The State of the Space Industrial Base 2024 report was released by NewSpace Nexus in collaboration with the U.S. Space Force, the Defense Innovation Unit, and the Air Force Research Laboratory this week. It outlines a clear strategic message: despite remarkable growth in launch capacity and commercial activity, the U.S. lacks a coherent national vision—and actionable commitment—toward in-space mobility, logistics, and infrastructure. The report identifies a widening gap between policy ambitions and institutional execution, especially in the development and deployment of capabilities like satellite servicing, orbital refueling, in-space manufacturing, and debris remediation
While the report surveys the broader landscape of U.S. and global space activity, it repeatedly returns to one central message—without decisive action and investment in in-space mobility, the U.S. risks falling behind in the evolving space economy.
A North Star Vision: Still Missing in Action
One of the foundational recommendations is the articulation of a unifying “North Star Vision” for the U.S. space sector. This vision is described as essential for coordinating civil, defense, and commercial interests across domains—from low Earth orbit to the Moon and beyond. Without such a vision, the U.S. lacks the strategic cohesion needed to compete with nations like China, which is executing a state-directed, cross-sector space strategy spanning mega-constellations, lunar infrastructure, and cislunar logistics.
Without clear demand signals from the government, long-term investment in infrastructure like satellite servicing platforms or lunar logistics chains remains high-risk. A shared vision is a prerequisite for planning roadmaps, R&D investment, and partner alignment.
Space Mobility and Logistics: The Unmet Catalyst
Among the most pressing themes is the systemic underfunding of Space Mobility and Logistics (SML). Despite being recognized by USSF as a core competency, two successive Space Mobility conferences, and ongoing initiatives like DARPA’s RSGS and SpaceWERX’s Orbital Prime, funding and coordination remain fragmented. Critically, the Space Force’s FY26 budget request cut funding for in-space mobility entirely. This gap in investment is viewed as more than an oversight; it’s a strategic liability. Quoting Simon Sinek, the report reminds the reader – “vision without execution is hallucination.”
It also calls for a concrete, resourced demonstration mission—an integrated first test flight—that would signal U.S. leadership, validate commercial capabilities, and reduce risk for future public-private partnerships. A funded test flight could de-risk commercialization of orbital servicing platforms, robotic infrastructure, and propellant transfer systems. Early-stage players need this kind of tangible government backing to attract follow-on investment and accelerate TRL progression.
Novel Space Activity Licensing: Still in Regulatory Limbo
One of the most urgent—and interlinked—challenges identified in the SSIB 2024 report is the ongoing failure to establish a streamlined, authoritative process for licensing novel space activities. Despite multiple policy proposals, including the Commercial Space Act of 2023 (H.R. 6131) and a parallel White House framework, the U.S. remains without a clear regulatory regime for in-space activities like debris removal, orbital refueling, lunar mining, and in-space manufacturing.
This absence of defined regulatory authority is both a compliance problem and symptomatic of a broader institutional incoherence. Emerging sectors lack ownership across federal agencies. No single body has taken responsibility for advancing space-based solar power, advanced propulsion, or orbital servicing. This has left critical capabilities “adrift,” and contributed to a patchwork of disconnected R&D programs and commercial efforts that fail to converge on shared standards or goals.
“The greatest risk is not technological failure but institutional incoherence.”
— SSIB 2024 Summary
Industrial Fragmentation: The Risk of Institutional Incoherence
The current system also lacks agility. Regulatory processes remain too slow to match the tempo of private innovation. The approval cycle for launch licenses, energy use, or proximity operations can stall companies for months—or longer. And because regulatory authority is fragmented across departments, companies often must navigate multiple, inconsistent approval tracks. These burdens are disproportionately hard on early-stage ventures.
Meanwhile, this lack of clarity sends weak or contradictory demand signals to the private sector. In areas where commercial capabilities are technically viable—such as orbital refueling or servicing—there is no coordinated government procurement strategy to anchor the market. Without those signals, companies face limited incentives to scale, and investors struggle to underwrite risk.
Human Capital and Supply Chain: Structural Vulnerabilities
The report also flags the erosion of the U.S. talent pipeline, citing STEM educator shortages, rising tuition costs, and poor rankings in global education indices. It recommends coordinated STEM mentoring programs, workforce tracking, and harmonized training standards—none of which currently exist in a unified national framework.
On the supply chain side, overdependence on a few major primes and outdated physical infrastructure (like LNG pipelines and payload processing centers) are creating bottlenecks. Despite strong commercial innovation, the report argues, the private sector lacks federal mechanisms to de-risk capital-intensive supply chain upgrades. Workforce development and physical infrastructure are long-term limiting factors and those within the space sector should anticipate friction unless more systematic federal support emerges.
Final Thoughts: From Ambition to Architecture
The SSIB 2024 report is not short on ambition, but it is grounded in operational realism. The path to a competitive, prosperous, and secure space economy will not emerge from piecemeal experimentation alone. As the report concludes, “Winning the new space race means more than outpacing competitors—it means securing a future of prosperity, liberty, and leadership beyond Earth”.
Call to action: The space tech community—founders, engineers, integrators, investors—should treat the report not as a rhetorical document but as a shared architectural sketch. The challenge now is execution.
Share this article:
