Why Europe observation is now Europe’s biggest satellite market [OPINION]

Some say that the war in Ukraine is reaching its ‘endgame’; others, that Russia believes it can finally crush Ukraine this winter. Certainly, the recent changes in the Ukrainian forces’ access to Starlink, SpaceX’s internet network, has led many to wonder if something significant has changed. But we’ve heard speculation of this kind many times before since the start of the conflict, and it would be unwise to try to predict the future. What we can say with more certainty is that it put defence, and particularly, European defence, in the spotlight. And this has changed the market for satellites.

In ways that were unthinkable a relatively short time ago, today’s governments want to know with increasing accuracy what is happening along their borders, at sea and in other places where military activity could threaten their security. More and more, they are turning to Earth observation satellites to provide a key layer situational intelligence. And the effect on the European space industry has been considerable. According to Eurospace, sales of Earth observation systems exceeded those of telecommunications systems by 24 per cent in 2025. Telecommunications had long been the industry’s leading satellite manufacturing market; now Earth observation has overtaken it, largely because of growing military demand.

The change is particularly evident in Spain, France, Germany, Poland and Finland, which Eurospace identifies as Europe’s strongest markets for Earth observation systems. All five countries have good reasons to improve their ability to observe events beyond their borders. Satellites allow them to examine large areas without sending aircraft or people into potentially dangerous places. They can monitor ports, follow ships, identify changes at military installations, and keep watch over important infrastructure. The same satellite can return to an area repeatedly, allowing analysts to compare what they see today with what they saw yesterday, last week or last month.

The war in Ukraine has helped governments appreciate just how valuable this can be. Satellite images have provided information about troop movements, damaged infrastructure and the condition of transport routes. They have also demonstrated the importance of being able to observe the same location regularly. A single image might reveal vehicles gathered beside a road. A later image might show that they have moved, or that more have arrived. Such information does not remove the need for drones, aircraft or intelligence gathered on the ground. It does, however, give commanders a better understanding of events over a much wider area.

This growing military interest has important consequences for satellite manufacturers. Defence customers want systems capable of producing useful information often enough, and quickly enough, to support decisions on the ground. This places considerable importance on the satellite’s imaging equipment. The spacecraft itself supplies the power, communications and control systems, but it is the optical payload itself that determines the detail and extent of what can be photographed. A camera intended to examine individual buildings, for example, must meet different requirements from one designed to survey hundreds of square kilometres.

There are also choices to be made about the kind of information a camera should collect. Conventional optical imagery allows analysts to recognise familiar objects such as roads, vehicles, buildings and ships. Multispectral and hyperspectral instruments, meanwhile, can reveal differences in materials and surfaces that may not be visible in an ordinary photograph. None of these systems can do absolutely everything. Optical cameras must contend with cloud cover and, depending on their design, limited light. Radar satellites can help overcome some of these restrictions. Defence customers therefore have good reasons to use several kinds of imaging system together, rather than depend entirely on one.

Image quality is only part of the problem, however. Consider a satellite that photographs a ship approaching a sensitive area. The picture may contain precisely the information an analyst needs, but its value will diminish if it takes several hours to reach the people responsible for responding. Processing some of the information aboard the satellite can help by reducing the volume of data that needs to be transmitted. A constellation of satellites can also revisit the same places more often, giving customers a more regular, richer picture of developments on the ground. This helps explain the rising interest in smaller spacecraft and optical payloads. Traditionally, many of these payloads have been designed for a particular mission, with components and engineering work tailored to the customer’s requirements. Where customers need dozens of similar cameras, manufacturers have a stronger incentive to use established designs and common components. Repeated production can lower costs and make delivery times more predictable.

Greater military demand would give European manufacturers a larger home market and more reason to invest in production. It could also reduce Europe’s reliance on foreign suppliers for equipment vital to its security. And the benefits would extend beyond defence. The same cameras could help farmers monitor crops and governments assess flood or fire damage. In short, Europe has an opportunity not just to buy more satellites, but to strengthen its ability to see the world for itself – if you like, through its own eyes.