 All right, everyone, for the final time today, because I promise you that at tonight's reception, there will be no speeches. This is the final time of the day, for our final day of the conference, that I need to call you to attention and to introduce you to some of our distinguished speakers. A little bit of the behind the scenes here. I threw a bit of a Hail Mary out into the world when we were designing our agenda. I said, what would I really like to see? What is gonna highlight the themes and the idea that we are trying to focus on at this event? And I said, I'd like to get to the biggest, most important satellite companies out there to talk about space sustainability, instead of to talk about what we're competing or the market we're building or all these other really important things, I wanna say, well, what do we think? What do we agree on? And maybe not always agree, but what can we all say is an industry that is the most important? And one of the things we say at Secure World is that space sustainability, in theory, is something we can all agree on. There's nobody out there who's gonna say, oh yeah, who cares, it's not my problem 50 years from now. I mean, we understand that this matters to everyone. But one of the things we're trying to do here is to say, well, what does that actually mean? What are we doing? Are we addressing those problems? Are we addressing them fast enough? What should be our priorities? And you heard from so many speakers over the last few days about their ideas in so many areas. And so today, I'm really happy to conclude with a panel where we're gonna dive a little more deeply into how these two companies, both of whom have expressed such a commitment to this idea, but are operating in a complex, evolving set of circumstances and honestly get a lot of questions about what that means. So I hope we're gonna be able to answer some of those questions and spark some debate today, moving forward and thinking about what that looks like. So I couldn't be more pleased to be hosting our closing keynote, which is a fireside chat with Julie Zoller, the head of Global Regulatory Affairs from Amazon Project Hyper, and with Maurizio Vinodi, the VP of Space Infrastructure Development and Partnerships at OneWeb. So welcome to both of you. Thank you, Chris. Excellent, I know our audience is really excited to hear from you, so we are just gonna dive right into the questions. Quick reminder, we will save some time at the end for some audience questions, just like we've been doing throughout. So those of you online, as well as in our audience, don't forget to log into your app into the correct session. Start getting your questions in, we will be looking at those momentarily. So to start, Julie, this is the last session of a two-day summit focused on global priorities for space sustainability. How would you characterize Project Hyper's views on this issue? So just generally, what do you think? Space sustainability is critical to Project Hyper. It's been a priority from day one. We chose our constellation design, our satellite design, and our operational plans based on space sustainability. In terms of constellation design, our orbital altitudes are 590, 610, and 630 kilometers. We will actively use propulsion to deorbit our satellites at the end of mission life. And if, for some reason, there's a failure of the propulsion system, atmospheric drag will bring our satellites back to Earth. We're also planning to operate our satellites with a narrow orbital tolerance. And we heard earlier in the week how important that is in terms of the space environment. On satellite design, I mentioned we have a propulsion system, but we've also designed our components to withstand impacts from small debris and we use shielding to shield the most sensitive components like propulsion tank and batteries. Our propulsion tank is designed to leak rather than to burst if there should be an impact. We have redundancy on our satellites, so critical systems are made redundant. So if one version fails, the next picks up and takes over the mission. And finally, on operational plans, we're going to do active collision avoidance throughout our mission life from launch in early orbit through operation and then de-orbit. We will be doing active collision avoidance. Wow, that was a fairly in-depth overview of what you're planning. So thank you, that was a great way to start off. You're welcome. I want to turn to Maurizio now. Can you share with us how OneWeb sees this? What is your perspective? And I don't know, I'm going to challenge you to be as forthcoming and thorough. I think it's a good way to put it. What do you guys plan? So, Crystal, we take our responsibility to space commons extremely seriously. And this has been our mantra since the inception of OneWeb since really day one. And the first aspect is that we really strive to create a safe environment for industry, for the operators and for people on Earth. So we're really trying to execute to our commitment. So it's not just a nice narrative PR messages, but our satellites since day one has been designed for the highest level of reliability. Using a use and abuse sentence for us, failure is not an option really, because we cannot rely on the atmospheric drag for the satellites to re-enter the atmosphere at the end of life. So not only we have the highest level of reliability to ensure controlled de-orbiting, but we also design for the worst case scenario could become for whatever reason uncontrollable. And I think we'll discuss about this later. But in particular about acting and not just talking, we really look at space sustainability in six macro areas. So there's an element related to space situational essay, space situational assurance. Space traffic management is the second key element. So first of all, knowing if you have a problem and then acting upon the problem you have. So every day we receive an average of 