Yes, it's cliche, but it's also true. We're always talking about the fact that space is hard, but the process to launch and re-enter a spacecraft is extraordinarily complicated. After that, if you are based in one country, one to launch in another, and then re-enter in a third territory, well, where on earth, quite literally, do you even start with that process? [Music] Welcome to T-Minus Deep Space from NTK Networks. I'm Maria Varmazis. European startup Atmos Space Cargo has received regulatory approvals that it needs for its first mission to demonstrate re-entry technologies. The company is based in Germany and is launching its Phoenix capsule from the United States and intends to return it in international waters. Sebastian Klaus, CEO and co-founder of Atmos Space Cargo and Dr. Engel Bauman, partner at BHO Legal, walk us through the process of obtaining licenses for this very complex first mission. I'm Sebastian. I'm the CEO and one of the co-founders of Atmos Space Cargo. I come from a double background. So on the one side, I'm an aerospace engineer. I did my bachelor's about atmospheric re-entry and the master's about startup behavior of liquid rocket engines for usability. And the other half of my background is a defense background. So I served 14 years as an officer in the German Army. I was a recovery specialist in special operations and founded the company in 2021 together with three co-founders. And we've brought the company to 50 employees now. What we do is re-entry technologies. Specifically, we built a vehicle that we call Phoenix. And Phoenix is a 100-kilogram class payload return vehicle for things like life sciences in space and in-space manufacturing, but also defense applications. And we are launching Phoenix to space for the first time in two months from now in April. It's going to launch from the US, from Florida, Kennedy Space Center and Atmos Space in Europe. Thank you for that, Sebastian. I appreciate that. And the other voice I think we'll be hearing from today, Ingo, would you mind introducing yourself as well? Yeah, Ingo Baumann. I'm partner at BHO Legal. BHO Legal is rather small but highly specialized law firm based in Cologne, Germany. We are now 30 people over all, 20 lawyers. I'm leading our space and satellite team. My background is academic wise from the rather famous Cologne Institute of Air and Space Law, one of the very few dedicated institutes of that kind. And before establishing the law firm, I was for seven, eight years in-house lawyer and later also manager in the German Aerospace Center, DLR. And from that background, we established the law firm. Okay. So, Sebastian, it's been really fascinating hearing about what you all are building. And I think one of the things that's also very fascinating to me about what you're making is also sort of the process that you all are going through as a European company that is going to be doing such a complex mission within the United States. I have to imagine that has been a very interesting process to navigate. And I was wondering, why don't we maybe start with, what has that been like for you all? Yeah, it is indeed very interesting. So, the thing is that in my old job in the military, I was already responsible to organize things like, for example, skydiving, trainings, like where you have very complex operations with several aircraft and helicopters, and you need to get permissions to do those jumps. So, there's always an operational aspect and a legal aspect involved in it. And so, I used that experience to conduct our first drop test. So, we did helicopter drop tests, for example, where you also need to get permissions from, you know, air traffic controllers from the owner of the properties, where you're dropping things, and then from environmental protection agencies and so on. So, I think in your first drop test, there were like 15 entities involved. So, there was a good training, let's say, for what we need to do now, because now it's obviously on a much larger and more publicly visible scale. And so, for this first launch that we are now conducting with Phoenix, I think there is like four aspects that we need to get right. So, I think the most important one, we have just made public. We needed to do what's called an FAA payload determination, where the FAA is pretty much analyzing our capsule and the payloads that it's carrying. And it's pretty much saying that this capsule is safe to be launched on a US launcher from US soil. So, that's aspect number one. And aspect number two is, Atmos is a German company. So, it's registered in Germany. And so, the satellite is also treated as a German satellite. And Ingo can explain that in more detail how that really happens. So, in Germany, we do not have a space law in that sense. So, what we needed to get was a waiver from the German Space Agency, DLR pretty much saying that, yes, Atmos is a German company and this is a German satellite. And then on top of that, of course, we needed to have our licenses for frequencies in place. So, those come from the ITU, the International Telecommunication Union. And then on top of that, we need to be able to actually export the vehicle from Germany to the US. And some of those things that we export, they fall under export control. So, yeah, four different aspects. And I think we can go into a lot of detail here together. Yeah, I was going to say each of those would be fascinating. So, Ingo, I see you're ready to contribute something. So, by all means. Yeah, well, as Sebastian shortly summarized, what Atmos has done here really shows the complexity of the space industry and its regulatory and legal frameworks and how to navigate through them. So, first, the ITU filings and the national frequency assignment that was done through the German administration, which is called Bundesnetzagentur or short Bnetzar. It's complicated as such, but it's less legal. It's more a technical procedure. You have to fill out all these details in the forms of the ITU, send