msm nov 2013 cover satcom for net-centric warfare … · 2013-11-28 · msm nov 2013 cover...

MSM NOV 2013 cover

MilsatMagazineSATCOM For Net-Centric Warfare November 2013

MILITARY LAUNCH SEGMENTandCOMMAND VIEWS

Of Satellites + Launches: The Inmarsat-5 F1

COMMAND CENTER • Michael C. Gass, United Launch Alliance • Ken Peterman, ViaSat • Michael C. Payne, Vislink

—Resiliency + Disaggregated Space Architectures: Part Two

—Lt. Gen. Pawlikowski on Space Acquisition Issues—The HPA Corner

DISPATCHES

Artistic rendition of the Inmarsat-5 F1

satellite in orbit. Image courtesy of Boeing.

http://www.avltech.com/

http://www.northropgrumman.com/protectedsatcom

MilsatMagazineSilvano Payne, Publisher + WriterHartley G. Lesser, Editorial DirectorPattie Waldt, Executive EditorJill Durfee, Sales Director, Editorial AssistantSimon Payne, Development DirectorDonald McGee, Production ManagerDan Makinster, Technical Advisor

Publishing Operations Senior Contributors

Mike Antonovich, ATEME Bert Sadtler, Boxwood Executive SearchRichard DutchikTony Bardo, HughesChris Forrester, Broadgate PublicationsKarl Fuchs, iDirect Government ServicesBob Gough, Carrick CommunicationsJos Heyman, TIROS Space InformationDavid Leichner, Gilat Satellite NetworksGiles Peeters, Track24 DefenceThis Issue’s Authors

Nancy-Jones BonbrestT’Jae GibsonClaire HeiningerKristen KushiyamaStaff Sergeant Kulani Lakanaria

Hartley LesserAaron LewisAmaani LyleKaren ParrishJulianne SympsonPattie Waldt

MilsatMagazine—November 2013

November 2013

3

http://www.gl.com/

Dispatches


U.S. Army—Blending EW + Cyber Warfare On The Battlefield, 6

Astrium + UK MOD—Terminals For Secure Comms, 8

Air Force Association—Cybersecurity Competition, 8

U.S. Army—Continuing The Drive For Innovation, 10

Harris—Falcon III Flies To The Middle East, 10

Northrop Grumman + U.S. Navy—First Flight Faultless, 12

U.S. Army—Evaluating The TCN System, 12

Exelis—Providing Sim Data For GPS III, 13

Service Chiefs Testify On Sequestration Risks, 14

ANG + JCSE—Adapting To Fluctuating Requirements, 15

DARPA + SSL—Servicing PODs In Space, 16

Green Hills Software + ViaSat—Security Solutions, 16

Rohde & Schwarz—Global Missions Interoperability, 16

Gilat Satcom + AST—Managing Government Work, 17

U.S. Army Research Lab + NASA—Image Retrieval, 18

General Dynamics C4 Systems + USCG—Rescue 21, 18

Télécoms Sans Frontière—Offering Comms Aid To The Philippines, 19

MilsatMagazine November 2013

Advertiser Index

Features

Of Launches + SatellitesThe Inmarsat-5 L1 Has A Hot Date In December, 20

Command CenterMichael C. Gass, President + CEO, United Launch Alliance, 24

Resiliency + Disaggregated Space Architectures—Part TwoAir Force Space Command, 28

Command CenterKen Peterman, Vice President, Government Services, ViaSat, 32

The HPA Corner: The International Aspects…By Aaron Lewis, Arianespace, 36

Command CenterMichael C. Payne, CEO, Vislink Inc., 38

Space Acquisition Issues In 2013By Lieutenant General Ellen M. Pawlikowski, USAF, 40

Advantech Wireless, 11

Astrium Services, 5

AvL Technologies, cover

Comtech EF Data, 15

Comtech Xicom Technology, 7

CPI Satcom Products, 17

GL Communications, 3

Harris Corporation, 9

Informa—VSAT Mobility 2013, 35

Newtec CY, 13

SatNews Publishers Digital Products, 45

Teledyne Paradise Datacom, 19

W.B. Walton Enterprises, 31

http://www.astriumservices.com/


Dispatches

As new technologies emerge and new cyber and electronic warfare threats plague Soldiers in the field, U.S. Army scientists and engineers continue to define next-generation protocols and system architectures to help develop technology capabilities to combat these threats in an integrated and expedited fashion.

As part of the Integrated Cyber and Electronic Warfare, or ICE, program, the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command’s Communications-Electronics Center, known as CERDEC, researches the technologies, standards and architectures to support the use of common mechanisms used for the rapid development and integration of third-party cyber and electronic warfare, or EW, capabilities.

“Currently, within cyber and EW disciplines there are different supporting force structures and users equipped with disparate tools, capabilities and frameworks,” said Paul Robb Jr., chief of CERDEC Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate’s Cyber Technology Branch.

“Under the ICE program, we look to define common data contexts and software control mechanisms to allow these existing frameworks to communicate in a manner that would support the concurrent leveraging of available tactical capabilities based on which asset on the battlefield provides the best projected military outcome at a particular point in time,” said Robb.

The boundaries between traditional cyber threats, such as someone hacking a laptop through the Internet, and traditional EW threats, such as radio-controlled improvised explosive devices that use the electromagnetic

spectrum, have blurred, allowing EW systems to access the data stream to combat EW threats, according to Giorgio Bertoli, senior engineer of CERDEC I2WD’s Cyber/Offensive Operations Division. Additionally, significant technological advancements including a trend towards wireless in commercial applications and military systems have occurred over the last decade, said Bertoli.

“This blending of networks and systems, known as convergence, will continue and with it come significant implications as to how the Army must fight in the cyber environment of today and tomorrow,” said Bertoli.

“The concept of technology convergence originated as a means to describe the amalgamation of traditional wired versus wireless commercial services and applications, but has recently evolved to also include global technology trends and U.S. Army operational connotations—specifically in the context of converging cyber and EW operations,” said Bertoli.

The Army finds itself in a unique position to help mitigate adverse outcomes due to this convergence trend.

“Post-force deployment, the Army has the vast majority of sensors and EW assets on the tactical battlefield compared to any other service or organization, posing both risks and opportunities. Our military’s reliance on COTS [commercial-of-the-shelf] systems and wireless communications presents a venue for our adversaries to attack. Conversely, the proximity and high density of receivers and transmitters that we deploy can be leveraged to enable both EW and cyber operations,” said Bertoli.

“The ability to leverage both cyber and EW capabilities as an integrated system, acting as a force multiplier increasing the commander’s situational awareness of the cyber electromagnetic environment, will improve the commander’s ability to achieve desired operational effects,” said Robb.

A paradigm shift in how the Army views system and technology development will further enhance CERDEC’s ability to rapidly adapt to new cyber and EW threats.

“The biggest hindrance we have right now is not a technological one, it’s an operational and policy one,” said Bertoli. “The Army traditionally likes to build systems for a specific purpose —build a radio to be a radio, build an EW system to be an EW system,—but these hardware systems today have significantly more inherent capabilities.”

To demonstrate the concepts of multi-capability systems, CERDEC chose not to solely focus its science and technology efforts on researching solutions to address specific cyber and EW threats, but also to develop the architecture onto which scientists and engineers can rapidly develop and integrate new, more capable solutions.

“As an example, the World Wide Web has grown into an architecture that is so powerful your tech savvy 10-year-old can build a website—and a pretty powerful one at that,” said Bertoli. “The only reason this is possible is because there is a wealth of common tools, like web browsers and servers, and standards such as HTML or HTTP already in place for them to use.”

“The ICE program is attempting to extend this model to the cyber and EW community by providing mechanisms to enable the leveraging of available tactical assets to support cyberspace operation mission sets. Early focus revolves around the development of augmented situation-awareness capabilities but will evolve to include the enabling of a multitude of cyberspace operations,” said Bertoli.

ICE will provide the Army with common tools and standards for developing and integrating cyber and EW capabilities.

“Capabilities can be developed to combat EM (electromagnetic) and cyber threats individually, but this is neither time nor cost effective and simply will not scale in the long term. The domain is just too large and will only continue to expand,” said Bertoli.

“In the end, we (CERDEC) believe this is the only way the Army will be able to keep pace with the anticipated technology advancements and rate of change related to cyberspace and the systems that comprise it,” said Bertoli.

The Army acquisition community has also seen changes in the relationship between cyber and EW.

“Tactical EW systems and sensors provide for significant points of presence on the battlefield, and can

be used for cyber situational awareness and as delivery platforms for precision cyber effects to provide a means of Electronic Counter Measures and Electronic Counter-Counter Measures, for instance,” said Col. Joseph Dupont, program manager for EW under Program Executive Office Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors.

“There is no doubt in my mind that we must provide for a more integrated approach to cyber warfare, electronic warfare and electromagnetic operations to be successful in the future conduct of unified land operations,” said Dupont.

CERDEC, as the Army’s research and development experts in cyber and EW, works closely with the Program Executive Offices, the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command and Army Cyber Command to shape operational concepts and doctrine by providing technical expertise regarding technically achievable solutions in the context of the tactical cyberspace operations and supporting materiel capabilities for the Army.

In addition to working with the Army’s strategy and policy makers, CERDEC I2WD has tapped into its facilities and pre-existing expertise to further the ICE program.

CERDEC I2WD maintains state-of-the-art laboratories that support both closed and open-air testing facilities to provide relevant environment conditions to conduct research that provides a seamless cyber-electromagnetic environment with both wired and wireless modern communication infrastructure.

“We leverage these facilities and our inherent core competencies in cyber, EW and signals intelligence to engage with the Army and the community at large, both academia and industry partners, to collaborate on developing and integrating relevant technologies to achieve domain superiority in a changing environment,” said Robb.

The fully-instrumented labs include commercial information assurance products and allow for in-depth experimentation while sustaining automated rapid network re-configuration technology and virtualization technologies to support scalable testing. Additionally, I2WD expands its potential environment by maintaining remote connections with external government sites, which also enables collaborative experiments.

The combination of these assets and expertise allows CERDEC to demonstrate achievable capability improvements related to cyber and EW convergence.

“During the next three years, the biggest thing we can do within the ICE effort is show the ‘art of the possible’ by providing technology demonstrations on both existing and experimental Army systems to provide concrete proof of the advantages such a capability can provide,” said Bertoli.

Story by Kristen Kushiyama, RDECOM CERDEC

The U.S. Army RDECOM CERDEC Integrated Cyber and Electronic Warfare, or ICE, program looks to leverage both cyber and Electronic Warfare

capabilities as an integrated system to increase the commander’s situational awareness. CERDEC is focusing its science and technology efforts on

researching solutions to address specific cyber and Electronic Warfare threats and developing the architecture onto which scientists and engineers can

rapidly develop and integrate new and more capable solutions.Image is courtesy of U.S. Army CERDEC.

U.S. Army—Blending EW + Cyber Warfare On The Battlefield

http://www.xicomtech.com/GettingGreener.aspx


Dispatches

Astrium is now delivering to the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) enhanced overseas tactical, land and maritime communications capability which directly links to Astrium Services’ new IP core based modular infrastructure.

This capability allows UK Armed Forces to securely connect their users to one core defense infrastructure.

That single core will support all voice and data traffic with encryption from tactical, land and maritime operations across the globe—rather than having to recreate a network of services.

Astrium Services is delivering the first two DMM (Deployable Maritime Milsat) SCOTPatrol terminals, which feature reduced top-weight and a compact footprint both above and below deck for easier integration on small vessels.

These terminals will enable IP based communication onboard smaller Royal Navy ships, including Mine Counter Measure Vessels on operations in the Arabian Gulf. The SCOTPatrol next generation naval satellite communications terminal, along with all of the baseband equipment, allow the vessels to fully integrate into the network via Skynet 5’s resilient and hardened X-band satcoms. Further terminals are on order and are being delivered during the next year.

To meet the UK Armed Forces land and tactical requirements, Astrium Services is delivering 25 Mantis terminals and lightweight “Snapper” baseband equipment to the UK MOD as part of a managed service package.

A small IP node service—which has enabled a switch over to IP baseband—covers X-band on Skynet 5, a Mantis terminal and “Snapper” baseband for an advanced lightweight and resilient communications capability for remote users overseas.

To meet the requirements of large deployed land forces or air bases with multiple users, fixed and transportable IP Domain nodes are available. The first two overseas bases to be equipped are on order for delivery early next year.

Services offered as part of the Skynet 5 contract also cover training, spares/maintenance support, assurance monitoring and reporting, as well as 24/7 customer services and more.

Through the Skynet program, Astrium Services operates the Skynet military satellite constellation and the ground network to provide all Beyond Line of Sight communications to the UK MOD.

The program, covering a 22-year period, has also enabled Astrium Services to provide Skynet-based communication services to other government institutions including the UK Cabinet Office and armed forces from other nations such as The Netherlands and Portugal, and also to NATO.

Astrium + UK MOD—Terminals For Secure Comms

The Air Force Association has announced that CyberPatriot, the National Youth Cyber Defense Competition, has drawn 1,566 teams for its sixth season of competition, representing a nearly 30 percent growth from last year.

This year, teams represent all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Canada, and U.S. Department of Defense Dependent Schools in Germany, Italy, The

Republic of Korea, and Japan. New to the competition this year is a middle school division featuring 69 middle school teams from 23 states. This new pilot track is being offered in response to an increase in interest among younger students in the cybersecurity and STEM fields.

Teams are now gearing up for the first online round of competition, which will be held November 15-17. This round uses the CyberPatriot Competition

System developed by the Center for Infrastructure Assurance and Security (CIAS) at the University of Texas at San Antonio, to allow hundreds of teams to compete at the same time. During the round, teams compete online to identify and solve vulnerabilities in simulated computer networks.

Combined scores from this round and a second online round in December will determine which teams advance to the Semifinals where they will have a chance to win all-expenses-paid trips to the National Finals Competition in Washington, D.C. in March 2014.

For teams not advancing to the CyberPatriot National Finals Competition, a state and regional recognition round will be held to determine top teams in each area that were not national finalists. The Regional Recognition Round will be powered by Leidos’ CyberNEXS.

“CyberPatriot is the nation’s largest and fastest growing youth cybersecurity challenge,” said Bernie Skoch, CyberPatriot Commissioner. “Its unique structure allows us to provide a hands-on learning environment that engages students in the curriculum and excites them through the element of competition. We are particularly excited this year to bring personal and professional growth for middle school participants by teaching them technical skills as well as the value of teamwork, leadership, and critical-thinking, right alongside high school students.”

CyberPatriot is presented by the Northrop Grumman Foundation, with founding partners SAIC and the CIAS at the University of Texas at San Antonio. Other sponsors include Cyber Diamond Sponsors AT&T Federal, Cisco, Microsoft, Raytheon, USA Today, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the Secretary of Defense; Cyber Gold Sponsors URS, Splunk, and Symantec; and Cyber Silver Sponsors Air Force Research Laboratory, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Leidos, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, and University of Maryland University College.

The Air Force Association is a non-profit, independent, professional military and aerospace education association. Our mission is to promote a dominant United States Air Force and a strong national defense, and to honor Airmen and our Air Force Heritage.

AFA has 200 chapters nationally and internationally representing more than 107,000 members.

More information on this competition is available at:

http://www.uscyberpatriot.org/Pages/default.aspx

Air Force Association—Cybersecurity Competition



http://www.oscomet.com/'


Dispatches

After putting the tactical communications network “under pressure” in a realistic operational environment in order to quickly deliver a “digital guardian angel” to troops in Afghanistan, Army leaders said the Network Integration Evaluation process is adapting to drive continued innovation.

The network remains a critical modernization priority in today’s uncertain budget and national security climate, senior leaders said this week, during the 2013 Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition.

With Capability Set 13, or CS 13, now supporting long-range, on-the-move communications for two brigade combat teams of the 10th Mountain Division during their advise-and-assist operations, the Army is focused on improving future

capability sets by promoting competition among vendors and simplifying the network for the user.

“As the Army gets smaller, the network is an enabler to that smaller force—it makes it more lethal, it gives it a greater reach,” said Col. Mark Elliott, director of the Army’s G-3/5/7 LandWarNet-Mission Command Directorate. “You do get more bang for your buck for what the network brings to the Warfighter—we just have to continue to do it better.”

Leveraging lessons-learned from the 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry) and the semi-annual Network Integration Evaluations, known as NIEs, the Army is working to enhance training and make systems more user-friendly as additional brigade combat teams are fielded with advanced network capabilities.

Aside from the operational benefits, simplifying the network will lead to cost savings by combining hardware and other infrastructure, reducing software development efforts and decreasing the number of field service representatives required to train Soldiers and troubleshoot systems.

“This network allows the commander to stay in the situation, to stay connected, at all times—that’s what the power of the network is,” said Brig. Gen. Dan Hughes, program executive officer for Command, Control and Communications-Tactical, or PEO C3T. “But we have to make these systems much easier to use, train and maintain.”

As the Army transitions from fighting two wars to preparing for future threats, the NIE will provide the operational “laboratory” to incrementally enhance the network, respond to the emerging needs of regionally aligned forces and assess dynamic “leap-ahead” technologies, leaders said.

While the events are adapting due to budget constraints—including greater use of modeling and simulation—the Army remains committed to the forum and the construct.

“Continued evaluation of new capabilities for the future is essential—how can we afford not to do it?” said Lt. Gen. Keith Walker, director of the Army Capabilities Integration Center. “The NIE gives us a practical, hands-on environment to develop programs in real time with Soldier feedback.”

Over the course of the five NIEs conducted to date, such user feedback not only shaped the technology and doctrine for CS 13, but also influenced the Army’s acquisition strategy on several key programs, including tactical radios, said Heidi Shyu, assistant secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology.

“The NIE has informed us that we have more vendors out there that can come into competitive environments

and produce the innovation we need,” Hughes said.

While the Army has procured commercial routers, antennas, switches and other items as part of the NIE, the service is also implementing changes to improve the process for industry partners.

Capability gaps will be identified farther in advance and “locked” in place to be evaluated over two NIE cycles, increasing industry’s lead time in developing mature capability solutions.

Having fewer, more defined gaps will also allow the Army to better align NIE results with budget planning to inform procurement and fielding decisions for future capability sets, Elliott said.

NIE 14.1, the sixth event in the series, begins next week and continues through November. By mixing live and simulated operations, NIE 14.1 will reduce cost and demonstrate innovative training techniques and capabilities.

Next spring, NIE 14.2 will be the first such event to include joint and multi-national participation. NIE 15.1, in fall 2014, will be used to assess the integrated network baseline to evaluate the performance of existing network capabilities and identify remaining gaps for industry to target.

“[The NIE] is not a one-year, two-year or three-year journey,” said Lt. Gen. James Barclay III, deputy chief of staff, Army G-8. “This is a long-term journey to help us decide where we want to go, what we need to buy, or what we need to improve.”

(Nancy Jones-Bonbrest contributed to this article.)

Story by Claire Heininger, U.S. Army

U.S. Army—Continuing The Drive For Innovation

Staff Sgt. Shelby Johnson, a squad leader with the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), observes the area around Forward Operating Base Torkham, Afghanistan, while wearing the new

Capability Set 13 communications suite.Photo courtesy of U.S. Army.

Harris Corporation has received an $11 million order from a Middle Eastern nation to provide a comprehensive coastal intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance communications network.

Harris will provide Falcon III® RF-7800M Multiband Networking Radios, accessories and its battle management application in Coast Guard vehicles and strategic installations on land, at sea and in the air.

The integrated solution will allow users to send and receive situational awareness and intelligence information across a secure mobile network, connecting squads and their commanders for real-time decision-making. If a threat is detected, local commanders will be able to coordinate air, ground and naval asset responses.

“This unique solution demonstrates Harris’ ability to deliver integrated tactical area communication systems that connect users wherever they are,” said Brendan O’Connell, president, International Business, Harris RF Communications. “Users will be able to communicate over longer distances and reach command centers from remote areas that lack telecommunications infrastructure.”

The RF-7800M is part of the Falcon III® family of wideband radios. Harris has shipped more than 45,000 of the radios to the U.S. Department

of Defense as well as allied forces in more than 15 nations.

Harris RF Communications is the leading global supplier of secure radio communications and embedded high-grade encryption solutions for military, government and commercial organizations.

Falcon III® is the next generation of radios supporting the U.S. military’s Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) requirements, as well as network-centric operations worldwide.

Harris RF Communications is also a leading supplier of assured communications® systems and equipment for public safety, utility and transportation markets—with products ranging from the most advanced IP voice and data networks to portable and mobile single and multiband radios.

Harris—Falcon III Flies To The Middle East

http://www.advantechwireless.com/gov


Dispatches

Northrop Grumman Corporation and the U.S. Navy have successfully completed the first flight of the next-generation MQ-8C Fire Scout unmanned helicopter at Naval Base Ventura County, Point Mugu, California.

The MQ-8C Fire Scout took off and flew for seven minutes in restricted airspace to validate the autonomous control systems. A second flight was also flown in a pattern around the airfield, reaching 500 feet altitude.

The aircraft was operated by a ground-based Navy/Northrop Grumman flight test team also located at Naval Base Ventura County.

“First flight is a critical step in maturing the MQ-8C Fire Scout endurance upgrade before using the system operationally next year,” said Capt. Patrick Smith, Fire Scout program manager, Naval Air Systems Command. “The systems we’ve developed to allow Fire Scout to operate from an air-capable ship have already amassed more than 10,000 flight hours with the MQ-8B variant. This system’s evolution enhances how unmanned air systems will support maritime commanders.”

The MQ-8C Fire Scout is designed to fly twice as long and has three times the payload capacity of the current MQ-8B variant.

Based on a larger commercial airframe with additional fuel tanks and an upgraded engine, the MQ-8C will be able to fly up to 12 hours or carry up to 2,600 pounds.

“Operating the MQ-8B Fire Scout from Navy ships has proved extremely successful. During at-sea deployments, operators saw the need for a system that carried the same intelligence-gathering capabilities of the MQ-8B, but fly longer and carry additional payloads,” said George Vardoulakis, Northrop Grumman’s vice president

for medium range tactical systems. “Changing out the airframe, installing control systems and avionics, and then conducting a first flight of the system in a year is truly remarkable. I couldn’t be more proud of the team.”

Currently, the MQ-8B Fire Scout is on its seventh at-sea deployment supporting antipiracy missions on board Navy frigates. The system has also been used extensively in Afghanistan since early 2011 to provide airborne surveillance to ground commanders.

Using on-board sensors to capture full-motion video, Fire Scout can identify targets and then distribute the information in real time to various users. This capability allows ship-based commanders to maintain awareness of a specified area or keep an eye on a target of interest for long periods of time.

Production of the MQ-8C Fire Scout is being completed at the Northrop Grumman Unmanned Systems Center in Moss Point, Mississippi.

