The sector challenge
Long-term responsibility depends on decisions made before mission end.
Space operations involve uncertainty in orbit information, changing mission conditions and decisions whose effects may persist beyond the useful life of a spacecraft. Disposal and passivation cannot be treated as isolated closing tasks if the design and operational concept do not support them.
The programme is developing structured assessment methods using reference mission scenarios and simulation. Mission-end choices, orbital information uncertainty and responsibility for engineering decisions are examined together to strengthen the quality of the resulting guidance.
Programme development priorities
- Make mission-end assumptions, responsibilities and constraints explicit.
- Examine risk and disposal options across a defined range of scenarios.
- Document limitations and the evidence needed for further engineering or authorization decisions.
Technical scope & method
A structured approach to the question.
- 01Mission-end concept
- Define the reference spacecraft, mission objective, operating context and end-state assumptions. Consider passivation, disposal planning and responsibility for records and decisions.
- 02Orbital-risk framework
- Identify relevant debris and collision-risk considerations, data dependencies and uncertainty. Distinguish a technical scenario assessment from an operational warning or maneuver instruction.
- 03Scenario analysis
- Explore nominal and degraded conditions, including limited resources or incomplete information. Compare options using consistent assumptions and clearly stated safety factors.
- 04Review and learning
- Trace findings to assumptions, record unresolved questions and develop a checklist concept. Distinguish voluntary international guidance from binding requirements applicable to a real operator.
- 01Reference missionObjectives and operational assumptions
- 02End-state optionsPassivation and disposal concepts
- 03Risk scenariosUncertainty and degraded conditions
- 04Decision recordResponsibilities, limits and lessons
Pilot development & application
A simulated mission-end and orbital-risk assessment.
Mission-end development uses a reference small-satellite scenario with documented resource, orbit and information assumptions. The assessment compares nominal and degraded end-state options, passivation considerations and disposal-planning approaches. Scenario coverage, uncertainty and decision traceability define the evaluation—not operational maneuver instructions.
Define the scenario
Specify the assumed orbit context, spacecraft capability, remaining resources and information limits. Record the reference satellite parameters and the limits of the simulation.
Compare options
Examine nominal and degraded mission-end cases, passivation considerations and disposal alternatives within the stated assumptions. Record sensitivity and uncertainty.
Review responsibility
Check risk coverage, requirements traceability and the decision record. Identify matters requiring specialist engineering, operator action or jurisdiction-specific authorization before real use.
Development connects a defined application, measurable criteria and a traceable technical review.
Technical deliverables
Outputs and evaluation.
The development workstreams connect these deliverables to reviewable evidence and application-specific evaluation criteria.
- Mission-end scenario description
- Risk assessment framework
- Disposal planning example
- Operational checklist concept
- Technical lessons-learned report
- Suggested implementation guidance
Evaluation priorities
- Risk coverage
- Relevant nominal and degraded cases are considered without hiding unresolved hazards.
- Assumption consistency
- Inputs, uncertainty and limitations are carried through the assessment.
- Traceable decisions
- Each conclusion has a documented basis, responsible decision context and clear limit on use.
Participation & boundaries
The right expertise. Clear responsibilities.
The participation framework connects mission design, space-safety research, orbital analysis and information-governance expertise. Contributions are assessed against the mission-end question, the assumptions and the evidence required for review.
Scope and safeguards
Assessment methods support competent mission and operator decisions. Operational maneuver advice, collision-warning services and regulatory determinations have their own responsible authorities and service arrangements.
International guidance and jurisdiction-specific obligations are assessed separately. Real mission activities require the responsible operator to establish applicable requirements, permissions and competent technical review.
Participation and technical decisions remain separate.
Participation does not automatically confer membership rights, AF Recognition, accreditation, certification, standards-setting authority or procurement preference. Sponsorship must not determine technical conclusions, evaluation results or governance decisions.
Development pathway
Development, grounded in evidence.
Technical objectives, responsible coordination and application needs shape the development process. Resources, safety, confidentiality, data protection, intellectual property and reporting arrangements are reviewed alongside the methods and deliverables, keeping progress focused and accountable.
A structured development pathwayExplore the seven connected development stages
Programme development connects technical requirements, responsible coordination and reviewable evidence. Each stage informs the next, while review findings refine the scope, methods and priorities.
- Requirements & Objectives
Define the technical problem, user need and scope.
- Feasibility & Evidence
Examine methods, resources, interfaces and dependencies.
- Scope & Responsibilities
Align workstreams, coordination and review arrangements.
- Pilot Development
Connect the evaluation plan to funding, safety, data and intellectual-property controls.
- Controlled Implementation
Maintain the agreed technical boundary and responsible delivery arrangements.
- Technical Evaluation
Review evidence and outcomes against application-specific criteria.
- Knowledge & Further Development
Translate reviewed findings into useful outputs and the next development priorities.