2026 Issue Three

From Connectivity to Mission Assurance

Historically, military SATCOM programmes focused on connectivity: ensuring that forces could reach command centres, exchange information and maintain contact across long distances. Today, defence planners are focused on mission assurance, meaning the ability to continue operating even when parts of the communications environment are degraded, denied or contested.

Mission assurance requires networks that can maintain communications despite satellite outages, reroute traffic during denied operations, support mobile users across air, land and maritime domains, integrate commercial and sovereign infrastructure, and preserve operational security under contested conditions. It also requires clear policies for prioritising traffic, protecting sensitive information and ensuring that critical command-and-control services remain available when capacity is constrained.

This is why network orchestration is becoming as important as satellite capacity itself. Modern defence communications increasingly depend on software-defined networking that can select the most appropriate communications path in near real time, based on mission priority, availability, security policies and performance. Smart Network Exchange from Hughes allows the integration of existing and new network technologies across multiple orbits, ground infrastructure and managed network capabilities into more unified architectures.

The objective is not simply to add more networks; it is to make multiple networks operate as one coherent mission resource that can adapt as priorities change, capacity fluctuates or threats emerge.

Tactical Networks at the Edge

The tactical edge presents a different challenge. Ground vehicles, maritime vessels, helicopters and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms operate in environments where communications must remain available despite mobility, interference, limited power, antenna constraints and rapidly changing operational conditions. For these users, terminals and modems must support beyond-line-of-sight communication while remaining adaptable to mobility, changing spectrum conditions and mission security requirements. Software-defined modem technologies, protected waveforms, transmission security capabilities and anti-jam techniques are becoming essential building blocks for land, airborne and maritime operations, particularly where the network must support both high-value platforms and dispersed tactical users.

The ability to connect tactical users into a broader multi-orbit framework allows commanders to preserve situational awareness while retaining flexibility in transport selection. This is especially important for ISR missions, where information must move quickly from sensors and platforms to decision-makers and where delays in connectivity directly impacts the momentum gained in the operation.

Sovereign Communications in a Commercial Era

Many nations are evaluating how commercial satellite constellations can complement sovereign communications requirements. This is particularly relevant for emerging space nations throughout Asia-Pacific, where governments are seeking to expand national capabilities while also taking advantage of the speed, scale and innovation available from the commercial space sector.

Commercial NGSO systems provide rapid access to low-latency connectivity and broad coverage. However, governments should keep greater control over network management, security policies, data sovereignty, operational prioritisation and mission planning. For defence users, the central issue is therefore not only access to commercial capacity, but the ability to integrate that capacity within national command structures and security frameworks.

The emerging model is not the replacement of sovereign or military networks by commercial constellations, but integration. National defence organisations increasingly seek open architectures that combine sovereign space assets, commercial constellations and terrestrial infrastructure under unified operational control, while preserving the ability to decide how, when and where each network is used while keeping full control over critical information pathways

Hughes builds systems for governments and defence organisations to leverage commercial LEO with sovereign GEO capacity, ground infrastructure, managed services and network orchestration into unified architectures. In this model, commercial connectivity can support sovereign requirements rather than operate as a separate layer, while resilience is built in through diversity, integration and operational control rather than dependence on a single network or provider.

The Role of Multi-Orbit Orchestration

Perhaps the most significant evolution in military SATCOM is the concept of orchestration. Adding more satellites does not automatically result in a resilient network. Without intelligent management, multiple constellations create unwarranted operational overhead by forcing users to manage separate systems, services, network policies and performance conditions.

This requirement places new emphasis on the ground segment. Future architectures require intelligent gateways, interoperable terminals, software-defined modems and network management platforms capable of applying mission policies across GEO, MEO, LEO and terrestrial resources. These systems must also provide operators with sufficient visibility to understand network performance, enforce security policies and shift traffic before degradation negatively impacts mission outcomes.