The MQ-8C Fire Scout industry team includes Bell Helicopter, Rolls-Royce, Summit Aviation, Cubic Corporation, General Electric Aviation, Sierra Nevada Corporation and Honeywell.

Northrop Grumman + U.S. Navy—First Flight Faultless

The MQ-8C Fire Scout is a fully autonomous, four-blade, single-engine unmanned helicopter.

Image courtesy of Northrop Grumman.

Soldiers of Bravo Company, 2nd Special Troops Battalion, 1st Armored Division, are evaluating a plethora of new equipment for the Brigade Modernization Command during the Network Integration Evaluation 14.1.

The equipment being evaluated is an upgraded version of the tactical communications node or TCN.

“The tactical communications node is important because it gives our brigade commander on-the-move communication capabilities,” said Sgt. Lindsay Szopinski, a tactical communications team chief in Bravo Company, 2/1 STB. “The TCN also can provide stationary capabilities.”

The TCN system is designed to provide a satellite and terrestrial communication network. Additionally, the service allows soldiers to send and receive information in a tactical environment. The system also can provide a mobile, flexible, dynamic tactical network capable of support for a highly dispersed force over an isolated area.

“The system includes a satellite terminal transportable, network to network central waveform, division multiple access and line of sight communications,” Szopinski said. “The line of sight communications can reach 32 kilometers.”

The TCN can work like an Internet access point in an austere environment.

“I think it is also a morale booster,” said Spc. Ricky Anggana, a satellite communications system operator in Bravo Company, 2/1 STB. “The system can get voice and data including social media sites. It is also important to keep soldiers connected with family. Normally we don’t get to work with this system. I can’t wait to see how it preforms during the rest of the [Network Integration Evaluation 14.1].”

The TCN system is fully mobile. It can be set up, broken down and moved to a new area rapidly.

“The TCN network enhances signal capabilities on a new battlefield,” Szopinski explained. “It’s important because it provides ungrounded communications. To sum it up it’s [Internet] and communications on the go.”

Story by Staff Sgt. Kulani Lakanaria, 24th Press Camp Headquarters,

Fort Bliss, Texas

Cpl. Marc Harms, a signal support specialist in Headquarters, Headquarters Company, 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division, guards the only Mobile

Integrated Command Post MaxxPro mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle in the Army at Fort Bliss, Texas, October 28, 2013. Harms evaluates the MICP

MRAP during Network Integration Evaluation 14.1.(U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Kulani J. Lakanaria)

U.S. Army—Evaluating The TCN System

MilsatMagazine—November 2013 13

Exelis has successfully completed factory acceptance testing for the Global Positioning System (GPS) III navigation payload simulator software.

Developed by Exelis, the software will simulate the behavior of GPS signals in space, which will be used for testing the U.S. Air Force’s next generation GPS ground station known as the operational control system (OCX).

The simulator will be integrated into the Raytheon-developed GPS System Simulator (GSYS) within OCX.

“The simulator models the navigation payload function and interface with OCX,” said Kevin Farrell, positioning, navigation and timing general manager at Exelis Geospatial Systems. “It provides simulation data representative of multiple GPS III space vehicles at the level needed to support control segment test events, mission rehearsals, and anomaly investigations, ensuring that the OCX control system is properly functioning before launching into space.”

Awarded in February 2010 by Raytheon, Exelis is on contract to provide critical software elements in the navigation processing subsystem to enable GPS constellation controllers to better understand the satellites’ exact position.

This helps ensure accurate navigation information is being securely broadcast to users.

In addition, Exelis is building high-precision receivers for use in ground monitoring stations placed strategically around the world and also builds data encryptors to ensure secure information exchange between the ground and space segments of the system.

As part of the GPS modernization effort, Exelis is also on contract with Lockheed Martin to provide payloads for GPS III satellites.

Exelis is a major space technology provider, supporting both the satellite and ground portions of the GPS III modernization program.

For nearly 40 years, Exelis payloads and payload components have been on board every GPS satellite and have accumulated nearly 700 years of on-orbit life without a single mission-related failure due to Exelis equipment.

Once the new operational control segment is implemented, GPS will improve a variety of business and economic applications, including air traffic control, increasing crop yields, and monitoring environmental trends, among others.

The new capabilities offered by GPS modernization will also provide U.S. Air Force Space Command increased accuracy, availability, anti-jam power and international interoperability.

Exelis—Providing Sim Data For GPS III

Artistic rendition of a GPS III satellite.

Dispatches

http://www.newtec.eu/


Dispatches

As they face the prospect of another year of deep cuts to their budgets, the military’s service chiefs testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the impact sequestration is having on the ability to organize, train and equip their service members.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh III, and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James F. Amos told lawmakers sequestration portends a hollow force, greater risk of coercion and fewer options to handle global adversaries.

Odierno urged all military leaders and lawmakers to keep foremost in their minds the impact budget shortfalls have on soldiers who are asked to protect the nation.

“They are national treasures and their sacrifices cannot be taken for granted,” Odierno said. “They are not chess pieces to be moved upon a board—each and every one is irreplaceable.”

Odierno added, “We are drawing down our Army not only before a war is over, but at a time when unprecedented uncertainty remains in the international security environment.”

The total Army—active duty, Guard and Reserve—currently remains heavily committed in operations overseas and at home. “More than 70,000 U.S. Army soldiers are deployed to contingency operations with nearly 50,000 soldiers in Afghanistan alone,” Odierno said. There are more than 87,000 soldiers forward stationed across the globe in nearly 120 countries, he added. During his 37 years of service, Odierno said the Army has deployed soldiers and fought more than 10 conflicts, including Afghanistan, the longest war in the nation’s history.

“No one desires peace more than the soldier who has lived through war,” he said. But with a looming drawdown and the restructuring of the Army into a smaller force, the general explained, the service will experience degraded readiness and extensive modernization shortfalls. “We’ll be required to end, restructure or delay over 100 acquisition programs,” Odierno said. Personnel cuts will also take a toll, the general said.

“The Army will be forced to take additional end-strength cuts to no more than 420,000 active duty, 315,000 Army National Guard and 185,000 in the U.S. Army Reserves,” Odierno said. “This will represent a total Army end strength reduction of more than 18 percent over seven years—a 26 percent reduction in the active component—a 12 percent reduction in the national guard and a nine percent reduction in the U.S. Army Reserves.”

Odierno stressed that he does not consider himself an alarmist, but a realist. “In the end, our decisions today and in the near future will impact our nation’s security posture for the next 10 years,” he said.

The Navy, too, will have to make strategic choices, operating where and when it matters to respond to contingencies with acceptable readiness, Greenert said. He noted current hot spots such as North Korea, Egypt and Syria.

“This ability to be present reassures our allies and [ensures] that U.S. interests around the world are properly served,” Greenert said.

Sequestration in 2014, Greenert warned, will further reduce Navy readiness and the service’s ship and aircraft investment as the service attempts to maintain a sea-based strategic deterrent and sustain a relevant industrial base and an appropriate forward presence.

Greenert said most concerning is the reduction in the Navy’s operations and maintenance budget, which will result in only one non-deployed carrier strike group and one amphibious ready group trained for contingency response.

Greenert said this will fall short of the Navy’s covenant with combatant commanders—the provision of at least two carrier strike groups, two amphibious ready groups deployed and another three of each in and around the continental United States for short-notice response.

The budget fallout also ensures a continued hiring freeze for most of the Navy’s civilian positions, degrading the distribution of skill in the workforce, the admiral said. Greenert recommended Congress allow the Navy to transfer money between accounts as one way of mitigating the situation.

“This would enable us to pursue innovative acquisition approaches, start new projects, increase production quantities and complete the ships that are under construction,” recommending the transfer of about billion dollars each into his service’s operations, maintenance and procurement accounts.