50,000 messages out of which normally is about eight that we are really actively looking at. And sometimes we have to maneuver and sometimes it's just coordination and nothing has to be done from an operational level. Then we have ADR. Missions like the one that we'll be doing together in partnership with Astroscale, that's the third area. The fourth and fifth area are very, very close related and are the relationship that we have with the radio astronomy and with the optical astronomy community. And last but not least is a carbon footprint assessment. So in 2019 we launched a nice unsolicited assessment of the carbon footprint of our generation one supply chain. Obviously launches aside that are not particularly green but it's something that we're gonna use as a benchmark for our internal purposes for the next generation and for trying to be as responsible as possible as green as possible also from a supply chain industrial perspective. It's an interesting note to leave on in terms of are we a responsible space entity but then also what does that look like in terms of how we operate on Earth? I mean maybe we'll come back to that. I'd like to hear more about that. So both of your companies have made, as you said, it's not just PR. You've made commitments to acting as responsible stewards of Earth and space. That's how Kuiper has stated it. And being dedicated to responsible practices on the basis that space is a shared natural resource. That's from one web's website. Recognizing that the orbital volume is a shared one and I am not gonna get into all the various ways you can describe that. We're gonna go with shared one. How are your companies working with each other and with other companies and other users of space to ensure that those responsibilities are actually upheld? I'll start with you, Marie. So from our perspective coordination is key and we've been covering a lot of ground over the last few months. We are actively working and coordinating with our fellow operator Starlink. We started a journey with Project Kuiper and we recently signed a contract with the Leo Labs for space nutrition awareness and safe operations monitoring. We're also sharing data from what we see in space in terms of GPS interference, GINSS interference in general. And last but not least, just a few days ago we've announced is the next step of the cooperation with Astroscale, UK Japanese company for in orbit servicing for our satellite. So we really keep, and I actually see these, I'm not saying this is just one web that does it, but I also see these honestly from the fellow operators because the last thing that we all want is an accident because that wouldn't pay dividends for anyone. So really, really praise to the corporation that we've been witnessing. Yeah, I mean, it has to be sustainable. What about you, Julie? Completely agree with Maurizio on the need for coordination and our FCC license rightly requires that we conduct such coordination with other operators in our orbital vicinity. It's important that we share ephemeral data, covariance data, what our planned maneuvers are. We need to know where each other is, where we're going and what we're planning to do at any moment in time. You talked about the number of data messages you receive per day, it's astonishing. And it's important to develop norms so that we can streamline and simplify this process. I think that civil government has a convening role to play in helping to do that. I know that when I was at NTIA, National Telecommunications and Information Administration at Department of Commerce 10 years ago, NTIA convened a number of multi-stakeholder processes with industry to come out with standards. And one particular one that I remember was a process on consumer privacy bill of rights and how industry would be implementing that on mobile apps took a year, but it was quite successful and that convening role, a multi-stakeholder process is so important to coming to a good outcome. Excellent, I wanna do a follow up here. So we wanna get into some of the harder questions. One example of a shared use that raises a lot of questions and attention is the potential interaction between larger constellations and astronomical and astronomy observation capabilities. How are your companies interfacing with that community to address that concern? Great question. It was not long after I started at Amazon that the first articles came out about the reflectivity issues and then the astronomy community reached out to us, thankfully, and we've been engaged ever since. We participated in the SACON-1 and Dark and Quiet Skies conferences as members of the conference learning about the issues and at SACON-2, a member of my team co-chaired the industry working group and then became chair of the industry working group at Dark and Quiet Skies. Now the IAU Center for Sustainability has been stood up and my team is co-chairing the industry working group there as well. So we're very committed to working with the astronomers on this issue. We'll be launching two prototype satellites later this year and we're putting a sun shield on one satellite and not on the other so we can compare and contrast the difference between an unshielded and a shielded satellite in our very first launch. So we're excited to get data on that and to find out what we can do next. That's a great point, right? Like we have concerns but we need to really understand exactly what the options are so that's some exciting information. What about OneWeb? So it's fascinating, I was just thinking about it when Julie was talking. Up to 10 years ago, this was a non-existing problem and actually people were looking for satellite flares on the internet. Everyone was excited about the satellite flares and now with large constellations being deployed, actually a complete different angle is being presented to look at these kind of potential, potential, now challenging potential in the