Technologies such as the Hughes HM modems and the Hughes Network Management System (NSM) for defense organisations offer practical examples of the capabilities required. In this environment, the modem, terminal, gateway and management platform work together so traffic can be prioritised, monitored and routed according to defined mission outcomes. Seamless failover, end-to-end visibility and a simplified user experience at the tactical edge are critical to ensure that additional connectivity options do not become an additional operational burden.

Looking Ahead

The future of military SATCOM will be defined less by individual orbits and more by how effectively defence organisations can orchestrate across them. As GEO, MEO, LEO, sovereign assets, commercial constellations and terrestrial networks converge, the critical capability will be the ability to manage them as a unified architecture that adapts to mission priorities, operational risk and changing network conditions.

For governments across Asia-Pacific, this shift points toward a new communications model: one built on diversity, control and interoperability. Multi-orbit SATCOM will be most valuable when it enables secure, resilient and mission-ready connectivity across domains, not as added capacity alone, but as an integrated foundation for modern defence operations

Pillar 1: Network Agility

The pace of change in satellite communications continues to accelerate. New orbits, new service models, evolving customer requirements, and the emergence of 5G NTN are reshaping how connectivity is delivered. Operators can no longer afford architectures that lock them into a single technology path or vendor ecosystem.

Network agility begins with open standards. Operators need infrastructure capable of supporting multiple waveforms, multiple orbits, and multiple deployment models. Standards-based architectures provide the flexibility to integrate new technologies as they emerge, rather than requiring costly redesigns every time the market shifts. This is particularly important as 3GPP 5G NTN standards gain momentum and create new opportunities for satellite operators to participate in the broader telecommunications ecosystem.

Agility also means preserving choice. Modern operators increasingly favor architectures built on open interfaces and interoperable systems that allow them to incorporate new partners, platforms, and technologies without disrupting existing operations. By avoiding vendor lock-in and embracing standards-based integration, operators can respond more quickly to market opportunities while protecting long-term investments.

In a market defined by constant change, agility is no longer a competitive advantage. It is a prerequisite for long-term success.

Pillar 2: Operational Automation

As networks grow in scale and complexity, traditional operational models become increasingly unsustainable. Today’s operators manage diverse combinations of GEO, MEO, and LEO assets, multiple frequency bands, and infrastructure from different vendors. Many still rely on disconnected management tools, siloed workflows, and manual processes to keep services running.

The result is operational strain. Monitoring data grows faster than teams can analyze it. Visibility gaps emerge between systems. Resources are optimized locally rather than across the network as a whole. Simply adding more personnel or more tools is not a viable solution.

Automation is becoming essential to managing this complexity. By applying AI and intelligent orchestration, operators can move beyond reactive network management toward predictive and autonomous operations. Modern systems can identify anomalies before they impact service, recommend optimization strategies, and automate routine corrective actions within defined operational guardrails.

This shift allows operations teams to focus on higher-value activities while improving service consistency and reducing operational costs. More importantly, automation enables operators to scale without requiring proportional increases in staffing or operational overhead.

Pillar 3: End-to-End Visibility

Effective decision-making depends on having a complete understanding of network performance. Yet many operators still manage networks through fragmented monitoring environments where each tool provides visibility into only a portion of the infrastructure.

As networks become more distributed and services increasingly span multiple platforms and orbits, this fragmented view creates operational blind spots. Problems can take longer to identify and resolve, service quality becomes harder to guarantee, and planning decisions are often based on incomplete information.

Future-ready operators are addressing this challenge by creating unified operational views across their entire network environment. By collecting, normalizing, and correlating data from diverse systems, they gain the ability to understand network performance holistically rather than in isolated segments.

This end-to-end visibility delivers benefits across the organization. Operations teams can identify issues more quickly. Engineering teams can make more informed planning decisions. Commercial teams gain better insight into service utilization and customer behavior. Most importantly, visibility becomes the foundation upon which automation, optimization, and business intelligence can be built.

In increasingly complex networks, visibility is not simply about monitoring performance. It is about creating a shared operational understanding that supports faster and better decisions.

Pillar 4: Embedded Resilience

Modern satellite networks must be designed not only for performance but also for resilience. As operators introduce new technologies, integrate more systems, and expand into new markets, the potential impact of operational failures and security threats grows.

