The latter category includes primary contracts for building the space (Galileosat) and ground infrastructure as well as the concession contract to operate the system once it is built. A September 24 communications from the European Commission to the European Parliament and European Council, reporting the state of progress on Galileo, noted, “If no decision is taken on this [ESA financial shares], the industrial operators involved will have greatest difficulties in keeping their teams of engineers working on the project.”

ESA and its Galileo partner, the European Union, face a 2005 deadline set by at the International Telecommunications Union World Radio Conference 2000 to be broadcasting at least experimental Galileo signals.

A May 21 regulation issued by European Council of Ministers established the JU for an initial term of four years “to ensure the unity of the administration and the financial control of the project” for the research, development, and demonstration phase of the Galileo programme, and to mobilise funds assigned to that programme.

More than 70 candidates reportedly responded to a call for applications for the post of JU executive director issued a week later. A short list of finalists for the position include Gérard Brachet, former director of France’s national space agency (Centre National d’Études Spatiales or CNES). A down-selection to 12 candidates led to three names being forwarded to ESA Director General Antonio Rodotà and EC Vice-President Loyola de Palacio for consideration.

The JU director will be responsible for organising, managing, and supervising the staff of the Joint Undertaking; drawing up and regularly updating the programme development plan, preparing the draft annual budget, and submitting to the JU Administrative Board any proposal involving a major change in the programme. Confirmation of the JU director is scheduled for the first meeting of the Administrative Board, although the appointment of the director may take place by mid-November on a separate track.

The ESA standoff also delayed the staging of an “information day” for enterprises wishing to participate in the Galileo programme. Originally planned for the fall of 2002, the event has been postponed to “early in 2003,” ostensibly due to “overwhelming interest in this event” but clearly affected by lack of an ESA agreement..

At the industry day, representatives from the EC, JU, ESA, and a consultancy will inform enterprises on the development of the programme, the steps leading to the choice of the future concessionaire, and the numerous services based on satellite radio navigation.

Work Continues. On September 19, ESA issued an invitation to tender (ITT) proposals to launch an experimental satellite that would serve as a Galileosat test bed (GSTB-V2) before launch of the first in-orbit validation (IOV) spacecraft. The same day the agency also solicited tenders for a second source to supply a navigation signal generation unit (NSGU) for the GSTB satellite.

The GSTB-V2 will enable ESA to characterise the medium earth orbit (MEO) radiation environment and perform on-orbit tests of critical payload technology, in particular atomic clocks and the radiation-hardened digital signal generator. The satellite will also provide an early experimental Galileo-like signal-in-space. Deadline for receiving the GSTB-V2 proposals is November 18.

Last year, ESA selected a team comprised of Austrian Aerospace, Saab Ericsson Space, and Astrium to design the NSGU. Given the NSGU’s mission-critical nature, the new ITT aims at establishing a second source through the procurement of an engineering and engineering-qualification models, as well as a “proto flight” model. The procurement activity will include design adaptation, validation, and test of the units for the experimental GSTB payload.

Earlier this year ESA also received responses to an ITT for “special” non-transport related GNSS applications and another for intelligent car navigation.

Future Activities. According to the EC Directorate-General for Transport and Energy (DG-TREN), the next steps for awarding the Galileo concession will be as follows:

• Early in 2003, a call for expression of interest will be launched to allow private sector companies to make themselves known, to organise themselves for the call for tenders, and to enable European governments and the EC to get a better picture of interested companies, their sector of activity and initial commercial concepts.

• In spring 2003, the JU should launch a call for tenders for the later selection of one or more consortia interested in operating and marketing Galileo. The selection will be done on the basis of financial criteria, quality of service, and innovation.

• In parallel with the chosen competing consortia, the JU will prepare the contents and the scope of the concession contract, beginning September 2003. The EC will determine the public service requirements (quality, availability, integrity and continuity of the services, safety requirements, and so forth) that will be included in the contract.

• By mid-2004 at the latest, the JU should have awarded the concession contract. This schedule is designed to enable the concessionaire to become fully operational in 2005 and plan effectively for the deployment phase starting in 2006.