future. So we had a similar journey regarding the participation to the SACCON-1 and the Dark and White Skies Working Group and an active participation with Julie's colleagues for the SACCON-2. We have an open channel communication with the Royal Astronomical Society and the American Astronomical Society but what we also launched recently and recently is in the last 12 months is an active observation campaigns that is looking at measuring the brightness level of our satellites in the dark skies. Essentially is taking the signature of our satellites in space in order to assess the brightness level. This is not just done again as a PR stunt because unless you act on these things there's very little advantage in measuring the brightness level of your own satellites. So the approach that we've been implementing is that we're doing these observations in order to correlate the observations with the mathematical model that we've been developing. The mathematical model takes a geometrical model of the generation one satellites and aims at correlating predictions, simulated predictions with measured results. So why we're doing that? Because in the end what we want to do is we want to develop a tune. So once we've proven that the tool works through the correlation we're gonna be using these tools in order to optimize the design of the future generation of our satellites in order to have an ideal lower impact in the dark skies. Actually we would like to do more so we are in discussion with the scientific community in the US would like to share the code with them so they can help us to improve it and make it better and ideally we'd like to make it publicly available because it's something that could be used for the community and not just for one web. Oh, wow, that's exciting. All right, I'm just gonna keep plowing through because I have a lot of things I wanna talk to you about. So Maurizio, one of how you mentioned it earlier you have been talking about the possibility of active debris removal as one important method that your company is using to ensure that failed satellites can quickly be removed from low earth orbit. Can you tell us more about your plans in this area? Share some of the details and I'm also trying to get at how do you see this technology developing the future? How key is this to sort of your company being sustainable? So since day one our constellation our infrastructure has been designed taking worst case scenario in mind, right? So the point where the satellite could become uncontrollable. For this reason the first initial batches of our constellations are flying what we call a grappling fixture that is compatible with a robotic arm docking system. And from batch three onwards we've been flying what we call a magnetic plate for magnetic docking. So this is just to give an idea that since read inception we've been looking at a very, very responsible design for our satellites. We're also doing more. So through a partnership program that we've initiated with the European Space Agency through phase one we did initial scouting of candidate technologies and now in phase two we selected for a partnership Astroscale in the UK to develop a mission together with them to test the technology doing a real docking and the orbiting of one of our assets. So looking at technology what's really important is we are trying to act as a catalyst of a chemical reaction that would actually prove useful not only for one web but for the community as a whole. And also we are trying to incentivize diversification because the last thing we'd like to see is a monopolistic scenario because that wouldn't help really anybody. And last but not least in particular for this new business for orbit service animations what is really key is not just the technological advancement but also the advancement on the business model which is new and is a new chapter really that has to be written for the space industry. Yeah, I mean it's the tried and true engineering. We're building the train as it's moving but in almost a positive way. Like we're testing in real time. It's exciting to hear that you're planning for that and we're gonna get to see that. Not in a case that it must happen but that you're actually looking to confirm how that's gonna work. I wanna look at another area of space sustainability. So for Julie another important area is safe space operations is collision avoidance and you've both referred to that as something that is obviously of concern. No one wants to see that as you said. How does Project Hyper view the need for improved information sharing among companies? What does that look like for you? Well firstly I'll say collision avoidance depends upon having propulsion in most cases and the Kuiper system has propulsion in order to avoid collisions and to orbit rays and de-orbit. We think that all satellites operating at altitudes above 400 kilometers which is the approximate altitude of the International Space Station should have propulsion so that they can avoid collisions. In terms of data it's important to register satellites and get that catalog updated at the soonest possible moment and we'll be doing that. And to use all available sources of information both government and commercial. Where commercial sources of data are available and perhaps governments will be integrating that kind of data into the space situational awareness basic data that they provide to industry free. We have better knowledge on which to make decisions and have less risk. I'd say the other thing is to design for prompt disposal after the mission is complete and to really consider the full life cycle of the satellite from the time that you build it until the time that you retire it. Make sure that you can bring it back down to earth safely. Yeah. So it's interesting what you say about that compatibility, right? It's not gonna be either or. It's the importance and we've heard about this in some of