Resilience begins with architecture. Open, cloud-native environments must incorporate security and reliability as foundational design principles rather than afterthoughts. Distributed infrastructure, automated workflows, and standards-based integration can improve flexibility, but they must also be supported by robust governance, operational controls, and security frameworks.

Resilience also depends on reducing operational dependencies. Networks that rely heavily on manual intervention are inherently more vulnerable to errors and service disruptions. Intelligent automation, predictive analytics, and policy-driven operations help operators detect and address issues before they affect customers.

Another critical aspect of resilience is adaptability. Operators that maintain flexibility across waveforms, deployment models, and vendor ecosystems are better positioned to respond to technological shifts, regulatory requirements, and evolving customer demands. By preserving options rather than committing to rigid architectures, they can navigate uncertainty with greater confidence.

In an environment where disruption is inevitable, resilience is increasingly measured by how quickly operators can adapt and recover.

Pillar 5: Scalable Growth

The final pillar of modernization is scalability. Growth opportunities in satellite communications continue to expand, but traditional infrastructure models often make scaling expensive and slow.
Historically, operators have been required to build networks for anticipated peak demand, investing heavily in infrastructure long before revenue materializes. Expansion frequently involves lengthy procurement cycles and significant capital expenditure.

Cloud-native architectures offer a fundamentally different approach. Built on containerized microservices and virtualized network functions, these environments allow operators to scale resources dynamically, deploy services faster, and align infrastructure costs more closely with actual demand.

Scalability also extends beyond technology. Flexible commercial models, including subscription-based services and managed operations, allow operators to accelerate deployment, reduce upfront investment, and focus resources on business growth rather than platform management.

Perhaps most significantly, scalable architectures position operators to participate in emerging markets. Whether enabling enterprise mobility, supporting government requirements, or integrating with 5G ecosystems, operators need infrastructure capable of evolving alongside demand.

Scalable growth is not simply about adding capacity. It is about building an operating model that can continuously expand, adapt, and create value as market conditions change.

Modernization as a Continuous Journey

Future-proofing satellite networks is not about making a single technology decision. It is about establishing a framework for continuous evolution.

The operators that will thrive in the coming decade are not necessarily those making the largest investments or adopting every new technology first. They are the ones building adaptable, intelligent, and standards-based networks capable of responding to changing market conditions without constant disruption. They are creating unified operational environments, automating complexity, improving visibility, embedding resilience, and scaling efficiently as opportunities emerge.

For operators across Asia Pacific, modernization should not be viewed as a destination. It is an ongoing discipline. By focusing on the five pillars of network agility, operational automation, end-to-end visibility, embedded resilience, and scalable growth, operators can build networks that are not only ready for today’s challenges but prepared for whatever comes next.

What is SDA?

SDA is the practice of understanding what is happening in space, why it matters, and how it affects activities on the ground.

The orbital segment focuses on the physical environment in space. It answers foundational questions such as: What objects are in orbit? Where are they? When do they move? Traditional SDA tools like radar and optical telescopes operate here, helping track satellites and debris.

The terrestrial segment deals with people, infrastructure, and decisions on the ground. This is where operators ask: Why is an activity happening? How does it affect services, users, or national systems? It connects space behavior to practical consequences.

Between them is the link segment, where satellites transmit and receive signals. This segment provides the bridge between “what is happening in orbit” and “why it matters on the ground.” RF sensing plays a central role here, because analyzing the signals themselves—just the external characteristics, not their content—reveals changes, interference, and operational behavior that may not be visible from orbital tracking alone.

The data in this article comes from Kratos’ KnownSpace Sensor Network, which collects global RF measurements across L, S, C, X, and Ku bands to support SDA across the orbital, link, and terrestrial segments. KnownSpace includes services, products, and SDA subjectmatter expertise that enable signal characterization, classification, and geolocation. All measurements were processed through the Kratos’ KnownSpace 24/7 Network Operations Center to produce the signal phenomenology used in this analysis.