Similarly, Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, described readiness sustainment within the current fiscal environment as a “mortgage” of tomorrow’s readiness, infrastructure sustainment and modernization.

“We are ready today because your Marines are resilient and determined to defend the United States of America,” Amos said. “We are funding today’s readiness by curtailing future investment in equipment and in our facilities.”

Amos expressed his displeasure over last month’s furlough of some 14,000 Marine Corps civilians.

Since sequestration began in March, Amos said he has realigned funds within his authority to maintain unit readiness to the highest extent possible.

“My priorities have remained consistent: first and foremost, the near-term readiness of forward deployed forces, followed by those that are next to deploy,” he said.

The commandant reported that the Marine Corps is currently spending about 16 percent of what is required “bare minimum” to maintain barracks, facilities, bases, stations and training ranges.

“This is unsustainable and it can’t continue over the long term.”

To meet the requirements of future conflicts, investments in modernization, infrastructure and people are critical, he said.

The defense strategic guidance calls for 186,800 active duty Marines, which enables the Marine Corps to meet steady state operations and fight a major war, and preserves a 1:3 dwell time for Marines and their families.

A force of 174,000 Marines, which sequestration will require, drives the service to a 1:2 dwell, or 6 months deployed with 12 months of recuperation and training, Amos said.

“This is dangerously close to the same combat operational tempo we had in Iraq and Afghanistan while fighting in multiple theaters and maintaining steady state amphibious operations around the world,” Amos said. “This is a formula for more American casualties.”

In the Air Force, Welsh described the impacts of sequestration as sobering and warned that the service will be forced to cut flying hours to the extent that in coming years many flying units won’t be able to retain mission readiness.

“We’ll cancel or significantly curtail mission exercises again,” Welsh said. “And we’ll reduce our initial pilot production targets which we were able to avoid in FY 13 because prior year unobligated funds helped offset about 25 percent of our sequestration bill last year.” Those funds; however, are no longer available, Welsh said.

The Air Force hopes to build a viable plan to slow personnel and infrastructure costs when able, he said. Yet, the only way to pay the full sequestration bill, he added, is to reduce force structure, readiness and modernization.

“Over the next five years, the Air Force can be forced to cut up to 25,000 airmen and up to 550 aircraft, which is about nine percent of our inventory,” Welsh said. These cost savings, he said, could force the Air Force to divest entire fleets of aircraft.

Meanwhile, Air Force officials will prioritize, focusing on long-range capabilities, readiness and full-spectrum training, Welsh said.

“We’ll favor recapitalization over modernization, which is why our top-three acquisition programs remain the F-35, the KC-46 and the long-range strike bomber,” Welsh said.

Story by Amaani Lyle, American Forces Press Service

Service Chiefs Testify On Sequestration Risks

General Raymond T. OdiernoU.S. Army Chief of Staff

Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert Chief of Naval Operations

General James F. Amos Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps

General Mark A. Welsh, III Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force


Dispatches

A team of highly-trained and experienced joint communicators from the 224th Joint Communications Support Squadron, a Georgia Air National Guard unit aligned with the Joint Communications Support Element (JCSE), completed a four-month deployment in support of Pacific Partnership 2013 (PP13).

Teams of medical, dental, veterinarian and engineering professionals traveled to six island nations in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region aboard the USS Pearl Harbor to enhance disaster response preparedness. These teams also completed service projects in their respective fields to strengthen local stability and regional infrastructures in case of natural disasters.

The JCSE team provided ship-to-shore connectivity and on-the-spot communications solutions—an integral piece of this mission. Not only did JCSE’s extensive expertise and versatile communications equipment demonstrate the command’s unique capabilities, but the team maintained vital communication services for PP13 participants.

The JCSE team employed four Initial Entry Packages (IEP), a commercial airline checkable equipment set that supports up to eight users, to provide the unclassified voice and data networks for the PP13 teams. At each port call JCSE’s support provided mission-critical connectivity to beach detachments responsible for the movement of personnel on and off the ship. Their support also ensured the medical teams at various sites ashore had open lines of communication to reach back to doctors on the ship, better serving patients’ needs.

In addition to this routine support, this mission also required JCSE’s communications experts to adapt to fluctuating necessities. The team’s in-depth understanding of the communications equipment and the operational environment allowed them to rapidly modify their capabilities to address short-notice communication requirements.

“Due to the ample amount of training and real-world experience we have on our compact and portable communication packages, we were able to think outside of the box and better serve the needs of the mission,” said JCSE member U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Neil Howard.

For instance, JCSE’s highly mobile communications support was specifically requested by the PP13 mission commander, U.S. Navy Capt. Wallace Lovely, as he traveled to Papua New Guinea in advance of the scheduled port visit by the Australian ship HMAS Tobruk for formal engagements with key leaders and mission partners. From June 22 - 30, Howard traveled with Lovely and provided communication services to multiple users over the course of the trip using a scaled down version of the IEP.

“By using components of the IEP we created our own ‘communications-on-the-fly’ kit to travel as light as possible and provide uninterrupted communications to Captain Lovely and monitor network reliability for his advanced team,” said Howard. “We traveled 1,000 miles away and I only carried my rucksack, my backpack and my light-weight portable communications kit and a wireless router.”

Another instance of JCSE’s flexible, mission-tailored support took place at the mid-point of the deployment during a port call in the Marshall

Islands. In the midst of providing communications support for a high-level engagement ceremony on board the ship, an engineering team in the field urgently requested JCSE’s support after losing connectivity.

An additional two-man JCSE team was sent to the engineering site to troubleshoot the cause of the interruption. JCSE’s instinctive ability to adapt and overcome communication issues was a key factor in the engineering team immediately regaining connectivity. JCSE’s flexible capabilities and scalable communication package proved to be a perfect fit for this incident.

The JCSE team’s expertise and flexibility in supporting the needs of PP13 contributed to mission success. After four-months abroad providing uninterrupted connectivity and demonstrating JCSE’s versatile capabilities, the JCSE team returns home thankful for this rewarding experience and proud that they supported such an extraordinary mission. After validating their extensive training and ability to adapt to challenges in the field, this JCSE team is even more prepared for future operational requirements.

Story by Julianne Sympson, Joint Enabling Capabilities Command

ANG + JCSE—Adapting To Fluctuating Requirements

http://www.comtechefdata.com/


Dispatches

Many satellites in orbit are obsolete or have failed—yet all have usable components—however, currently, there is no way to use those components.

Space Systems/Loral (SSL), a provider of commercial satellites, today announced that it has been selected to develop designs, processes and business terms for hosting free-flying science and technology missions on its geostationary (GEO) satellite platform.

Under the next phase of the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Phoenix program, SSL intends to develop detailed design and implementation processes and business terms for cost effective delivery of small spacecraft beyond Low Earth Orbit

(LEO). In addition to its first use for the DARPA Phoenix mission, this capability is envisioned to enable numerous additional operational, science and technology space missions.

The goal of the revolutionary Phoenix program is to enable cost-effective repurposing of serviceable space hardware that is already on orbit. As part of the program, SSL aims to accommodate an ejectable hosted payload, called the Payload Orbital Delivery (POD) system, on a commercial GEO satellite. The POD would ultimately be released from the commercial spacecraft to accomplish its servicing mission in space.

“SSL is very pleased to participate in this innovative, affordable and

sustainable access to space for the PODs that would supply and replenish the DARPA Phoenix architecture,” said John Celli, president of SSL. “DARPA’s vision and commitment to this capability could open the door to many other small satellite missions, enabled by frequent access to space on the SSL 1300 platform.”