our other panels of a variety of data sources that's gonna allow us to actually create a solution that works for everybody. You know I think that we've seen that in the last two days and that's really emphasized by what you're saying. So I have another question for both of you actually. There's another important area of space sustainability one that's often overlooked and I actually noticed we got an audience question about this as well but you'll be happy to know I had it in the list anyway. So that's spectrum. You know given that the exciting and the rapid growth of the commercial satellite sector can strain spectrum allowance what do you see as the major challenges regarding spectrum use in the future? You know how can we address that area? I'll start with you Marietta. So yeah, in the name, right? So that is one of the hottest topics. So constellations are built on spectrum. So that is the foundation of any constellation business. And it's quite clear that there is a limited number of constellations that will be able to really operate with the spectrum that within the spectrum that is currently available. So there's a first mover advantage that's for sure and the reasons why not only coordination is key but also the technological advancement is key because I like to use the analogy of real estate. So if you have a limited amount of land available whether it's New York City, City of London or Monte Carlo, if you want to start building more and more you have to move up. So same for frequency. So this reason why the tendency is to start moving up in frequency. There's been announcement about going up using e-bend. We're gonna likely move up in frequency as well for some elements of our constellation with generation too. So but again, coordination becomes key. First mover advantage is obviously key. And also what is important is technological advancement. So it's really intimately linked with coordination of spectrum. Yeah, exactly. It's not either or it's gonna be a combination of things. Absolutely. How do you guys view it at Project Kuiper? The demand for bandwidth just keeps growing and the pressure on the spectrum allocations is absolutely immense these days. All, really all satellite spectrum is shared spectrum. Whether that's with other satellite systems or with terrestrial systems. Usually both. And the rules that were put in place for non-geostationary systems were put in place internationally over 20 years ago. I'll date myself but I'll admit that I was at the 1997 and 2000 World Radio Conference. This is working on equivalent power flex density limits to enable non-geostationary systems in the KU and KA band to share with geostationary satellite systems. So those same EPFD limits that we adopted at WRC 2000 are in effect. And that takes care of sharing between geos and non-geostationary systems. But as Mauricio noted, we have to coordinate with each other. And that is a complex process because we're both moving all the time and figuring out how to reach coordination agreement requires a lot of hard work and good intent on both of our sides in order to get there. But it works at the end of the day. It's really important that as we mature the technology and evolve designs that spectrum efficiency is foremost in our minds and that we're thinking about small spot beams, spectrum reuse, the ability to be agile as we're sharing with other users, especially non-geostationary systems. And look for ways to establish permissible interference levels that allow us to come to a common baseline for our agreements. Yeah, I like to think of it. Sometimes the policy can move slow. I mean, that's a great way of thinking about it. You know, that we are dealing with something that is not up to date in the way that it needs to be, but that it's also about technology. That again, it's a theme that it's, we have to be looking at all these solutions. There is no one single way to address space sustainability. We need to be looking at and attacking it from so many different ways. So thank you for that. I know some of, I find there are two types of people in the space industry. Those who are very interested in spectrum and those who like to pretend it's not a problem. So I had to ask about this because it is really important as you both just said. So for Maurizio, in an interview last year with Space News, your CEO Neil Masterson who we saw briefly earlier today, he starts the importance of industry collaboration, responsible behavior and how this can complement regulatory efforts to ensure space sustainability. But what does that balance actually look like? You know, Julie earlier mentioned the convening power of government is one important aspect of that. But what does that balance look like for you? Where is there a need for additional regulation and where should industry lead the way? So normally in the way we interface with the national regulatory body, we are not too prescriptive. And obviously we have to align and comply with national regulations for the markets we want to operate in. This said, we try to be as vocal as possible. And actually these week last week we released our responsible space, White Paper which is really summarizing our key principles and what we would like to suggest the regulatory body to start looking into and implement in order to ensure responsible and sustainable use of space as a natural resource. And the reason why we released these White Papers is that we would like to use these in our conversations with the key regulatory stakeholders and really outlines about 20 key guidelines that we would like the space community to act on. And last but not least, there's an element they would like the national regulators so we'd like to urge them to start thinking which is the size of sovereign backed constellation which is an element that the sheer number of satellites that are gonna be launched in space that regardless whether we're gonna do