more with simulations showing ejective velocities increasing accordingly. This is where plume surface interactions move beyond an engineering concern and become a long-term sustainability problem. The effects are cumulative, shared, and increasingly consequential as activities occur closer together, often without any direct relationship between missions. This is not a future issue. It is an emerging operational reality. As we consider how to mitigate plume related risks moving forward, historic lunar sites must be part of that analysis from the outset. These sites are not simply cultural artifacts. They are fixed, well documented reference points that allow us to observe plume reach, cumulative degradation, and the consequences of operating in proximity over time. Because they cannot be redesigned, relocated, or hardened after the fact, they represent the most conservative test case for understanding plume effects. Importantly, historic lunar sites are also one of the few categories of surface assets in which all states have a shared interest. Unlike future installations that may serve the objectives of one or a few actors, these sites belong to the collective history of humanity. Beginning here provides a neutral, widely acceptable foundation for developing mitigation practices that will ultimately benefit all lunar operations. Lunar plume effects are not being raised here as a legal violation in search of a legal remedy. They are being raised as a scientific and technical phenomenon with legal consequences. The Outer Space Treaty already applies through principles of responsibility, due regard, harmful interference, and consultation. The difficulty is that applying those obligations after the fact would be unwieldy, uncertainly, and likely ineffective. Even where responsibility could be established, the current construct of international space law makes it difficult to identify compensable damage in cases involving historic lunar sites, where harm is often non-economic, intangible, and irreversible. In short, the law can assign responsibility, but it cannot prevent the harm. That is why plume effect-related risks must be addressed upstream through scientific understanding, operational practice, and coordinated planning. UN COPUOS is the only international body with the mandate, legitimacy, and technical breadth to address plume effects at their source. Because these effects arise from space activity itself, implicate safety, sustainability, and proximity, they fall squarely within the mission of the COPUS and particularly the STSC and the ATLAC. Research suggests that partial mitigation, standoff distances, berms, or terrain shielding is insufficient for sustained lunar activity. Engineered landing surfaces may be necessary, but mitigation is not solely technical. Without coordination, isolated measures risk shifting hazards rather than reducing them. That coordination function belongs here. STSC provides the scientific and technical foundation. ATLAC provides the consultative mechanism. Distinguished delegates, in summary, The lunar plume effects are a known, cumulative, and far-reaching technical hazard that cannot be managed by individual missions alone. They arise directly from space activity and affect other missions across surface and orbital regimes with impacts that extend to fixed, irreplaceable sites of human heritage that make visible the limits of uncoordinated activity. Because these effects pose foreseeable risks to both future lunar infrastructure and historic sites that cannot be redesigned after damage occurs, meaningful mitigation and governance must begin within UN COPUOS as the only international body with the mandate, legitimacy, and technical competence to address the problem at its source. The moon imposes physical restraints that are not negotiable. Apollo revealed them. Future missions will amplify them. If we want lunar activity to scale responsibly, we have to address cumulative effects and proximity now in the forum designed to do exactly that. Gene Cernan warned us about dust. It is now our responsibility to act on that warning. Thank you for your kind attention.

Thank you very much for your presentation. Madam, the next presentation on my list is on the crash clock, a key elemental indicator for assessing operational stress on orbit by the observer for the outer space institute, OSI. OSI, you have the floor, please.