SSL regularly works with a broad range of commercial satellite operators and has significant experience with hosted payload accommodation. For the DARPA Phoenix mission SSL intends to develop detailed plans and operating procedures for safe and accurate dispensing of the PODs from its 1300 satellite platform with minimal divergence from standard launch and orbit raising procedures. SSL also intends to work with DARPA to select the commercial host mission and develop the terms and conditions to incorporate POD ridesharing into standard commercial contracts.

Communication satellites in geosynchronous orbit (GEO), approximately 22,000 miles above the earth, provide vital communication capabilities to warfighters. Today, when a communication satellite fails, it usually means the expensive prospect of having to launch a brand new replacement communication satellite. Many of the satellites which are obsolete or have failed still have usable antennas, solar arrays and other components which are expected to last much longer than the life of the satellite, but currently there is no way to re-use them.

The goal of the Phoenix program is to develop and demonstrate technologies to cooperatively harvest and re-use valuable components from retired,

nonworking satellites in GEO and demonstrate the ability to create new space systems at greatly reduced cost. Phoenix seeks to demonstrate around-the-clock, globally persistent communication capability for warfighters more economically, by robotically removing and re-using GEO-based space apertures and antennas from decommissioned satellites in the graveyard or disposal orbit.

The Phoenix program envisions developing a new class of very small ‘satlets,’ similar to nano satellites, which could be sent to the GEO region more economically as a “ride along” on a commercial satellite launch, and then attached to the antenna of a non-functional cooperating satellite robotically, essentially creating a new space system. A payload orbital delivery system, or PODS, will also be designed to safely house the satlets for transport aboard a commercial satellite launch.

A separate on-orbit ‘tender,’ or satellite servicing satellite is also expected to be built and launched into GEO. Once the tender arrives on orbit, the PODS would then be released from its ride-along host and link up with the tender to become part of the satellite servicing station’s ‘tool belt.’ The tender plans to be equipped with grasping mechanical arms for removing the satlets and components from the PODS using unique space tools to be developed in the program.

DARPA + SSL—Servicing PODS In Space

Artistic rendition of Phoenix satellite servicing vehicle.Image courtesy of DARPA + SSL.

Green Hills Software has an agreement to team with ViaSat Inc. to deliver military-grade security for Android smartphones and tablets.

The INTEGRITY® Multivisor™ separation-kernel has been selected as the hypervisor solution for the ViaSat Secured, a mobile enterprise system that addresses the stringent security, privacy, manageability, and usability demands for dual-use—personal and business—smartphones and tablets.

ViaSat Secured offers a carrier-agnostic suite of the latest and most popular mobile devices so that users may switch between personal and corporate use.

ViaSat Secured devices are pre-programmed with Green Hills Software’s INTEGRITY Multivisor, a foundational firmware layer of data protection and isolation below the mobile operating system, which enables either a secure single or dual persons solution that cannot be achieved with container-based offerings.

ViaSat Secured devices are managed with ViaSat network management, which includes firmware-over-the-air update (FOTA) and enterprise policy management services, as well as an open application programming interface (API) for integrating with popular enterprise Mobile Device Management (MDM) products.

Whether devices are corporate or personal liable, the use of the secure dual persona and enterprise management technology is designed to give consumers complete confidence in the privacy of their photos, contacts, e-mail, and other information while enterprise and government IT administrators manage the device’s business persona with assurance in the security of enterprise data both within the device and across the corporate network.

This solution represents a broad collaboration, not only between ViaSat and Green Hills Software, but also across multiple worldwide mobile network operators and major mobile device OEMs.

Green Hills Software + VIASAT—Security Solutions

Combined Endeavor is the largest international exercise for interoperable communications between the armies of mission partners. Each year, the event brings together more than 1,000 participants from NATO member states, Partnership for Peace countries and industries.

The objective is to conduct interoperability tests under combat conditions to ensure reliable communications during missions.

At the event in Grafenwöhr, 25 of the 40 participating nations watched a live demonstration of the new tactical R&S SDTR software defined

radio from Rohde & Schwarz. The R&S SDTR is an open platform that provides the ideal base for porting allies’ waveforms, meeting the need for interoperability between nations during missions.

During several technical presentations, Rohde & Schwarz also demonstrated its expertise in the area of high data rate waveforms and software defined radios (SDR). Rohde & Schwarz and its partner company EID successfully performed interoperability tests conducted by the Portuguese Army integrating the R&S SDTR together with VoIP telephones, IP video cameras, BMS and EID’s TWH-101 personal radio.

Rohde & Schwarz—Global Missions Interoperability


Gilat Satcom and Applied Satellite Technology Ltd (AST) have jointly been awarded a 36 month procurement contract by the Israeli Government covering all MSS services on Inmarsat and Iridium networks.

This contract covers IP and handheld services and leverages the value adds and solutions supplied by Gilat Satcom and AST in the Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) industry.

“Assured delivery of MSS IP (specifically BGAN) traffic from AST, key solutions such as DigiGone and Gilat Satcom’s vast knowledge and capability in serving the Israeli Government were key factors in the choice of the Gilat Satcom/AST partnership” said Ami Schneider, Vice President Mobile Satellite and Voice Services at Gilat Satcom.

Gilat Satcom is a leading communication solutions provider offering satellite and fiber-based connectivity services in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

With successful deployments in more than 60 countries, Gilat Satcom delivers high-quality, cost-effective and efficient communication solutions to telcos, ISPs, governments, enterprise customers and international organizations.

The AST Group consists of nine individual companies, each possessing individual specialist abilities, serving direct and indirect channels throughout the United Kingdom, Africa, America, Asia and Australia. AST is a Tier 1 provider of satellite airtime and a Distribution Partner for satellite and radio equipment throughout the world.

AST offers independent, unbiased advice to ensure customers receive the right communication solution to meet their business needs, and at a competitive price.

Gilat Satcom + AST—Managing Government Work

Graphic courtesy of Gilat Satcom.

Mobility photo courtesy of AST.

Dispatches

http://www.cpii.com/satcom


Dispatches

New hardware built by research engineers at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory is helping NASA retrieve experimental images otherwise lost at sea.

The hardware weighs less than two pounds and serves as a means of locating NASA’s flight imagery recorders that capture valuable image data of decelerators during deployment and deceleration. It’s a small box with a GPS receiver, satellite communications modem, batteries, and a dual band antenna.

NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, or JPL, sought the U.S. Army Research Laboratory’s help in “ruggedizing” a locator unit to limit the risk of losing this data, especially in the event of a catastrophic failure.

Missions to Mars are expected to grow in the future “... so NASA needs new technology to slow these big landers from hypersonic entry speed to subsonic ground approach speeds,” said Rex Hall, Electronics Technician, Army Research Laboratory, known as ARL, Project Lead Engineer; Flight Imagery Recorder Locator, or FIRLo. He said using atmospheric drag is a solution that would save the rocket engines and conserve fuel for landing.

In NASA experiments, large decelerators will be deployed at supersonic speeds and slow the vehicle to safer speeds for the crew and cargo. Hall said that NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab, based in Pasadena, California, is leading full-scale stratospheric testing of these technologies.

“The parachute decelerators will slow the vehicle from Mach 2 to subsonic speeds,” he said.

The whole experiment is “floated” by a huge balloon to about 120,000 feet then released. A rocket motor is then fired and the Supersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator is accelerated to supersonic speed.

“At about 180,000 feet in the air, the rocket motor burns out and the Ringsail chute is deployed. Shortly after the chute is deployed, the large Supersonic Ringsail Parachute is deployed, slowing the whole thing down until impact with the ocean once the experiment is over, or after a catastrophic failure,” said Hall, who spent 20 years at Wallops Island, a tiny NASA facility on the Eastern Shore of Virginia as a radio frequency and communication engineer before joining ARL in 2002.

