Designed for ESA–NASA interoperability · Civilian-led
A crisis is the wrong time to write the playbook.
CAELUM is an independent, civilian-led space governance framework designed to help space agencies prepare for and coordinate responses to major emergencies affecting Earth and human activity beyond it.
01 — CORE CONCEPT
The threat may be unpredictable. The response doesn’t have to start from scratch.
Major space emergencies can demand decisions faster than institutions can establish new cooperation arrangements.
Interstellar, Project Hail Mary, Salvation (CBS) — these stories explore what happens when humanity faces an extraordinary threat while institutions must urgently determine who has authority, who holds critical information, and who is responsible for what.
CAELUM explores how those questions could be answered before an emergency occurs.
The project combines research into space-related threats with the development of a proposed governance and operational framework. Its scope includes institutional responsibilities, activation procedures, information sharing, decision-making under uncertainty, accountability, and financial sustainability.
The underlying principle is straightforward:
When a defined emergency occurs, participating agencies should already know how they intend to respond together.
FROM THREAT TO RESPONSE
01 — Threat Assessment
Relevant technical authorities assess an emerging threat against the applicable CAELUM criteria.
02 — Protocol Activation
Once the relevant conditions are met, the corresponding contingency procedures are initiated.
03 — Agency Coordination
Designated liaisons coordinate through their existing institutions and communication structures.
04 — Operational Response
Agencies carry out previously agreed responsibilities, exchange relevant information, and coordinate their respective actions.
05 — Review and Improvement
The response is documented and assessed. Lessons can be incorporated into future revisions of the protocol.
Coordination without centralized command.
CAELUM does not remove the authority of participating agencies.
Each institution retains responsibility for its own personnel, resources, operations, and decisions. The protocol provides a common operational reference rather than transferring authority to a new organization.
Agencies would enter a crisis with established expectations concerning:
- Who coordinates with whom?
- Which institution is responsible for which task?
- What information needs to be exchanged?
- When does additional technical or military support become relevant?
- What happens when assessments disagree or circumstances change?
The objective is to reduce avoidable institutional improvisation when time matters most.
02 — SCENARIO CLASSES
Seven emergency categories. One shared framework.
CAELUM currently addresses seven categories of space-related emergencies affecting Earth, orbital infrastructure, and human activity beyond Earth.
These categories establish the framework’s initial scope. Each is intended to be supported by its own contingency procedures, responsibilities, and technical activation criteria.
The scenarios define what CAELUM prepares for. The protocol establishes how participating institutions would respond.
SEVERE SOLAR STORM / CME
A major solar event threatens terrestrial infrastructure, orbital systems, or human activity in space.
The scenario addresses the potential consequences of severe space weather for satellites, communications, power systems, and crewed space operations.
ORBITAL DEBRIS CASCADE
A collision or fragmentation event creates a risk of further destructive collisions in orbit.
The scenario addresses the potential escalation of orbital debris and its consequences for spacecraft, infrastructure, and continued access to affected orbital regions.
Explore the interactive collision simulation below.NEO IMPACT: LONG WARNING
A near-Earth asteroid or comet presents a potential impact threat with substantial warning time.
The scenario addresses the coordination of threat assessment, mitigation planning, and longer-term preparedness.
NEO IMPACT: SHORT WARNING
A near-Earth asteroid or comet presents a potential impact threat with limited warning time.
The scenario addresses the coordination challenges created by compressed decision-making and restricted response options.
LUNAR BASE EMERGENCY
A serious emergency affects a crewed human presence on the Moon.
The scenario addresses the coordination of support, resources, and contingency procedures during emergencies involving lunar operations.
MARS MISSION ABORT
A crewed Mars mission encounters circumstances requiring emergency mission planning or an alternative course of action.
The scenario addresses the challenges of distance, communication delays, limited external assistance, and coordination between mission partners.
CISLUNAR TRAFFIC CONFLICT
Spacecraft, infrastructure, debris, or operations in cislunar space create a significant operational hazard.
The scenario addresses coordination between relevant operators and agencies where activities or trajectories may create dangerous conflicts.
PLANETARY CONTAMINATION
Planetary contamination has been considered as a potential additional scenario but is not part of CAELUM’s current seven-category framework.
Additional categories may be incorporated through future protocol revisions.
INTERACTIVE SCENARIO 02
Kessler Syndrome
One collision can trigger a chain reaction.
A damaged satellite may release fragments that threaten other spacecraft. Further collisions can produce additional debris, increasing the danger to the wider orbital environment.
Explore how an initial impact can develop into a cascading collision sequence.
CONSTELLATION STATUS
COLLISION SEQUENCE
All satellites are intact. Start the simulation to introduce the initial impact.
- Awaiting initial impact
Educational visualization, not a predictive orbital model. Debris sizes are exaggerated; time and distance are compressed.
