Should a Research and Development (R&D) agency be building successive models of the same satellite?
We totally agree that ESA is an R&D agency and that Kopernikus should be handed over to the European Commission as the ultimate user of the services. But we don’t view these so-called B-units of the Sentinels as recurrent. They are necessary for the system to be fully operational. We see no advantage in having the Sentinels paid for by the European Commission at this point. Do you believe ESA governments will approve the agency’s request for 850 million euros for Kopernikus/GMES? I think so. But there will be a compromise in which the launches of the A and B units will be a little later than planned, but not so late as to be harmful to the overall system integrity. And we will ask the EU Commission to pay for the launch of the B units, and to perform in-orbit validation of the satellites. ESA also is asking for more funds for the Exo-Mars rover-lander mission, to be launched in 2016. Mission costs now are 1.2 billion euros, and ESA is looking for U.S., Russian and Canadian backing. Wil
