A “weapon” with a payload of cargo (Image: NASA TV)

Editorial: “Don’t let knee-jerk secrecy slow down space flight“

Dragon capsules are classed as weapons, and commercial spaceflight may suffer for it. US rules to stop arms trafficking may mean we never find out what delayed a recent Dragon mission to the International Space Station.

SpaceX, based in Hawthorne, California, sent a Dragon capsule into orbit on 1 March carrying supplies and science experiments bound for the ISS. Then its thrusters developed problems, apparently due to blocked fuel valves. But ground engineers managed to clear the blockages, and the craft docked with the space station a day late.


SpaceX promises a full investigation into what went wrong, but what it can reveal is restricted by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which list commercial capsules like Dragon as munitions.

In place since 1999, ITAR aims to keep technology which could be used in advanced ballistic weapons out of the hands of certain countries, such as China, Iran and North Korea. The US satellite industry recently won an exemption from ITAR allowing firms to sell their spacecraft internationally, but space tourism and cargo capsules remain under its rigid purview.

Relaxing the rules

“SpaceX will know what went wrong, regardless of ITAR,” says spokeswoman Christina Ra. “ITAR regulates what we can share.” Meanwhile, space-industry firms – led by the Commercial Spaceflight Federation in Washington, DC – are pressing for ITAR to be relaxed.

“Certainly NASA will find out what happened with SpaceX. And I think there’s value to the community in learning about what happened so that people can avoid similar problems in the future,” says Alex Saltman, CSF executive director. “Being able to share best practices is important in any industry, and you don’t want to put any undue restrictions on that capability,” he says.

There may be light at the end of the tunnel: CSF and the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates civilian spaceflight in the US, are working on secure ways to allow firms to share mishap information so that they don’t make the same mistake twice, says Saltman.

“But all these conversations are in their very early stages,” he says.