Once on the ocean surface, ARL’s FIRLo unit will turn on and transmit a short-burst data transmission, containing location coordinates. This data’s location is imposed on a map. Coordinates can also be emailed to the experimenter.

“No specialized receiving equipment is necessary,” Hall said.

Time between transmissions is programmed prior to launch and can also be changed via satellite communication while the locator is floating. Battery status is also available in the transmission.

Hall said JPL used an iPhone to locate the FIRLo during a water recovery test this summer.

“The FIR was dropped about five miles off the Pacific coast and left to float for about four hours,” Hall explained. “The unit was successfully recovered. The prototype FIRLo was also subjected to a violent water surface impact test at JPL’s facility in Pasadena, California.

The locator was attached to a structure with the same mass and dimensions of the FIR, and was fired into a pool of water, 24 inches deep, at a velocity of over 70 mph. The FIRLo and simulator were supposed to hit the water sideways, but due to a failure of the slingshot-like launch device, the 60-pound structure hit the water, FIRLo first!”

ARL’s hardware can survive in excess of 10,000 g’s, is waterproof and will work when located only 12 inches from the ocean surface, and in temperature extremes below 35 degrees Celsius to 85 degrees Celsius.

The intent is for the FIR to be located and retrieved with specialized GPS receivers and other geo-location hardware that are being leveraged from similar technology previously developed at ARL for Army and Navy high-g guided projectile concepts. The FIR packages with geo-location hardware will be demonstrated in the first quarter of fiscal year 2014, with additional launches to follow.

The first prototype was given to JPL in September. ARL is currently building seven more to be delivered to JPL by the end of the month for use on other experiments.

ARL is supporting new requests for this hardware to support NASA’s Sounding Rocket Program tests at White Sands, N.M., and Poker Flats, Alaska, and additional testing in Pasadena, California, and off the coast of Kauai, Hawaii.

Story by T’Jae Gibson, Army Research Laboratory Public Affairs

U.S. Army Research Lab + NASA—Image Retrieval

The U.S. Coast Guard has conducted approximately 60,000 search and rescue operations since 2006 with support from the General Dynamics C4 Systems-built Rescue 21 system.

The nationwide command, control and communications system connects Coast Guard personnel with distressed mariners up to 20 nautical miles or more out to sea.

Rescue 21 is also interoperable with federal, state and local law enforcement and public safety organizations’ communications systems, increasing the Coast Guard’s effectiveness in accomplishing its missions, including critical homeland-security operations. Rescue 21 became operational in 32 of 37 U.S. Coast Guard Sectors by 2012; the first life saved by the system was recorded in 2005.

“In addition to being a life-line for millions of boaters, Rescue 21 is a model program that demonstrates how broadband technologies are improving maritime situational awareness, communication and collaboration among multiple government and law enforcement agencies,” said Chris Marzilli, president of General Dynamics C4 Systems.

On October 5, 2013, a Coast Guard watchstander in Sector Key West (Key West, Florida) heard an emergency call from a boat captain traveling from Naples to Key West. A fire onboard had severely damaged the boat’s

radio and propulsion system. Before it failed, the radio operated just long enough to send a two-second “Mayday” call. Using position/location information generated by the Rescue 21 system, a C-130 search plane and Coast Guard rescue boat found the stranded mariner and returned the captain and his vessel to shore.

Rescue 21 comprises 253 towers and 32 command centers in full operation that cover more than 41,000 miles of U.S. coastline, lakes and rivers. When a distress call arrives, the system automatically records the call while direction-finding equipment on the towers accurately computes the call’s location, allowing search-and-rescue operations to begin immediately.

The system is also designed to accommodate additional sensors and command and control equipment as it becomes available, which will deliver new and cost-effective capabilities to the Coast Guard.

General Dynamics C4 Systems + USCG—Rescue 21


Dispatches

Most would flee to escape its ravages, but Télécoms Sans Frontière (TSF) knew the potential dangers, and, nevertheless arrived in anticipation of its brutality... to assist with the results...after.

They arrived from Bangkok to the Philippines as a team to Visayas and Leyte in the Philippines on November 7th—the typhoon hit on November 8. The NGO’s team were well versed about Typhoon Haiyan (locally known as Yolanda)—a Category 5 typhoon with wind speeds of up to 300 km/h—the strongest tropical cyclone to make landfall in recorded history. The typhoon further destroyed areas of the Philippines which had already been weakened by two earlier typhoons and an earthquake in just this month—roads and infrastructures were seriously damaged and there was a high risk of further significant landslides.

The impact of Haiyan has been compared to that of the category 5 Typhoon Mike which hit the Philippines in 1990, causing more than 500 deaths and destroying almost 250,000 homes. TSF is able to provide immediate, essential support to hundreds of thousands of people affected as well as the numerous humanitarian aid agencies in the field. The reinforcements sent from TSF’s international HQ meant that victims of the storm would be able to make calls to their families to inform them of their situation, and, in many cases, to reassure them that they were still alive. Thanks to its partnership with UNDAC (United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination) TSF is one of the first NGO responders on the ground, allowing for telecoms assessments to be carried out as well as the immediate installation of telecoms centers to generate a coordination hub for the other NGOs in the disaster zone.

Being among the first on the ground after Haiyan struck, TSF was able to pre-position three telecom centers for relief coordination before the influx of humanitarian aid from other NGOs and agencies arrived. The town of Tacloban had been identified at the most affected area, with the head of UNDAC, Sebastian Rhodes Stampa, describing the area as having suffered “destruction on a massive scale.”

TSF had already installed three functioning satellite connections to provide Internet to the telecom centers—the first to do so, to the benefit of the Filipino NDRRMC (National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council) as well as the Ministry of Telecommunication; the second, for use by the United Nations agencies of OCHA, WFP and UNDAC; the third for all of the other humanitarian organizations present in the area.

As of this writing, as many as 10,000 people may have died in Tacloban alone, with hundreds more feared dead in the rest of Leyte and on neighboring Samar island. Many survivors have no clean water, electricity or food. More than 10 TSF’s centers have been established and they provide fielded NGOs with a management hub from which essential information can be sent concerning their operations and for effective coordination. Working in collaboration with local telephone operator, SMART, TSF has carried out assessments of the telecom situation and it is estimated that it could be as many as two months or more before the telecommunications networks are restored.

Security conditions across the Philippines did rapidly deteriorate. The critical need for food and water has lead desperate inhabitants to pillage supplies from shops and supermarkets, notably in the town of Tacloban. The Department of Health placed an official request for TSF to put into place a satellite connection within Tacloban General Hospital. The need for medical care borders on desperation. TSF’s satellite connection will allow for hospital workers to collaborate with medical teams on a national scale and provide well-coordinated health support to the thousands of victims seriously injured by the typhoon.

SMART and Globe Telecom have managed to partially restore GSM coverage in some areas of Tacloban. Pending the full operational service of the mobile network, TSF, alongside SMART, will continue to carry out their humanitarian calling operations.

TSF—Offering Comms Aid To The Phillipines

http://www.paradisedata.com/

Boeing, Inmarsat and International Launch Services (ILS) enjoy a wealth of successful satellite and launch history among themselves. Inmarsat’s important December launch will mark the

milestone of the first of their Global Xpress satellites and subsequent support for secure, government comms. This event is the result of these partnerships. The timeline of this team’s events and technologies are as follows:

T h e B o e i n g B a s Beginning in 1976, Boeing built three satellites and four payloads for Inmarsat. Marisat 1, 2 and 3 were three L- and C-band communications satellites built for the space segment of the world’s first maritime system.

