## 6 Conduct
Falcon 9 has had 454 launches since 2010 up to now [110; 111; 112]. This translates into the following cadences: 4.59 and 2.25 versus 30.27 launches per year, respectively. Moreover, the cadence of Falcon 9 is continuously growing, and in 2024, it achieved 134 launches [112]. Mission customization is high in Traditional Space, which excels in creating highly bespoke solutions. New Space scores low as it aims for standardized architectures. It focuses on repeatable platforms that can rapidly adapt to varied commercial and research needs without expensive custom builds, enabling mass-manufactured, standardized systems and greater economies of scale. Speed to market, reflecting the timeline from mission conception to launch, is scored low for Traditional Space due to extensive qualification cycles. Lengthy governmental reviews and mission-specific engineering result in slower delivery. In contrast, New Space moves swiftly, employing agile methodologies, rapid prototyping, and commercial production techniques to compress development timelines. Traditional Space acknowledges the role of small satellites but still prioritizes larger, single-payload missions. New Space leans heavily into small satellites with a strongly developed small-rocket segment, and it offers services like SpaceX Transporter and Bandwagon (rideshare missions where multiple, smaller payloads share a single launch) [113]. The seventh factor, reusability, has been absent in Traditional Space since the abandonment of the space shuttle program. However, it is a differentiating factor for New Space. This is scored medium to denote only partial reuse (booster landings) rather than total system reusability. In the case of Traditional Space satellite producers, they could be profiled across six factors, while New Space firms add an additional seventh factor (Figure 11). First, manufacturing costs hold a stark contrast, with Traditional Space rated high and New Space representing low cost. Traditional satellite development typically involves government-style procurement, mission-specific components, intensive testing, and longer production cycles. In contrast, New Space seeks to minimize costs through standardized platforms, commercial-off-the-shelf sourced components, and agile engineering and manufacturing. Regarding longevity, Traditional Space scores very high, while New Space scores very low. The established approach prioritizes satellites designed to remain operational for fifteen years or more, justified by large upfront investments, high launch costs, and strict reliability requirements. Conversely, New Space firms often sacrifice longevity. They rely on commercial off-the-shelf components rather than fully customized, space-grade hardware. The durability of such components in harsh orbital conditions is often lower than bespoke systems subjected to rigorous testing standards. Moreover, higher risk tolerance plays an important role: some companies accept that certain satellites may fail earlier, thus requiring more frequent replenishment, offsetting that risk. Furthermore, New Space focuses on LEO, where atmospheric drag accelerates orbital decay. Many also omit propulsion systems to reduce mass and cost, making orbit maintenance impossible. This lean approach allows rapid deployment, lower expenses, and swift upgrades, but ultimately shortens operational life. Traditional Space also excels at mission customization, emphasizing highly tailored satellite architectures. Traditional satellites are often purpose-built, reflecting unique government or scientific specifications. New Space highlights the contrasting philosophy, producing batches of similar satellites based on standardized platforms (buses) to decrease costs and accelerate delivery. The conventional approach to building satellites often involves protracted design phases, meticulous engineering checks, and multiple review gates, typically spanning several years from initial concept through hardware fabrication to fully operational status.