What is it about?
As more countries and companies build rocket launch sites, no shared system exists to coordinate them. This paper proposes the INCS. A voluntary global network where spaceports share AI scheduling tools, safety standards, and logistics so launches become smoother, cheaper, and accessible to all.
Featured Image
Photo by NASA on Unsplash
Why is it important?
As of 2025, more than 30 active or planned commercial spaceports exist globally, with new facilities emerging in Africa, Latin America, and Oceania. Global orbital launches exceeded 250 in 2025, and U.S. orbital launches alone are projected to reach nearly 160 per year. Yet there is no coordinating framework to ensure these facilities can interoperate, share best practices, or collectively respond to disruptions. The consequences of this fragmentation are already visible: a single Kennedy Space Center launch in 2013 caused 563 flight delays and forced aircraft to fly an additional 34,841 nautical miles due to manual airspace closure. As launch cadences accelerate, this ad hoc approach becomes untenable. What makes this article unique is threefold. First, it is the first to propose a voluntary, non-regulatory, consensus-driven consortium specifically designed to fill the operational-coordination layer that no existing body occupies. The article demonstrates through an explicit functional coverage analysis (Table 3 and Figure 3) that UN COPUOS, ICAO, ITU, CCSDS, and the Global Spaceport Alliance each govern distinct vertical domains, but none addresses cross-spaceport scheduling, inter-spaceport logistics, or contingency-diversion routing. INCS occupies this unoccupied connective layer without replacing any existing mechanism. Second, the article introduces a rigorous four-phase methodology (Technical Benchmarking, Comparative Institutional Analysis, Operational Data Synthesis, and Stakeholder Validation Modeling) and identifies CCSDS as the most directly applicable governance analog. CCSDS, a voluntary multi-agency standards body established in 1982, has achieved adoption across more than 1,000 space missions in 13 nations without any binding mandate, demonstrating that voluntary technical standardization in the space domain is both achievable and durable. The article draws concrete lessons from this precedent: prioritize interface-layer standards, publish all standards openly, and maintain rigorous working-group review cycles. Third, the article addresses cybersecurity architecture and data sovereignty as structural implementation requirements. The INCS digital backbone, spanning the "SpaceSync" scheduling platform, a secure digital tracking layer, and a cross-border knowledge repository, constitutes key infrastructure. The article proposes a federated data model in which raw operational data remains resident within each member's sovereign infrastructure, with only derived or preauthorized data subsets shared across the network, aligned with the International Data Spaces Association's interoperable data spaces framework. The article also identifies orbital debris mitigation as an operational sustainability dimension, proposing that INCS membership standards include minimum deorbit timeline requirements and a dedicated orbital sustainability indicator reported annually. The phased implementation roadmap (Table 2) defines measurable Key Performance Indicators and binary go/no-go gates for each phase, from consortium building through formal governance establishment. This matters for spaceport operators seeking efficiency, launch providers navigating fragmented regulations, emerging space nations seeking equitable access, and policymakers looking for pragmatic coordination models that do not require treaty negotiation.
Perspectives
I wrote this article because I kept encountering the same structural problem from different angles in my research. In my work on the Omega Spaceport in Kenya, I saw how a new facility in an emerging market would struggle without shared standards and digital tools. In my research on interplanetary logistics, I saw how the absence of coordination frameworks on Earth would compound into chaos on the Moon and Mars. INCS is my attempt to solve the problem at its root on the ground, where it is still manageable. What distinguishes this journal article from my earlier conference presentation at IAC 2025 in Sydney is the depth of intellectual honesty I was able to bring to the framework. The peer review process and the extended revision pushed me to confront limitations I had previously glossed over. The article now explicitly acknowledges that all projected outcomes are conceptual and require empirical validation through pilot implementation. What excites me most about the "SpaceSync" concept is its potential to transform launch scheduling from a manual, bilateral, reactive process into a continuous, adaptive, AI-optimized planning cycle. Today, a single weather delay at one spaceport can cascade across an entire week of planned missions because there is no system-wide visibility. "SpaceSync" would integrate real-time weather data, range availability, airspace schedules, and vehicle health into a single platform. The maritime analogy is direct: the port of Rotterdam handles millions of containers annually using AI-driven berth allocation and predictive maintenance. The space industry, with far fewer "ships," should be able to do at least as well. Finally, I want to be transparent about the article's most significant structural limitation. The voluntary, opt-in nature of INCS means that systemic network effects will only materialize if a sufficient proportion of high-cadence operators and major range authorities adopt INCS standards. A scenario in which participation remains limited to smaller operators and emerging nations would significantly reduce the framework's systemic impact. The incentive-compatibility model I propose (where adoption cost is minimized by confining standards to nonproprietary interface layers, and benefits accrue directly to the adopting operator) is designed to address this, but it remains to be validated through pilot implementation. Credibility comes from demonstrated results and that is precisely what the phased roadmap is designed to deliver.
Wanjiku Chebet Kanjumba
University of Florida
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: An Integrated Network for Commercial Spaceports: A Unified Vision for Global Space Access, New Space, August 2026, SAGE Publications,
DOI: 10.1177/21680256261476888.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page







