Don’t want to belittle the achievement but they launched it as in „had it launched by the commercial launch provider SpaceX“, not on a self-developed rocket as it sounds like on the first read.
replies(10):
Edit (rather than reply and make the comment chain long): It's fine that you read it that way. I figure that if the article were about a launch vehicle then it would have been the rocket's name in the title, and if the article were about the satellite then it would have the satellite's name (BOTSAT-1). If Botswana had developed both an orbital launch vehicle and their first satellite then I'd bet the headline would have been sensational.
It’s more a case of does it make economic or strategic sense to do so. For most countries it wouldn’t.
Sure, developing a single satellite isn't something that makes a lot of sense in a first order economic assessment. They are definitely not going to be able to sell the data they collect for the millions of dollars they spent on the program. And they definitely spent more on the satellite than they would have spent buying equivalent imagery from commercial providers for the next few years. There is almost no chance that they will have a satellite with competitive technical specs.
But nobody is comparing Botswana to NZ. This is their first satellite. Having a satellite program at the national university is a point of national pride. It will inspire their young people and encourage them to study STEM. It gives valuable practical experience to their people, some of whom might go on to start a space systems company and bring high tech business opportunities to their country. This is a step toward moving part of their economy from being based on natural resources (diamonds, the value of which are subject to the whims of a cartel that they don't control), to being based on knowledge.
It is not our only space venture. Our universities are churning out aerospace engineers. It annoys STEM academics that the space industries keeps "poaching" the best grad students.
To the best of my knowledge, the company is not a strategic priority for New Zealand, we do not absolutely need to launch our own satellites. It is purely a commercial venture. They had no choice but to make it a joint effort.
If it was not a joint effort they would have far fewer customers and a extremely limited supply chain.
Quite a while ago when I met an MP who seemed interested in space. I asked if anything could be done to keep/inceltivize future space ventures fully on-shore. They shrugged their shoulders and said no.
Just remember that the best place the EU came up with is in south America. Places like mainland Netherlands probably qualify for the worst places to launch orbital rockets from.
1. Good atmospheric conditions. 2. Low air traffic. 3. Low/flexible/favourable regulations. 4. Good locations for ground infrastructure (in part because of 1. and also because everywhere is by the sea). 5. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, tertiary education geared to support the industry.
Also, and I don't know for sure this is a factor, but we have a number of specialised industries such as building large things from carbon composite (yachts) and radio communications for example.
I think option 3. is a big one. The govt. attitude is usually "give it a go", rather than a default "no".