it through the administration, coordinate everything. That was a rather smooth process on that side, because also our German administration is very used to that and is also very supportive. So, we had really open door, great support, also really hands-on support, how to fill out certain aspects and so on. So, I think, Sebastian, you can confirm that was really very agreeable and well-working procedure. On the other hand, on the space law side, it was, let's say, from the outset more complicated, because here we had already two countries, Germany and the US, and let's say an unusual payload with reentry by a new company, never flown before. So, lots of firsts in that process and in any regulatory process, first make it always more difficult. Yes, of course. People have never seen it before, so they go, "Okay, you're now forging a new path. What does this mean? There's no model to use." I imagine that is extremely difficult. And then add in that you're talking two different countries, exponentially more difficult, I must imagine. Yes, exactly. And one of the specialties, while German companies are launching with SpaceX and also Rocket Lab all the time, as you know, we're known, our European launch situation has been very bad over the last months and even longer. So, there was not much choice and so every German operator wanting to launch something had to go and is still going to SpaceX. And while it's already a certain issue, if you are just launching a normal satellite, payload, a small satellite, etc., because on the US side, things have become stricter. SpaceX is now asking for confirmation that the client has all the necessary licenses and approvals earlier and they are also way stricter. And if you don't deliver the copies of all the licenses to their satisfaction, they simply don't launch you. In the end, mostly so far, it has been managed, but there was also some situation a few months before we came where in fact a number of German customers were on some SpaceX and they were very late in bringing the necessary copies also because Germany has, is a well-developed space-faring nation with a very big and thriving industry but has no national space law. And that is of course from a US perspective is surprising. Everybody would expect, hey Germany, while they should have a space law since a long time, there should be no issue to just send the copy of the license. But as we don't have a law, there is also no obligation to get a license and therefore there is also no procedure to get a license. And the solution to that is, but this is, let's say, an interim solution and it's also, let's say, making the German authorities a bit nervous is to issue upon request a kind of rather simple and short letter saying that yes, Germany is a party to the UN Space Treaty, is taking care to fulfill its international law obligations, but has currently no space law and therefore there is no obligations for license. And so it's a kind of short confirmation letter, which you get, but because the number of German companies asking for that letter and also, again, new companies, new technologies and also larger projects is increasing constantly, our DLR agency is a bit nervous to issue all these letters because in the end, without a legal basis, they cannot really control these activities for the moment. And while we are working on a space law since a long time and also the current government has made quite big steps forward just ahead of a real draft, but now as many of the audience may also know, our government failed and there will be a real new elections and therefore this process of creating the space law was halted for another time, in fact. We'll be right back. [Music] That sounds incredibly, even more complex than I think the norm, which is already extremely complex for many people's point of view, but that is quite an ordeal there. Sebastian, I'm wondering when you speak with your peers who are creating spacecraft within Germany, what your advice has often been to them, given that you've been going through this incredibly complex process? What have you been advising your peers? It's a very good question. I think actually, even though this is complex, the licensing for a launcher and some of the companies that we speak to is ESA Aerospace and Rocket Factory Augsburg and High Impulse, I think the licensing for a launcher is actually still way more complex because of the much higher risks involved, obviously, right? Like when you're talking about rocket stages that are fueled with several tons of fuel and you launch that close to population, it's a completely different level of risk than we have here. So I would rather say that we are rather taking advice from them than us advising them. Sure. Just to be a bit humble there. I appreciate that. I guess then I'll flip the question around. What advice did you get that maybe made this process more easy for you? I mean, one thing is for sure, you need to take this very seriously, right? So you have to start this process very early on and you have to get yourself some professionals to work with you, right? Like, I mean, Ingo is the best example here, but we also got ourselves some support in the US. So you need to have people that have walked this path before and that know the right people also. And take your time to do it right because if you don't do it, we all saw a launch of a US company a couple of months ago that went to space and was not allowed to come back because licenses were not in place. So you have to take this very seriously. Yeah, absolutely. And you also had mentioned sort of the timeline. We're pretty close to launch for you also. Tell me a bit about the expected timeline and maybe what comes next? Yeah, I mean, for the first flight now, we're looking at not earlier than April for launch. As you know, it's the space industry, right? So there have been delays on this mission, like on this rocket launch before because one of the other payloads was not ready. It's not on our