Thank you, Chair and distinguished delegates for this opportunity to present our work on the crash clock, a proposed key environmental indicator that can be used to assess the stress on Earth's orbital environment. The work is currently available as a preprint. I have the first slide, please. Thank you. The crash clock is designed to be a key environmental indicator or KEI for the orbital environment. The idea behind a KEI compared with other types of metrics is that it represents a snapshot in time of the environment and does not rely on estimates of what the environment might look like in the future. It uses data from any snapshot in well-defined calculations. Anyone with the data can calculate the value for the KEI. The results are then used to assess instantaneously the stress on the environment. If past data are available, the KEI can be used to understand trends in environmental degradation. KEIs can be used for decision making when paired with different models and/or regulatory frameworks. KEIs are different from other environmental concepts such as carrying capacity or orbital footprints. Ideally, they do not depend on assumptions about decisions made by various operators, such as collision avoidance thresholds. KEIs also do not necessarily have thresholds themselves or rely on defining capacities. With that in mind, they can be used to help define risk to operations, the environment, or both. Finally, KEIs are complimentary to the European Space Agency's recently announced health index as a sustainability metric. The crash clock stands for collisional realization and significant harm clock. It is premised by the following question. What is the timescale for potential collision to occur if there is a situation, for whatever reason, where there is a complete loss of satellite control? By loss of control, we mean no station keeping, and thus optimal configurations cannot be maintained within constellations, no collision avoidance maneuvers, and no minimization of collisional cross sections. While hypothetical, this assumption has several desirable features. It is intuitive, you simply let the system go. Relatively straightforward to calculate and reflects an extreme but realistic possibility. Examples might include a catastrophic solar storm or widespread and severe corruption of control software. So how do you calculate the crash clock? There are several steps. Density distributions are calculated using actual orbital information. For simplicity, we average over spherical shells, making the density a function of altitude only. For the calculation, we use an average typical relative interaction speed, which we approximate by assuming randomly oriented orbits within each shell. As we will show, this turns out not to be a serious limitation. One of the most important steps of the crash clock is setting cross sections for various interactions between objects. The cross section should be based on possible collision thresholds and not absolute minimum distances. Earlier, I had mentioned the crash clock represents the expectation time for a potential collision to occur. The reason we emphasize a potential collision is because whether a collision takes place or not will depend on the actual orientation of the objects at the time of their closest approach. These components, density distributions, relative speeds, and cross sections are used to calculate an average collision rate within each shell. Finally, we sum all the rates in all the shells with the inverse of that giving the crash clock value. For those seeking more detail, the paper lays out the calculations. To give a brief technical description, the top equation shown here is used to determine potential collision rates. This depends on the typical encounter speed as discussed above, which can be determined for the circular speed assuming random orbits. As you can see, the density distribution given by N sub I and N sub J for two different object types such as satellites and debris or the same object type when I equals J is also of high importance. With the basic calculations in mind, we want to visualize some of the quantities used in the crash clock. The following graph shows the orbit average density distribution of different objects as a function of altitude. The black curve includes everything in the public catalog, while the different colors give example satellite constellations or debris fields. The debris fields tend to form broad swaths over many altitudes, while the satellite constellation shells can form sharp peaks. I want to impress upon you that while the density values may appear to be small, they are consequential due to high orbital speeds. The last point is illustrated in the following plots, which show the typical timescale as a function of altitude for any two objects to come within one kilometer of each other, assuming no maneuvers. The blue curves use the methods outlined above, relying on analytic rates and assumptions of randomly oriented orbits with thin spherical shells. The red curves are the results of numerical simulations that use the detailed orbital information of the actual satellite and debris population with no averaging or assumptions about orientations. The numerical simulations provide very strong validation of our analytical methods. The plot further highlights typical time scales for conjunctions less than one kilometer as a function of altitude for two different instances in time using the actual orbital information. In 2018, shown on the left, the average time for encounters less than one kilometer, assuming no maneuvers, dip just under one day for some altitudes. In June of 2025, on the right, some altitudes had encounter times as short as 20 minutes, again, assuming no maneuvers. If we sum the corresponding rings over all altitudes and use that to determine a typical encounter time for all of low earth orbit, the one kilometer encounter time scale in 2018 was about four minutes. In June of 2025, it was approximately 40 seconds. Now that we have estimates for an encounter rate and have validated our analytic calculations, one moment. Next slide, please. Thank you. Now that we have validated our analytic calculations, we need to ask what cross sections should be used