THE DEVIATION PRINCIPLE
Follow by default. Deviate when justified. Own the deviation.
CAELUM is designed to establish shared expectations without removing institutional independence.
Participating agencies would normally follow their previously agreed procedures. Where circumstances justify a different response, they retain the authority to act independently.
Significant deviations and their reasoning should be documented to support accountability, institutional learning, and future improvements to the protocol.
The purpose is not to eliminate independent decisions. It is to ensure that those decisions are made with an established contingency framework already available.
03 — CAELUM SPACE GAMES
Test the response before the emergency.
CAELUM proposes annual crisis simulations known as CAELUM Space Games.
Inspired by the principles of wargaming, these exercises apply simulated emergencies to civilian space operations and institutional cooperation rather than military conflict.
Participating agencies would work through realistic scenarios, make decisions under pressure, exchange information, and respond to unexpected developments while following the CAELUM Protocol.
WHAT DO SPACE GAMES TEST?
- Coordination: Can agencies communicate and fulfil their assigned responsibilities?
- Decision-making: How do institutions handle uncertainty, conflicting assessments, and changing circumstances?
- Information sharing: Can critical information reach the relevant institutions without compromising sensitive material?
- Adaptability: What happens when an agency cannot perform its assigned role or the original response proves insufficient?
ONE MAIN SPACE GAME PER YEAR
CAELUM proposes one principal Space Game annually, with additional exercises where necessary.
The results would be reviewed and used to improve the actual protocol.
The objective is to identify weaknesses in the response before those weaknesses have real-world consequences.
04 — PROPOSED PARTICIPATION
Existing agencies. Shared procedures. Independent authority.
CAELUM is designed for potential adoption by existing space agencies rather than the creation of a separate international organization.
Its proposed institutional structure places ESA as the initial host, with interoperability between ESA, NASA, and other prospective partner agencies as a central design objective.
Coordination would take place through designated agency liaisons.
Each agency would retain its own operational authority, personnel, infrastructure, and decision-making responsibilities.
Under the proposed model, ESA would coordinate, not command. NASA and other participating agencies would remain responsible for their own operations.
PROPOSED INITIAL SIGNATORIES
| Agency | Proposed role | Illustrative annual contribution |
|---|---|---|
| ESA | Initial institutional host and coordination base | €1.25M |
| NASA | Principal interoperability partner | €1.45M |
| JAXA | Prospective participating agency | €750K |
| CSA | Prospective participating agency | €550K |
| UKSA | Prospective participating agency | €550K |
| ASA | Prospective participating agency | €450K |
All agency roles and financial contributions are proposals within the independent CAELUM concept. No participation, institutional endorsement, or funding commitment is implied.
LAYER 1 — PARTICIPATION ARRANGEMENT
The proposed instrument through which an agency would formally recognize CAELUM, accept its participation commitments, and designate an institutional liaison.
Participation would not create a supranational authority or transfer an agency’s operational powers to CAELUM.
LAYER 2 — THE CAELUM PROTOCOL
The evolving operational manual containing the defined emergency scenarios, activation conditions, institutional responsibilities, information-sharing procedures, and coordination mechanisms.
This distinction would allow technical procedures to evolve while maintaining a stable participation structure.
EVIDENCE-BASED REVISION
Scientific and technical evidence informs protocol development and revision.
Substantive changes to the proposed protocol would require approval by two-thirds of participating signatories, without an individual veto.
The results of Space Games and actual activations would provide additional evidence for improving the framework.
05 — WHAT IT COSTS
Funding preparedness, not response missions.
CAELUM is designed to operate through existing institutional infrastructure.
It would not own spacecraft, construct an independent headquarters, maintain a large external workforce, or independently finance space-response missions.
Its proposed budget focuses on maintaining the contingency framework and the coordination systems required to use it.
WHAT THE BUDGET SUPPORTS
The proposed operating budget covers:
- Secure communications and data infrastructure
- Protocol maintenance and technical review
- Annual CAELUM Space Games
- Liaison coordination, meetings, and travel
- Legal and administrative work
- Translation and documentation
- Contingency expenses and public communication
The proposed annual funding model includes a common base contribution of €250,000 per initial signatory, with the remaining budget distributed according to institutional capacity.
CAELUM would finance preparedness and coordination. Actual operational response missions would remain the financial responsibility of the participating agencies or governments.
All figures are preliminary estimates developed for the independent framework proposal.
06 — WHAT CAELUM IS NOT
Designed to coordinate, not command.
CAELUM is not intended to become:
- A new international space agency
- A supranational authority
- A replacement for ESA, NASA, or national space agencies
- A military alliance or military-led institution
- A global government or UN-style organization
- An independent operational command structure
The framework is designed around civilian institutional leadership, with military participation limited to a maximum of 49% under the proposed governance model.
CAELUM is a contingency protocol intended for use by institutions that already exist.