side. We cannot influence it really. So that might still happen, but not earlier than April is when we're going to launch. And, you know, since we're talking about legal aspects here, we have actually already filed for our second flight. So our second flight supposed to come back to Santa Maria, the Azores, Portugal, so in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean instead of the Indian Ocean like on this first flight now. And speaking about taking this seriously, we filed for the reentry license already at the end of last summer. So we want to make sure that we have everything in place and time always. Fantastic. And Ingo, I think I want to ask the same sort of a similar question that I asked Sebastian about your advice, given that you do work with a number of companies who are going through their own various versions of sort of what we've been describing here. Given the complexities, I wonder, aside from, you know, start early, which makes a lot of sense, what else you would advise, you know, companies that are coming to you? I think Sebastian summarized it perfectly. Start early and take it serious are the two best advices you can give. And then start early even ahead. Because it takes time. Regulatory processes take time. And then you may have things like summer holidays or Christmas holidays or illness of certain people or additional questions. And as we already said, in our case, also a new company with a new payload and etc. etc. And quite some other European companies having normal payloads, small satellites, etc. for transport emissions, they simply realized if you come in, if you start preparing yourself in the last minute, you get into real trouble. You don't want to have even up to that you cannot take the launch that you have to to get off that your mission is postponed, etc. etc. So that's really the best advice we can give. Of course, as a lawyer, I would always say take lawyers on board. And as soon as it is involving reentry, I would definitely advise to do so. If it's a normal small submission, maybe even help with some logistic companies, it can be done without. I'm not recommending, but it's possible. But if we are talking about reentry vehicles, then definitely it's more complex. And certainly as we see more and more companies doing reentry, I imagine the needs will become more complex, but also hopefully the process will be a little more streamlined. Well, I guess fingers crossed on that. But gentlemen, thank you both so much for your time. I want to make sure I give you both the opportunity to sort of leave our audience with any final thoughts, either about what we've discussed or anything else truly. So Sebastian, why don't I start with you? Sure. So one one advice that I can also give to everybody else that wants to go for something like this is keep it simple. Right. So in our specific case for reentry, we chose to go to a reentry location over the Indian Ocean, like in the middle of nowhere, where there's no islands, very little air traffic, very little shipping traffic. So that simplifies the whole regulatory situation a lot in comparison to actually landing such a vehicle, you know, let's say in the continental US. Right. So, so that's one thing. And then the final remark would be it never stops, right? Like this is only the first step for us right now. We're already looking at future challenges, like, for example, making sure that for biomedical research in space, we have all the regulatory aspects in place, like, you know, making sure that the vehicle is certified as a sterile environment for these special payloads. So it never stops and you you got to work with the right people for us. Absolutely. Ingo, to you as well. Well, no, one thing which is really surprising is you may imagine that the authorities in Germany in France in UK in the US, they are in also in, while at least regular exchange that they know how whom to call, that they know how to exchange, etc. So that processes can be simplified. It's a bit surprising to see that this is absolutely not the case. They may meet also in our conferences from time to time, but a real exchange and collaboration between the main regulatory authorities is not really there. And that's a bit surprising. You would you would expect that. And that can make things also more complicated. And as we all know, the internationalist base law is not really evolving. We have the old treaties, of course, step by step. But it takes very, very long time. And OK, here in the case of utmost, we were talking about a reentry vehicle. But another topic where these collaboration on the international level between the authorities is or will be becoming super relevant is on a bit servicing or I some or some, however, which which abbreviation you use because here you have the servicer object and the service, the target object, and they may come from two different countries. And then you have really the need for these interaction. And OK, that's still at the starting point. We have some demo missions. Technology is emerging, but the real market is not yet there. And that will be a real problem. So we all have to work on that and gain experience as fast as possible, because otherwise all the market expectations which are surrounding these in orbit servicing, etc. They will not happen as predicted. And that's it for T minus deep space brought to you by N2K cyberwire. We'd love to know what you think of this podcast. You can email us at space@n2k.com or submit the survey in the show notes. Your feedback ensures that we deliver the information that keeps you a step ahead in the rapidly changing space industry. And 2k senior producer is Alice Carruth. Our producer is Liz Stokes. We're mixed by Elliot Peltzman and Tre Hester with original music by Elliot Peltzman. Our executive producer is Jennifer Eiben. Peter Kilpe is our publisher and I am your host Maria Varmazis. Thanks for listening. We'll see you next time. [Music] [Music] (gentle music) [BLANK_AUDIO]