More Satellites, More Spectrum Activity

SDA has long relied on optical telescopes and radar to detect, track, and characterize objects in orbit. RF adds another dimension. By reviewing the signals satellites transmit and receive, RF SDA shows activity, behavior, interference and changes that help operators understand not just where a satellite is, but what it is doing.

Modern communications satellites are increasingly software‑defined, giving operators the ability to reconfigure beams, frequencies, and capacity through software updates. Instead of being fixed to one mission, these satellites can shift coverage, change applications, or adjust bandwidth on demand. This flexibility increases overall spectrum activity.

The trend is particularly visible in Asia-Pacific. Satellites crossing the equatorial region may serve several countries within minutes, changing frequencies and beam assignments as they move.

RF activity shows how satellites use the spectrum and how that activity changes over time.

What RF SDA Can Show

RF observations provide information about satellite transmissions that cannot be derived from orbital position alone.

They can show:

• which satellites are transmitting
• what frequencies are in use
• how signal activity changes over time
• when interference occurs
• whether activity differs from established patterns

This distinction is increasingly important as satellite communications become more dynamic. Changes in transmissions, beam coverage, frequencies or services can occur without a corresponding change in orbit. RF monitoring can reveal these changes and provide a more complete view of satellite activity.

RF SDA Capabilities: Tracking, Signal Characterization, and Geolocation

RF SDA extends beyond identifying satellite transmissions. It offers several capabilities that help operators interpret activity, respond to changes, and maintain reliable services in a more crowded radio environment.

Tracking and Maneuver Detection

While orbital sensors show where a satellite is, RF sensing can reveal how it behaves. A Two Line Element set (TLE) summarizes a satellite’s orbit so its future position can be predicted and it is typically generated from radar and optical observations. Passive RFderived measurements such as Doppler shift and signal timing provide additional information that refines these orbital estimates, helping reduce uncertainty for rapidly moving LEO satellites or objects with limited visibility. Incorporating RFderived measurements enables more frequent updates to TLEs, improving the accuracy of predicted satellite behavior.

Signal Characterization

Understanding what a satellite transmits is equally important. RF SDA can classify signals by modulation type, bandwidth and power, revealing how the satellite is using the spectrum. These measurements provide insights into the pattern of life and determine whether the satellite is operating normally, whether new services have been activated, or whether unexpected changes have occurred. Signal characterization is particularly valuable for softwaredefined satellites, whose beams and frequencies can shift dynamically based on demand, as noted earlier.

Geolocation of Interference

When interference affects users, knowing where it comes from is essential. RF SDA enables geolocation of terrestrial sources by analyzing how signals arrive at multiple monitoring sites. This helps operators identify unauthorized transmitters, diagnose crosssystem conflicts, or verify compliance with regional spectrum rules. In environments with growing non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) activity, signal analysis can distinguish between interference caused by passing satellites and interference originating from the ground.

Together, these capabilities show how RF SDA contributes not only to situational awareness but also to operational decisionmaking. As the RF environment grows more complex, these insights become increasingly important for regulators, operators, and governments across Asia-Pacific.

Turning Observations into Useful Information

Collecting data is not the goal. The goal is to understand what is happening.

RF SDA can help identify transmitting satellites, classify signals, detect interference, and establish patterns over time.

An operator may know service is degraded but not why. RF monitoring can show which signals are present, what changed and possible causes.

A single observation shows only one moment. Repeated observations establish reference patterns and make deviations easier to detect.

Operational questions often come down to:

• Is the satellite operating as expected?
• Is another signal affecting the service?
• Where is the interference coming from?

RF monitoring can support these assessments.

The Power Spectral Density (PSD) readings in Figure 6 show how RF SDA turns raw signal measurements into useful understanding. A PSD is a simple chart showing how much signal appears at each frequency and RF sensing uses it to recognize normal patterns and spot changes. Early observations show stable carriers with no interference. Deviations appear over time, causing the center carrier to experience periodic disruptions every ten minutes and reducing uptime on adjacent carriers. By day’s end, sustained interference forces those carriers offline. Geolocation identifies the terrestrial source (a jammer for example), showing how RF monitoring can reveal what changed, diagnose degraded service and attribute interference to its origin.