to determine the crash clock value. This is the trickiest part of the crash clock, as there can be reasonable discussion on what should be adopted as a safety margin. Regardless, we strongly advise against using the minimum or radar cross sections, as these will underestimate the potential for collision for certain orientations. Indeed, two randomly oriented rods passing by each other have a typical cross-section that is not set by the thickness of the rods, but approximately one-third of their lengths. Based on the known physical spans of many satellites on orbit as well as abandoned rocket bodies, we recommend using cross-sections set by encounter distances of 10 meters for satellite-satellite, rocket body-rocket body, or satellite-rocket body close approaches. We further recommend using five meters for satellite debris or rocket body debris encounters. Finally, we assume a distance of 10 centimeters for debris-debris interactions. Together, we call this the 10-5-10 crash clock, which motivates the values we discuss here. The next two slides emphasize the issue of selecting a minimal cross section. In the case shown here, two satellites safely pass each other at a very small distance, relying upon maintaining a favorable orientation. For the case shown here, the orientations are not favorable for a close conjunction and a collision becomes possible. Because the crash clock assumes random orientations, such encounter situations need to be taken into account. So, for the 10-5-10 crash clock, we find that at the start of 2018, the crash clock value was 164 days. If something were to go horribly wrong, there would be months to address the problem. In June of last year, the crash clock value had dropped to less than a week. And now, the crash clock is just under four days. We expect this value to vary with time, but the overall change is quite clear. What can be done with this information? As a KEI, the crash clock can be used to inform policy decisions and assess the safety risks associated with prolonged periods of uncertainty. Here is one example. Assume for some reason there was a widespread failure and we are in a no maneuver situation. Further suppose we require 24 hours to manage the problem. In this case, we can ask what is the probability that there will be a potential collision during a 24 hour period? The black curve in the figure is the result. For illustrative purposes only, we have defined the red danger zone as the crash clock values where there is a 50% chance or greater of a potential collision within 24 hours. The yellow caution region extends to where there is a 10% chance, but the green safe is below that limit. For our 2025-2026 values, we are well within the caution region in this framework. At the Outer Space Institute, we will be monitoring the crash clock and providing regularly updated values. We invite you to follow this project as it progresses. We welcome engagement on the use of the crash clock and will be pleased to work with other organizations and delegations on how this key environmental indicator can help with keeping the use of space safe and sustainable. Finally, at the OSI, we're working on other KEIs for evaluating the overall stress on the Earth space system and would be happy to discuss some of those efforts with you. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much for your presentation. The last presentation on my list under this agenda item is on the living and working in free space, a choice of freedom. but observer for the Space Renaissance International, SRI. SRI, you have the floor, please.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, distinguished delegates. Earth has 8.5 billion people and we are using resources faster than they can be replenished. This leads to a decline in quality of life and the worsening of environmental and social conditions. Next slide. Okay, that's fine. As resources become scarce, some will cling to Earth and fight for what's left. The brave will venture behind our planet to find new resources for all of humanity. These pioneers will be known as the space settlers. Yet, where should we live in space? Most popular visions imagine colonies on planetary surfaces like the moon or Mars. Exciting scientific endeavor, yet there is a better way focusing on human well-being, freedom, and creativity. Free space habitats, rotating, self-sustaining orbital worlds designed to simulate Earth's gravity and sustain rich human communities. This vision offers not just survival in space, but a thriving, free, beautiful human civilization. Living in rotating space habitats, as Gerard O'Neill proposed in the "Ic Frontier," is far better than life on planetary surfaces. These habitats provide simulated gravity for health, continuous sunlight for energy, and can be moved away from cosmic dangers. Prioritizing geolunar space development in the short and mid-term rather than Mars can boost the space economy and greatly enhance quality of life from safety to well-being and beyond. O'Neill's idea continues the enlightenment spirit, showing how human reason and creativity can build environments that preserve freedom, dignity, and beauty. In 1969, physicist Gerard O'Neill asked his Princeton students if a planet's surface was the right place for an expanding technological civilization. They said no. Other visionaries shared this idea from Brown rotating world station in 1952. Clarke's orbital islands in the sky in 1954 and Romick's giant space colony in 1956. Later concepts included NASA's Stanford torus in 1975, called asteroid habitats, Eric K. mobile colonies and lunar industrialization before astropolitics and free space settlements. Living on the moon or Mars means adapting to harsh alien worlds that limit human flourishing and quality of life. Space habitats must transcend mere survival. Beyond safety and durability, space living requires beauty, ergonomics, and comfort to support a vibrant lifestyle. Abundant greenery and water should harmonize with the design as sterile environments export only survival and not culture. Beauty and art define civilization. A humanist vision must carry joy and creativity. Free space habitats uniquely offer adjustable gravity, constant sunlight and mobility, creating environments shaped by human ideals of happiness. The debate between surface and free space approaches continues. Surface advocates Not humans receive about half the radiation compared to free space, yet radiation on the moon or Mars remains dangerous due to lack of magnetic fields. Both planetary and free space habitats can use regolith water shielding or artificial magnetic fields for protection. While the moon offers metals and water ice, asteroids provide similarly vast resources. Humans could work on planetary surfaces but live comfortably in free floating habitats at one G. Material processing is more efficient in microgravity within rotating infrastructures axis. Free space habitats offer full exploitation of solar power and nuclear fusion when it will be available. Although planetary surfaces aid mining and exploration, they limit health, movement and creativity. On-air habitats best combine visibility, economic growth and human freedom, while people should remain free to choose life on planets or in rotating worlds. Over past decades, hundreds of astronauts have lived sometimes for a full year aboard orbital stations such as the ISS. These missions have generated vast data on the effects of prolonged exposure to microgravity and radiation on human health. Evidence is clear, long stays in space cause profound and sometimes lasting physiological changes. Astronaut Scott Kelly's one-year mission on the ISS provided a comprehensive study of human adaptation to space. In his book, Endurance, Kelly describes the harsh effects of microgravity and radiation on his body, highlighting a central challenge, these efforts must be mitigated before civilians can safely live in space. Prolonged isolation can dull motivation and emotion, making psychological resilience as vital as physical health. Space settlers should not become nostalgically attached to Earth, yet unfit to return. Habitats must feel safe, beautiful and uplifting, free from pressure or anxiety, and ideally better than Earth life. This requires designing life glorifying, not merely life sustaining systems. Private flats with kitchens, bathrooms, and living rooms, along with generous communal spaces like meeting rooms and squares are essential. Ergonomics, calming colors, soft lighting, art, and comfortable seating with options to view or avoid outer space will support relaxation, social interaction, and well-being. A green environment in space habitats must go beyond food and oxygen production. Gardens and lush vegetation should form earth-like biomes, including selected animals to provide beauty and psychological comfort. NASA notes that plants and flowers support not only nutrition and air quality but also mental health and morale, while fresh orbit ground produce ensures essential vitamins. Water is equally vital not just biologically but as a living environment. Lakes, rivers and large bodies of water are needed for self-sustaining ecosystems and on a style spinning habitats could host vast seas supporting rich life. Space living demands more than survival. Beauty, comfort, and nurturing spaces are essential for emotional well-being far from Earth. Access to nature, natural light, art, ergonomic design, sport arenas, meditation pods, and tranquil gardens transform habitats from shelters into true homes where both body and soul can thrive. Without freedom, space settlements risk creating exiles, not pioneers. Freedom of choice is a fundamental human right and the cornerstone of dignity. Take Peter, a pioneer who joins a moon colony full of hope. Over time, the moon's low gravity weakens his body, making a return to Earth dangerous or even deadly. His trip becomes one way, forcing painful limitations. Humans must always retain the freedom to choose where to live, free from being trapped by biology, technology or politics. When we decide to live in a space community, non-human rights should be disregarded or denied. Space habitats spinning to simulate Earth. Gravity preserve health and strength, so settlers like Peter won't face cruel trade-offs. People can migrate freely between Earth and space, keeping settlement reversible, voluntary, and human-centered. Through freedom of movements, let us make space a home, not a place of exile. Cultural freedom is a vital of freedom of movement. Our cultures, traditions, languages, and arts define who we are, and in space habitats like the rotating city New Gaia, they will not only survive, but flourish in new forms. Russian families might celebrate, and Indian communities like Diwali lamps, and indigenous people share ancient stories between beneath artificial stars. Temples, mosques, churches, and meditation rooms will serve many faiths. new space born cultures will emerge blending air tradition with space realities. Okay, cultural freedom. Astronaut Scott Kelly reported that ISS crew members suffered headaches from excess carbon dioxide and in other cases failure in the air recycler system with backups also in critical condition forced risky repairs where cargo from Earth was delayed. Should permanent space inhabitant face such limits? Life support system in space habitats must be built with large scale redundancy. Water, oxygen, power and food supplies need multiple backups to ensure safety without austerity. Redundancy is not only technical, it provides freedom from fear, the basis of creativity and trust. Okay, try to go quickly. Industrial activities in the jail lunar space are feasible and vital for a sustainable space economy and human expansion. With thousands of satellites in orbit, refueling, repairs and upgrades as provided by Northrop Grumman and Astro Scale could cast and extend asset life. Microgravity additive manufacturing yields for poorer materials and pharmaceuticals, photonics and quantum technology. Orbital factories could supply this by 2030, reducing earth dependence. The debris removal and recycling driven by ISAM ClearSpace transform waste into metals like aluminum and titanium, fostering circular economies by 2045. In space, propellant from lunar and asteroid water ice enables refueling the bots for lunar routes by 2035. Okay, well. I think I finished. Thank you very much and excuse me for a little bit longer. Thanks for your attention.