it sustainably or not responsibly or not, it's something that we need to address together as a community. Okay, similar to a different question Julie. So your counterpart, your colleague CalPAC, Guide recently commented on this issue as well. And what he said was that he highlighted the need for public-private partnerships and as you mentioned earlier, government convened industry groups particularly around standards development and other issues. He pointed out also a really important point that space-sustainable issues are not confined to one country which we're seeing here. I mean, we have folks from all over Europe, the US, the UK, Africa, Asia who really, really committed it and interested and worried about the problem. So can you tell us more about what kinds of government-led solutions you would like to see if space-sustainable is a global issue? How can global forums help advance this issue? I think that global forums like this one can help advance the conversation and a common understanding of how to move forward together in unison. We heard today about the importance of speaking with one voice. It's also so important that on the government side that governments come to a common understanding because we're global systems. And it's very difficult if there is a patchwork of norms or standards or rules to adapt to each different environment. So I would say a coordinated effort on that. It's important for government also to invest in space situational awareness technology to improve the ability to track small objects, to give faster data with more precision. We also heard today that you take four people in a room and they've all got their own data sources and they differ in substantial ways. And the calculations that are derived from those data sources yield different results. So coming into consensus on norms for data, having more precise data, I think is a very important role for government and then that convening power that governments have to develop the norms. All right, well I know you're all waiting for this but I wanna turn to the audience portion of our questions. We have some great ones coming in. Some of them touching on topics. I'm gonna jump one into how they picked out. There it is. This guy, you touched on this a little earlier but the house-based sustainability plays into a business case. So there's a couple of questions here on that. One of them is, so the theme of a healthy commercial competition was actually raised on a panel that we had earlier today on winner governments and they're asking, do you agree that competition between countries like companies, companies like yours, does that help advance sustainability? Do you think that it helps keep you accountable or do you think that there's a risk that a less sustainable actor might beat you to the finish line? Like how do you build competition and sustainability? Maurizio, you're smiling, so I'm gonna go to you first. I do like competition because pushes for, makes you uncomfortable to certain extent, right? And pushes you to think. And not to take anything for granted. I think that if you only had one solution, monopolistic scenarios are never good. Not for business, not for innovation, not for responsible and sustainable behavior. So I think actually it's a stimulus in order to think more responsibly and to use technology and innovation in a positive way. Okay, what do you think, Julie? I like competition as well. It absolutely keeps you on your toes. It inspires innovation and it brings lower prices to consumers and better products. And so it's essential and I think that applies in this area as well. Social consciousness is very high today and I think that a company who disregards space sustainability is not gonna be a company that consumers want to do business with. It's interesting you said that because your companies actually are quite a forward-facing or will be as you expand your services. You're quite a forward-facing part of our industry. I have to admit I was home talking to my parents and they were more aware of what companies like yours are doing than many of the others because it has a bit more of a direct link to service in some ways, right? I mean I think what you're saying about consumers is a really interesting point that we don't get into very often that it's not just ourselves and we heard yesterday in our media panel kind of the media world online. It's actual consumers who have a say in this. So I think that's a really great point. Here's another one kind of related but a little different and kind of a key to my heart since I work for an organization that only focuses on space sustainability. So this question is, where does space sustainability sit in terms of other commercial technological and strategic priorities that you might have as a business? You've both said where companies are committed to it but where does it rank in terms of your other priorities? Oh, who wants to go first? All right. I'll go. It's in the forefront because if we don't have sustainable space, the orbits to which we're going to deploy our satellites will not be usable. And if that happens, then the services that we're bringing to customers, low-cost, high-speed broadband are going to be impaired if even possible. It's a must-have, not an easy to have. Awesome. What do you think? Fully agree. So is we doing the right things now? In order to be able to use space in the future? Unfortunately, space is unforgiving so we really need to think ahead. And there are ways, as you know, both our companies are demonstrating to act responsibly and at the same time be successful. It's not either or. Yeah. I mean, I, as a space enthusiast, that's so important to me, right? And it's just so many people that we all get really excited about this and that's great. But we do want to make sure that what we're doing has that benefit. I mean, I think people assume that we care, sometimes we say this is, you