A Growing Requirement in AsiaPacific

These questions are becoming more important as countries across the region expand their satellite capabilities and rely more heavily on satellite services.

For governments and regulators, independent RF awareness is increasingly necessary. A country responsible for spectrum management needs to understand satellite transmissions affecting its airspace. Monitoring only terrestrial activity is no longer enough as NGSO systems grow.

This does not require every country to build large surveillance networks. RF monitoring can scale according to national needs. A regulator may focus on compliance and interference. An operator may focus on protecting services. Another organization may monitor activity over a specific region.
The common requirement is visibility into a more complex RF environment.

AsiaPacific’s geography adds to this: large ocean areas, dense urban markets, remote communities dependent on satellite links and countries at different stages of space development. Needs vary, but more organizations now have reasons to understand the spectrum above them.

Growing Interference Challenges from LEO Constellations

The growth of NGSO constellations is making interference patterns in Asia-Pacific more complex. This creates shifting RF footprints that differ from the stable, predictable behavior of GEO satellites.

These dynamics matter especially near the equatorial belt, where many countries depend heavily on satellite connectivity. As LEO satellites cross this region, they temporarily cross through GEO satellite RF beams. When the GEO and LEO satellites use common frequency bands, this can create brief interference events. Some may last only seconds, long enough to disrupt service but short enough that they are difficult to diagnose without continuous monitoring.

Signals may appear and disappear too quickly for manual observation, and operators may struggle to determine whether disruptions come from a passing satellite, a configuration change, or a terrestrial source.

This evolving environment highlights the need for more robust NGSO‑aware spectrum monitoring. Regulators may need visibility into which satellites are transmitting over their airspace and whether those transmissions meet national requirements. Operators may need tools that track dynamic frequency use, identify short‑lived interference and distinguish NGSO activity from local issues.

RF SDA addresses this challenge by showing which signals are present at any moment, how they change and where interference originates. The continued expansion of LEO constellations makes this capability increasingly important for maintaining reliable services across the region.

NGSO Changes Spectrum Monitoring

NGSO constellations introduce new monitoring challenges:

• Many satellites pass through a country’s field of view each day.
• Individual satellites move quickly across the sky.
• Beams and frequencies may change as networks allocate capacity.

For regulators, this means it may no longer be enough to check signals at fixed orbital slots. They may need to know which network is transmitting, when certain frequencies are used and whether transmissions meet requirements. They must also consider how NGSO activity affects existing GEO services.

The increasing overlap in frequency use makes interference harder to identify and resolve. Spectrum monitoring must adapt to this new environment.

What This Means for Commercial Operators

Commercial operators face similar challenges.

When service degrades, finding the cause quickly matters. The issue could involve ground equipment, network configuration, another satellite or external interference.

Greater RF visibility can help narrow the possibilities.

Monitoring over time can also differentiate onetime events from recurring patterns, supporting investigations and coordination with other operators or regulators.

Network growth makes manual analysis increasingly difficult. Operators managing large fleets need ways to identify changes without reviewing every signal individually. The goal is practical: understand what changed, determine whether it matters and respond when required.

RF Awareness for a Changing Space Environment

For operators, regulators and governments across Asia-Pacific, that information is becoming more important.

RF SDA provides a way to observe that activity directly. As the region’s space capabilities grow, the ability to understand what is happening in the RF spectrum will become an increasingly important part of understanding what is happening in space.

Three defining trends could be observed in Q2 2026: growing interest in orbital data centres, increasing demand for sovereign space capabilities, and a shift towards service-oriented business models.

Orbital data centres attract investment across the space value chain

Interest in orbital data centres continued to accelerate in Q2 2026, building on momentum already visible in the first quarter. The emerging market is attracting both new entrants and established space companies seeking to position themselves within a potential new segment of the space economy.