ESA Carves Galileo Pie

This year the European Space Agency (ESA) discovered that the same principle applies to money, at least when it comes to the Galileo programme — too much of it may be a bigger headache than not enough euros.

“Over-subscription” of the programme by ESA members produced a stalemate that had already continued for seven months as this issue of Galileo’s World went to press.

The situation arises from the way ESA allocates contracts under a policy of geographic “just return.”

Member countries of ESA fund a certain number of ESA projects under a mandatory cost-sharing program. For other projects, members may subscribe voluntarily — or not. If a nation chooses to subscribe to a voluntary project, enterprises in that country are guaranteed approximately the same amount of money in ESA contracts let for the project. Thus choosing and funding different space projects is directly tied to domestic employment and national technology strategies.

The four main players in this tug of war are Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and France. Each initially wanted to fund 25 percent of the project— which left nothing for the other ESA nations that wanted to subscribe a cumulative total of an additional 33 percent.

At first, according to one well-placed EU official, it appeared that Germany and Italy were vying for the political credit for being the leader of the Galileo project. Reportedly, a compromise of co-leadership was suggested and rejected. The problem became more complicated as it became clear that the two nations also wanted to maximise the return to their national industry, with Germany eventually asking that its contribution and return be based on its GNP.

According to one source, the division of labour had been settled by the end of September. Under the proposal, Germany would fund 19 percent percent and each of the other three would contribute 17 percent. Progress on agreeing the share allocation was reportedly made at a meeting of space agency ministers on October 5. That discussion posed an allocation of 19:18:17:17, with Germany having the largest share, and some language about “fair return” of EU Galileo funds for which Germany contributes 25 percent. By the conclusion of the meeting, the discussion had returned to 17.5 percent for each of the four large contributions, which left Germany unsatisfied.

An October 8–9 meeting of the ESA Council failed to put the matter to rest. Instead, the issue was held over to a special council meeting on Gal-ileo set for October 18. Fail- ing resolution there, the issue may come up at a heads of state summit on October 24.

A number of bilateral talks reportedly occurred in the succeeding days, tying in additional considerations from more tangential issues. One report of a German/Italian deal suggested a return to the German-led 19:18:17:17 ESA allocation with additional consideration from EU funding. Under this arrangement, Germany would support the VEGA launcher programme and Italy would receive responsibility for a “Galileo security and standards agency.” In return, Italy would support a German replacement for ESA Director General Antonio Rodotà if he steps down next year.

Just as important in the ESA debate is the fact that the European Union has not selected its contractors yet. Having two pots of money on the table makes the stakes in this game are a lot higher.

This is not the only delay the program has faced since the EU and ESA launched their global navigation satellite system (GNSS) initiative in 1994. Negotiations among members of the European Union (EU) and the European Commission (EC) over Galileo took about 15 months longer than the original deadline.

The lobbying finally ended on March 26 when the European Council of Transport and Telecommunications Ministers voted to release the remaining e450 million euros of their half of the e1.1 billion Galileo development budget.

EC Communication on Galileo

Among the key topics covered in the publication are the definition of the various services offered by Galileo, security questions, relations with the United States, and international cooperation with other countries. The detailed description of services contained in the communication is based on version 3 of the Galileo Mission High Level Definition, issued on 23 September 2002. (See article by Olivier Onidi in this issue of Galileo’s World.)

Copies of the report can be downloaded from the EC Website at http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/ dgs/energy_transport/galileo/ documents/official_en.htm.

ESA, Eurocontrol Sign Pact on Aviation Use of Space Tech

Under the Agreement, the parties will exchange information regarding programmes and projects, research results, and publications, and will coordinate research and development programmes. Specific arrangements will be implemented, spelling out the technical and operational interfaces between the respective activities and the roles and responsibilities of the two organisations. Each party will bear the cost of work to be done, without funds being exchanged.

One such arrangement will cover the safety regulation process for use of Global Navigation Satellite Systems, such as the U.S. Global Positioning System and Europe’s Galileo system. Operational validation will also be taken into account by working together on all phases of flight: en-route, standard non-precision approach, and airport surface movements.

A Joint Committee of ESA and Eurocontrol representatives will be responsible for the administration of the agreement.