know, we care about space sustainability, not because space is cool, but because we're actually doing all these things that we need in it. Exactly. We asked, this is a kind of a paired question to one of the things we talked about earlier. So I asked you about active debris removal, but there's a question here about Project Kuiper's plans on that. And you briefly touched on that earlier, but you know, what are you guys looking at for, are you, tell me a little bit more about your views on active debris removal, particularly, you know, given certain orbits. Yeah. So I mentioned earlier, we chose our orbits, the highest of which is 630 kilometers, in part because of space sustainability. So we can actively remove our satellites from orbit using propulsion at the end of life. So in that sense, we're not using a third party to do active debris removal. We are the active debris remover. At that altitude, our satellites will, through atmospheric forces, deorbit in less than 10 years. So, okay. That's, I have to admit, I'm not in the most technical of people. So I encourage, yeah, I mean, that's what we need to know. This is where we're exploring what's happening. Yeah, I think the most important thing is, using propulsion to remove a satellite from orbit is active to debris removal. Yeah, exactly. It's how we think about that word. Yeah. And sometimes it can be really fun to get caught up in the really neat technologies that are coming from some of your friends sitting in the audience. But it's a great point, Julie. We've got a couple of, a few more questions. I'm gonna do a couple of technical ones and one political one. So we actually had a keynote yesterday, virtual, unfortunately, Director Dalbella wasn't able to join us in person, but it was his first opportunity to talk about their plans. And so one of the questions that we have here is kind of let's see what industry's response to that is. So the question is, what are new or improved services you might be looking for from that office? And I'll broaden it a bit and say, what are you looking for from governments right now? This is specifically if they take over civil STM responsibilities. You both have a lot of business based in the US as well as abroad. So what are you looking for in the area of STM right now? Just start. So I think that coordination, I'm repeating myself, but coordination among operators is key. And I think that at this moment in time, coordination at industrial level is extremely effective. So it's working extremely well. So I have to confess I wasn't here for that keynote yesterday, but I think we should be extremely careful in considering government regulators to take ownership of space traffic management. I would really like to approach this in a very, very careful way. It's something that needs to be considered with a lot of attention. What is important is that either in an industrial private way or in a centralized way, we ensure that the time between need to action and action is minimized. And we are doing this as Julie said, sharing our two line elements, our femoris, our covariance information among each other and with the scientific community. We have private and institutional operators, if you want helping us with tracking our assets and raising alerts. And we have a kind of a red line open with our fellow operators that allow us to operate as safely as possible. Another analogy that I always use is because we want to act responsibly on rules that we try to impose on ourselves. And the analogy I always use is kids playing with the PlayStation. So they like playing with the PlayStation. If the grades are good, they can play with the PlayStation as long as they want. If the grades at school start coming down and they don't behave responsibly, well mom and dad then will start regulating how much time they can spend on video. And this is what is happening now. I think it's the perfect analogy. So we have an extremely good dynamic among operators and at this point in time, my personal view is that it's working, it's not, nothing is ever perfect and being proved, but it's working really, really well. And we should try to stick to that. Yeah, we've had a lot of really fun analogies about with children, we had one on textbooks. So I appreciate that, I mean, it's true. And as we've said for several things, it's gonna be both, right? It's gonna be what you guys need to do, but then also finding those appropriate times. Did you have anything you wanted to add on that, Julie? Just how encouraged I was by Richard's plans for the office and improving the quality and timeliness of space situational awareness data. I think that's great and that he's planning to put up a web API, also wonderful news. Give another plug for development of better tracking mechanisms so we can track smaller data. And I know he's considering as well the role of commercial sources of space situational awareness, which is another welcome idea. All right, we're gonna do two more kind of, there's some really good questions in here. And there's some that are a little, I don't wanna say simpler to answer, but a little more specific. I'm gonna do kind of a rapid fire to each of you on one of these just so I can get to a few and then we're gonna wrap up with my final question. So let me see, I hadn't picked up. So this one is for you. I'm gonna kind of paraphrase a little bit, but we've got several questions asking about launch, which we haven't touched on as an aspect of space sustainability. And I think everyone knows that one web has run into some issues in that area lately. So tell us how you're approaching launch right now. I mean, that is also a part of space sustainability. Yeah, so my opening remark is that I think that a few of you have read the book eccentric orbits about to read you. Maybe I feel we're gonna write one about one web one day. So I'm taking my notes. So, we've been hit by the international crisis. We