Investment activity is extending across the value chain, including satellite manufacturers, launch providers, power infrastructure companies, and computing technology developers. Companies are pursuing different approaches to capturing value in the emerging orbital data centre market, from integrating computing infrastructure directly with launch systems to deploying dedicated platforms and targeting specialised in-space computing applications. In China, for example, Beijing Orbital Twilight Technology, Cosmoleap and Nayuta Space all raised funds in Q2 to pursue opportunities in orbital data centres, but with different technological and commercial approaches. Some are focused on integrating computing more closely with existing space infrastructure, while others are developing dedicated orbital platforms or targeting specific applications for in-space compute. Rather than converging around a single business model, investment is therefore supporting multiple approaches across an emerging value chain.

However, orbital data centres remain a nascent market with significant technical, operational, and economic challenges still to be addressed. The central uncertainty is the scale and timing of commercial demand: will the unique advantages of orbital computing outweigh the cost and complexity of deploying and operating infrastructure in space? In the near term, addressable demand is likely to remain concentrated in high-value, latency-sensitive or space-based applications, while other potential users evaluate how orbital computing could complement existing terrestrial infrastructure.

SpaceX currently holds a significant advantage due to its vertically integrated manufacturing capabilities, launch access, and scale. Competing approaches will need to demonstrate clear differentiation, whether through specialised applications, alternative architectures, or access to market segments not directly targeted by SpaceX.

Sovereign demand accelerates investment in defence and strategic capabilities

A second major driver of investment has been the growing demand for sovereign space capabilities. Defence requirements and geopolitical competition are encouraging governments to invest in independent access to space, satellite capabilities, and supporting infrastructure.

Overall, governments are increasingly supporting domestic space ecosystems as part of broader technology and security strategies. This trend is also visible in Asia-Pacific, especially around sovereign launch systems. China continued to account for the most significant share of Asian space investment in Q2 2026, with activity concentrated in launch vehicles and Earth observation.

Late 2025 saw the appointment of the China National Space Administration (CNSA) as the primary regulator of the commercial space sector. This was significant in the Chinese context as prior to the announcement, space companies were regulated by a patchwork of government entities, and the appointment of CNSA was seen as a major source of stability for investors.

Across Asia-Pacific, governments are playing an increasingly active role in expanding national space economies, though approaches differ between markets. While China and India are opening traditionally state-led sectors to greater private sector participation, Japan and South Korea are using strategic investment programmes to accelerate industrial growth and strengthen sovereign capabilities.

This focus on sovereign capability is also reshaping investor priorities. Companies developing enabling technologies such as launch systems, space-grade components, secure communications, and Earth observation platforms are evolving beyond purely commercial ventures and are now viewed as essential strategic infrastructure assets.

Satellite companies transition from infrastructure ownership to service delivery

A third trend shaping investment is the continued evolution of satellite companies towards more service-based business models. Rather than focusing solely on owning and operating space infrastructure, many companies are increasingly capturing value by monetising the data, insights, and applications generated by their assets. At the same time, leading players are moving further along the value chain by adding analytics, software, and tailored solutions on top of their underlying infrastructure, to provide an integrated service offering. This shift allows companies to capture a greater share of the market and build recurring revenue streams around specific customer needs.

Governments are an important driver of this transition. Public sector customers are showing growing interest in accessing space-enabled services without the cost and complexity of developing and operating their own infrastructure. Commercial solutions are not replacing government-owned systems, but complementing them by providing additional capabilities and flexibility.

For example, US-based Spire Global has built a vertically integrated satellite and data platform across weather, aviation, radio-frequency intelligence, and Space-as-a-Service applications, with subscription-based revenue representing the majority of its sales. While commercial customers accounted for slightly more than half of revenue, government customers represented a growing share of demand, illustrating how recurring service-based models are becoming increasingly relevant for both commercial and sovereign users.

Similar trends are emerging in Asia-Pacific. Chinese Earth observation companies such as Yunyao Aerospace are developing commercial data services alongside constellation expansion, while other satellite operators are exploring opportunities in areas such as maritime monitoring, climate intelligence, and defence applications.

