UK-based rocket builder Orbex has revealed that it is counting on a positive outcome from its European Launch Challenge bid to fund the development of its medium-lift rocket, Proxima, citing a “challenging investment climate.”
The European Space Agency initiated the European Launcher Challenge in November 2023 to support the development of sovereign launch capabilities and, ultimately, a successor to the Ariane 6. While the exact format of the challenge has not yet been confirmed, initial reports have indicated that it will include multiple awards of €150 million each.
Orbex CEO Phil Chambers attended an “extraordinary meeting” of the Sutherland Spaceport Community Liaison Group on 20 January 2025 to discuss the company’s abrupt decision to pause work on its own spaceport and move the initial operation of its Prime rocket to SaxaVord. In its 4 December announcement, the company explained that the decision would allow it to “direct more funding to the development of a new, medium-sized launch vehicle called Proxima.” While this was the company’s position in December, by January, Phil Chambers had adjusted that stance.
During the meeting, community representatives questioned how the decision to abandon Sutherland was made in December, just two months after the company had given a “positive assessment” of the project in October. In his answer, Phil Chambers stated that “the decision was purely commercial when the financial position of the company necessitated Orbex to focus available funding on Prime.” Notably, his answers included no qualifiers on how much of that available funding would have been allocated to the Prime programme, raising questions about where Proxima fits into the equation. Fortunately, this was answered in the very next question.
When asked how the company could justify dedicating resources to a larger, second launcher while walking away from its commitments to Sutherland, Chambers explained that the development of Proxima was “targeted” at the ESA European Launcher Challenge. He cited the potential €150 million award as a key factor and added that, if successful, the bid would “positively affect the business moving forward.”
If Orbex does not secure a European Launch Challenge award, it stands to reason that the development of Proxima would be significantly impacted, if not abandoned altogether.
The Texas Two-Step on Timelines
The minutes from the meeting not only highlighted the precarious state of the company’s Proxima project but also painted the decision to abandon Sutherland as one made hastily, with little warning to those affected.
In October, Orbex met with the Sutherland Spaceport Community Liaison Group and gave a positive assessment of the progress of the spaceport’s development. Just a month later, in late November, the contractor Dynamic Concepts, working on behalf of Orbex, published invitations for tenders, believing the company was preparing to proceed with phases three and four of construction. Less than a week later, Orbex announced it was halting all work on the site.
When asked whether Orbex had misled the liaison group during the October progress update, Phil Chambers denied it, stating that “the decision had not been taken at the time.” Yet the abruptness of the move raises questions. If discussions about halting the project were not already underway by October, they certainly must have been by late November. Informing stakeholders of these discussions, even as a potential risk, might have been the responsible course of action. Instead, they were only notified after the final decision was made on 2 December 2024, just two days before the public announcement. Chambers also claimed that the company’s “financial position was made clear to stakeholders.” However, the reaction to the decision suggests that this message didn’t get through.
When questioned about the invitations to tender being published just days before the project’s cancellation, Chambers said the contractor had acted “in good faith.” He went on to explain that “the majority of employees within Orbex were not privy to any discussions around pausing the construction of the spaceport.” In other words, Orbex management withheld its plans from both key stakeholders and the very employees working on the project.