are supposed to complete the deployment of our constellation with another five launches with Soyuz is not gonna happen anymore. We've been lucky enough in March to sign in less than 72 hours an agreement with SpaceX for a few Falcon 9 launches. And a few weeks later, it has been followed by announcement of signing with an SIL, what was Israel before launching with GSLV Mark III. So this is our plan. So considering the geopolitical situation, I would say that we've had an incredible turnaround with great support from both SpaceX and the Indian Space Agency. So our plan is to be back on the launch pad in quarter four after the summer and to have complete deployment of the constellation by quarter two next year with all satellites in space. And then we'll do the orbit raising and we're gonna be in service with global coverage 24 seven by the end of next year. Excellent. You mentioned, we were talking a little bit about collision avoidance earlier. And so there's a question on here that I'm gonna direct to you about material selection actually. Not getting too specific. But you know how have you balanced material selection to withstand impacts of small debris without fragmentation or with minimizing re-interest? I guess I'm just saying, talk to us about how your thoughts behind what you're building. What are you putting in technologically on these satellites? I thought that was kind of a really interesting detailed question. Yeah, it's a, and I'll preface this with, I'm not the expert on satellite design and choices in this area, but I do know that it's a complex set of trade-offs because more robust materials may not devise and both are important. So one of the reasons for using shielding is to protect critical components in case of impact. Interesting, yeah. So we've touched on a lot of things. We've covered a lot of grounds. I wanna thank, first of all, thank you to both before my concluding question. I know, I should give Mauricio a shout out. There was some incredibly complex travel arrangements. I'm told in an emergency flight to get you here. So we really appreciate it. And Julie, you've been able to join us and it's been delayed to get to know you in the last two days. So I wanna conclude with a question which is we spend two days talking about this. And so I wanna give you both the opportunity to say, you know, if the audience can take away one message today from your two companies about space sustainability, what do you want that to be? What do we wanna go away thinking about? I'll start with you. From my perspective is a call for action. So we are not, he is not, you know, every man for himself. We really hear on the same boat as a community. And the time to act is real now. Some operators, some players, you know, have been doing since inception, since day one. We really hope that this call for action will also incentivize the rest of the industry at any level from prime contractors to operators, prime contractors, to one, two, and three, three, two, to act sustainably and to keep these in mind. And last but not least is just not all about technological development as I was referring around to, but also about new business cases and new business plans. Excellent. I mean, there's some messages there that I can get behind. We are a long community and the time to act is now, which is why we're having this, right? We really wanted to, we've spent all this time pointing out some of those areas and looking at, I mean, I think you were all here for the ASAP this morning. That's obviously a huge one. We haven't even touched on that at all for this panel. These are, the time is now. And these engagements, these gatherings are a perfect opportunity to thank you very much. But more importantly, I want you all to go away with these ideas. So thank you for that. Julie. We're all in this together. No question about it. And we have to work together to meet the twin goals of having a sustainable space environment and a robust, innovative and inclusive satellite industry that can provide those critical services that we need for humanity. I share the optimism that I heard on a video interview last week with the founder of Leo Labs and Bloomberg. The optimism about being able to solve these problems. The acceleration of technology in space over the past 15 years has been unprecedented. And I think we're gonna see a Moore's Law sort of acceleration now that we have more NGSO constellations like ours and solutions to these issues will come forward. Well, we are certainly behind that. So with those inspiring words, that is the conclusion of the summer for space sustainability minus the fun bit, the extra fun bit, which is gonna be shortly. So first of all, a round of applause for our two panelists. So I have one announcement and then I'm actually told I have to see the stage. I've been overruled by my boss and my co-host. So my announcement to all of you is come drink, come hang out. We have the generous support of our sponsors and we are really excited to welcome you all to the most appropriate venue I could find in the city, the Exploring Space Hall. For those of you online, I also wanna thank you. We are doing our best to hold a hybrid event. I'm gonna say we're learning and we are really excited that everything that you see today is actually gonna be available. And yesterday's gonna be available online. So if you missed a bit or you were off having a meeting or if you had to step off when you were in our online community, don't forget that our information is available. We'll get those posted and get that information out to everybody. If you have comments or feedback, you know me by now, let me know, send us notes and let's keep this conversation going. So again, thank you for me to all of you for being here and I am going to step off the stage with my fellow panelists and I invite Peter and Jacob to the stage. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.