Thank you very much for your presentation. Distinguished delegates, I shall adjourn this meeting so that the Working Group on the Long-Term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities can hold its third meeting. Before doing so, I would like to inform the delegates of our schedule of this afternoon. We will meet promptly at 3:00 p.m. This afternoon we will continue and hopefully conclude our consideration of agenda item four on the general action views. We will continue and hopefully conclude our consideration of agenda item 16 on the dark and west skies. We will begin and hopefully suspend our consideration of agenda item 17 on the draft professional agenda for 64th session of the subcommittee pending the discussion in the working group. We will suspend the plenary meeting so that the action team on lunar activities consultation can hold its formal meeting. Followed by the action team on the lunar activities, working group on the use of nuclear power sources in outer space, and working group of the whole can meet with a view of adopting their respective reports. We will then resume plenary and continue our consideration of agenda item five on space for sustainable development, technology and applications, including the United Nations programme on space applications, agenda item 12 on the future role and method of works of the Committee, and agenda item 17 on the draft provisional agenda for the sixty-fourth session of the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee with a view to endorsing the report of the Working Group of the whole. And we will hopefully conclude our consideration of items five and 17. We will then continue our consideration of agenda item 12 on the future role and method of work of the committee to invite the co-chairs of the action team to report on the result of its meeting held during this session. We will continue our consideration of agenda item 14 on the use of nuclear power sources in outer space with a view to endorsing the report of the working group on the use of nuclear power sources in outer space, and we will hopefully conclude our consideration of this item. There will be six presentations this afternoon. Delegates are reminded that the full schedule of today's presentation is available on the session web page. We would like to also inform delegates that the informal consultation of the working groups on the use of the UK Post Office, however, in the outer space will be held in the conference room M6 from 1.10pm to 2pm. This informal consultation are open to participation to Ms. teams as well with a virtual connection made available to the working group members. The main stream link is available on the information circular USA 2026/4, dispatched on the January 26, 2026. The schedule of the consultation is available on the web page of the session. We are now like to, I don't see my secretary announce myself then. Well, during the lunch time, there will be a joint event entitled, entitled the safeguarding space. environmental issues, risks and responsibilities, co-organized by UNEP at 2 p.m. in the press room of the M building and via virtual connection. All delegations are invited. The schedule of the side event is available on the web page of the session. Distinguished delegates, I would like to inform delegates that the provisional list of participants on the A/AC.105/3.1/2026/CRP.1 will be available today online on our webpage. The Secretariat has informed me that any correction shall be submitted to the Secretariat at the submission e-mail of the Office of Outer Space Affairs on unosa-submissions@un.org. by no later than Friday, this Friday, February, oh no, not this Friday, the Friday 20th, 26th. Are there any questions or comments on this proposed schedule? All right, I see none. Distinguished delegates, And with that, this meeting is adjourned till 3 PM. Thank you.