Japan provides a similar example with iQPS, which is building a constellation of small SAR satellites to provide near-real-time Earth observation data as a service. Rather than monetising individual satellites, iQPS is scaling the underlying constellation to increase the frequency and geographic coverage of its data.

However, the transition towards service-based models does not mean infrastructure ownership is disappearing. Different customers continue to require different approaches, particularly where sovereign capabilities, resilience, and mission assurance are priorities. In Europe, the continued growth and investment success of companies such as ICEYE demonstrates that demand remains strong for complete satellite systems and sovereign solutions, particularly among governments seeking dedicated national capabilities. At the same time, European institutions are increasingly using commercial providers to complement publicly developed space infrastructure, creating a hybrid model that combines sovereign assets with commercial innovation.

The market is, therefore, moving towards a more integrated ecosystem, where infrastructure ownership, data services, and -as-a-service models increasingly operate together as part of broader end-to-end solutions.

Attention Turns to Asia-Pacific as Expanding Driver of Space Investment Growth

Asia-Pacific continues to be one of the most dynamic regions for private space investment, although investment patterns differ significantly between markets.

In China, investment activity during Q2 2026 was concentrated in Earth observation, launch, and satellite constellation companies. Capital came from a mix of domestic private investors, state-linked entities, and local governments, reflecting the country’s broader focus on developing sovereign technological capabilities.

Japan ranked as the second-largest Asian market based on disclosed transactions, supported by both commercial financing, notably Astroscale’s financing round, and government-backed initiatives.
India ranked third, driven largely by investment into launch provider Skyroot Aerospace, reflecting growing investor confidence following India’s opening of government space infrastructure to private companies.

Other regional markets are also gaining momentum. South Korea saw renewed activity following a slower first quarter, while Australia continued to focus on sovereign launch and space infrastructure.

The space market is maturing and scalable capabilities are the next frontier

The private investment trends point to a space sector entering a more mature phase. Capital is increasingly concentrating behind companies that can demonstrate a path to scale, address strategic or sovereign demand, or build infrastructure with the potential to support sustainable commercial models. Investors are becoming more focused on how technologies can translate into commercially viable capabilities rather than early-stage concepts.

This is also changing where value is derived in the space economy. As access to space becomes more scalable and infrastructure increasingly commoditises, owning a satellite alone becomes less of a differentiator. Competitive advantage is increasingly built around how companies leverage that infrastructure: integrate it into larger systems, combine it with data and software, deliver services at scale, or address specific customer needs that justify recurring spending. This is particularly important as governments make greater use of capabilities procured from commercial providers that deliver usable outcomes over infrastructure alone. The result is a space market in which the ability to translate technology into scalable and defensible business models is becoming equally critical.

The future development of the space economy will be defined by the ability to turn new space assets into scalable, recurring, and strategically relevant businesses. Companies that can successfully combine technological innovation with sustainable business models are likely to be best positioned to attract the larger pools of capital now entering the sector.

Q: A lot of attention in the media and industry is paid to a question about GEO, MEO and LEO, asking which will be the winning orbit. In your opinion, how should governments and operators across Asia-Pacific think about this issue?

A: I believe the industry should be asking a different question. Rather than debating which orbit will “win,” governments, operators, and technology providers should be evaluating which architecture best meets their operational, commercial, and strategic objectives. The right answer depends on the specific use case, the performance requirements, and the assets already in place.

Our approach has always been to help customers build networks around their requirements, not around a particular orbital ideology. We focus on providing technologies and solutions that give operators the flexibility to meet operational objectives while remaining aligned with their financial and business models.

In Asia-Pacific, for example, countries that have invested in sovereign GEO satellite infrastructure are unlikely to abandon the unique capabilities those systems provide. GEO continues to play a critical role in supporting national resilience, sovereign communications, defense, public safety, and strategic economic development.

At the same time, LEO is creating significant new opportunities across consumer, enterprise and mobility markets, particularly where its capabilities align with customer requirements and economic considerations.

Ultimately, The objective should not be to replace one architecture with another, but to determine which approach, or combination of approaches, delivers the best outcome for a given mission or service.

In-flight connectivity is a good example. Airlines increasingly require both high performance and high availability, making it advantageous to leverage multiple orbital environments. Delivering that flexibility is often more important than advocating for one orbit over another.

A similar trend is emerging in government and defense communications, where resilience and assured connectivity are driving interest in multi-orbit architectures

At Gilat, our mission is to help customers maximize the value of their communications infrastructure, both today and in the future. We do that by leveraging our diverse technology portfolio to support evolving mission and market requirements while protecting existing investments and enabling the integration of new capabilities as they emerge.

Q: What defense trends are having the greatest impact on satellite communications demand in Asia-Pacific?

A: Three trends stand out.

First, defense organizations are placing greater emphasis on communications resilience. Rather than relying on any single network, technology, or point of failure, they are increasingly evaluating architectures that combine network diversity, automated failover, cyber resilience, and anti-jam capabilities to maintain communications in contested and degraded environments.

Second, relocatable and transportable ground infrastructure is becoming more important in modern defense communications. As military operations become more distributed, forces need capabilities that deploy rapidly, reposition as requirements evolve, and operate reliably across diverse environments.

Third, unmanned systems are taking on a larger role. As UAVs support more missions over greater distances, beyond-line-of-sight communications are becoming critical.

Together, these trends are shaping defense architectures designed for continuity, mobility, and flexibility.

Q: Asia-Pacific is one of the regions most exposed to natural disasters and large-scale disruptions. What role do you see satellite playing in improving preparedness and response?

A: Satellite communications are essential to disaster preparedness and response across Asia-Pacific. When terrestrial networks are damaged or congested, satellite provides the resilient communications layer needed to maintain coordination and continuity.

But the priority is moving beyond connectivity. Governments and public safety organizations need solutions that help them gain situational awareness, coordinate resources, and make informed decisions during fast-moving events.

By integrating communications, data, monitoring systems, and operational workflows into a unified platform, organizations can enhance preparedness, coordination, and response. For homeland security agencies, this level of integration is increasingly critical. In regions frequently affected by earthquakes, typhoons, floods, wildfires, and other natural disasters, integrated solutions provide the situational awareness and operational coordination needed to improve response and accelerate community recovery.

Q: Airlines across Asia-Pacific are expanding rapidly. How do you see in-flight connectivity evolving as part of this broader satellite story?

A: Aviation is one of the clearest examples of how connectivity expectations continue to rise. Passengers expect the same experience in the air that they have on the ground, and airlines are under pressure to deliver it reliably across long-haul and regional routes alike.

Asia-Pacific presents a particular challenge because of its geographic scale, with aircraft often moving between orbital coverage zones.

As regional carriers grow and compete on passenger experience, I expect in-flight connectivity to become a differentiator, not just an amenity, with satellite central to making that possible. We are seeing growing demand for our Sidewinder ESA multi-orbit antenna and ground systems capabilities, including the ability to roam between networks.

Q: Where do you see the most exciting opportunities for satellite communications beyond traditional connectivity services?

A: Today, satellite connectivity is becoming integral to network architecture and critical infrastructure design. This marks a fundamental shift, positioning satellite as a strategic enabler of resilient, always-available communications. As a result, satellite now serves as a key differentiator across defense and commercial applications, where operational continuity and network resilience are essential.

Value is also created as satellite connectivity becomes integrated with cloud platforms, evolves toward 5G NTN, and connects with AI-driven analytics, IoT devices, enterprise applications, and operational systems. In that environment, connectivity becomes an enabler, not the end objective.

This opens the door to new business models and use cases. The question is no longer, “How do I connect a remote location?” but “How do I improve an operational outcome?” Whether the goal is efficiency, automation, or real-time decision-making, communications are one component of a broader solution.

I believe this evolution will reshape the satellite industry. Success will be defined less by bandwidth delivered and more by the value created through the applications, services, and outcomes that connectivity enables.