Of the three Marisat satellites, all exceeded their contractual design life of five years and provided a combined 70 years of service. The HS-356 spacecraft were launched in 1976, one each on February 19 and June 9, and one on October 14. The satellites were placed in geosynchronous orbit at 15 degrees west longitude, 176.5 degrees east longitude, and 72.5 degrees east longitude, respectively. Boeing also built the L-band payloads that launched on the four Inmarsat-2 satellites during the early 1990s and they continue to operate without a single unit failure to date.

Continuing a relationship spanning three decades, Inmarsat returned to Boeing in August 2010 to order three 702HP spacecraft to provide its new Ka-band global and high-capacity satellite services. In October of 2013, Inmarsat exercised the option to order one more 702HP spacecraft to add to their fleet. Boeing additionally entered into a distribution partnership with Inmarsat to provide L- and Ka-band capacity services to key users within the U.S. government.

Leveraging Boeing’s expertise in government env i ronment s and a p p l i c a t i o n s , t h e Inmarsat-5 satellites will provide Inmarsat’s customers with an ar ray of secure v o i c e a n d high-speed

communications applications between land, sea and air services, and multinational coalitions.

Each Inmarsat-5 satellite will carry 89 Ka-band beams that will operate in geosynchronous orbit with flexible global coverage. The satellites are designed to generate approximately 15 kilowatts of power at the start of service and approximately 13.8 kilowatts at the end of their 15-year design life. To generate such high power, each spacecraft’s two solar wings employ five panels each of ultra triple-junction gallium arsenide solar cells.

The Boeing 702HP carries the xenon ion propulsion system (XIPS) for all on-orbit maneuvering.

The Inmarsat-5 F1 Global Xpress satellite is planned for launch on December 8th from the Baikonur Cosmodrome aboard a Proton M launch vehicle supplied by International Launch Services. With a mass of 6,300kg, it will be orbitally slotted in at 64 degrees East.

The ILS Involvement

The Baikonur Cosmodrome where the Inmarsat-5 F1 will be launched via a Proton M launch vehicle is located approximately 2,100km (1,300 miles) southeast of Moscow.

Founded in 1955, the Baikonur Cosmodrome is one of the Russian Federation’s two major space launch complexes and has been the launch site for Soviet, and later Russian, human spaceflight programs, geostationary satellites launches and scientific missions to the Moon and planets.

Baikonur has been the site of some of the earliest achievements in space:

October 4, 1957: Sputnik, the first man-made satellite t o o r b i t E a r t h , w a s launched from Baikonur

April 12, 1961: Yuri Gagarin lifted off from Baikonur to become the first man in space

June 16, 1963: Flight of the first woman in space, Valent ina Tereshkova

November 20, 1998: Zarya, the first piece of the International Space Station (ISS), designed and built by Khrunichev launched on Proton

July 12, 2000: Zvezda, the main component o f t h e R u s s i a n section of the ISS is launched on Proton

Of Launches + Satellites The Inmarsat-5 L1 Has A Hot Date In December

20 MilsatMagazine—November 2013


The Russian government leases the land upon which the Cosmodrome sits from the Kazakhstan government. The long-term lease is currently set to expire in 2050.

Baikonur is a large Y-shaped complex, shown below, that extends about 160 kilometers (100 miles) east to west and 88 kilometers (55 miles) north to south. The vehicle processing and launch areas are connected to each other and to the city of Baikonur by 470 km (290 mi) of wide-gauge railroad lines. The rail system is the principal mode of transportation. Rockets are carried from their vehicle assembly buildings to their launch pads horizontally on railcars and erected onto the launch pad.

Two launch pads are available for commercial Proton missions. Launch vehicle and spacecraft time on pad is five days. The spacecraft is transported to the Baikonur Cosmodrome by air and is offloaded at the on-site Yubileiny Airfield. The satellite is then transported to the state-of-the-art processing facility in Area 92 for testing, fueling, mating to the Breeze M Upper Stage, and encapsulation with the payload fairing.

Weather conditions in Baikonur, which is the home of the Proton launch vehicle, have few launch restraints, offering additional schedule assurance for customers.

Khrunichev implemented a Second Spacecraft Processing Facility (SSPF) in Baikonur in 2011 to support ILS Proton missions. The SSPF provides additional manifest flexibility for customers by allowing overlapping launch campaigns, minimizing the required spacing between commercial launches and supporting timely launches on demand.

The Proton launch vehicle is built by Khrunichev State Research and Space Production Center (Khrunichev), Russia’s space manufacturer. International Launch Services (ILS) has the exclusive rights to market the Proton vehicle commercially under the majority ownership of Khrunichev.

The ILS Proton Breeze M has the lift capability of more than 6 metric tons to geostationary transfer orbit and is compatible with all major spacecraft platforms. With the flexibility for geostationary and super-synchronous transfer, highly elliptical and direct geostationary insertion mission, the Proton launch systems provides precise delivery to orbit in a robust, flexible, high performing package.

The Phase IV Proton performance increase will be available starting in mid-2014. The mission profile can be optimized to maximize satellite fuel life.

Photo of the Baikonur Cosmodrome’s launch pads.

The Proton Breeze M launch vehicle


A previous ILS launch for Inmarsat occurred on August 19, 2008, when the Inmarsat 4 F3 satellite was launched by the Proton M / Breeze M rocket, which was ILS’ third launch of that year. The photo below is of that specific launch and is courtesy of ILS.

In Inmarsat’s Interest

The Inmarsat-5 F1 is the first of the company’s Global Xpress satellites. Global Xpress will be the first global Ka-band network and has been built specifically with government customers in mind.

The satellite will deliver secure, end-to-end wideband connectivity for seamless airborne, naval and land operations worldwide—Inmarsat has been serving government customers with mission-critical communications for more than 30 years.

GX offers managed services for flexible connectivity on demand as well as steerable, high-capacity leases. The technology is particularly suited to bandwidth-intensive mobile applications for Airborne Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (AISR); special operations and expeditionary forces; live full-motion video (FMV); intelligence; command and control; and theatre backhaul.

Wherever the next mission arises, GX will offer a network that’s owned and managed solely by Inmarsat. Purposely designed for mobility, GX will provide a continuous, consistent service as traffic is handed seamlessly across each spot beam, and from one satellite to another.

As the network is global, GX will deliver higher performance consistently—with a downlink up to 50Mbps and an uplink up to 5Mbps. When there are surges in demand, additional beams are directed to provide enhanced throughput and greater performance.

GX will be the first global, commercial network that’s interoperable with MILSATCOM Ka-band networks, providing resilient, cost-effective augmentation. Using contiguous commercial spectrum, GX will provide global reach and additional capacity for those with existing Ka-band networks, and peer capabilities for those without.

The GX network is base-lined to satisfy U.S. Mission Assurance Category (MAC) level III, with secure gateways and satellite commanding. Secure GX offers enhanced security capable of MAC I/II levels.

GX will deliver higher data rates through more compact and affordable terminals than those in the Ku-band. A broad portfolio of terminals will be available for government applications in mobile, portable and fixed formats to suit all environments, from industry-leading manufacturers.

In a climate of continuing budget pressures, GX offers some respite with more affordable services and terminals. Ka-band is more efficient in its use of bandwidth, and, as Inmarsat owns and manages the entire global network, better use of the satellite resources equal significant cost savings for mission requirements.

All three Inmarsat-5 satellites will be launched on Proton vehicles provided by International Launch Services from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Each satellite will be served by two fully-redundant ground stations to ensure the highest levels of network availability.

Inmarsat has also appointed iDirect to develop the ground network and core module technology that will be integrated into satellite terminals.\

The full GX constellation is expected to be deployed by 2014, with global coverage planned for the end of that year.

For more information about Global Xpress, please access the website at: http://igx.com/

http://igx.com/


Recent, Updated Information Regarding GX

The President of Inmarsat, Miranda Mills, said in October, “The GX Aviation program is firmly on track within our current schedule of being available from early 2015. Under the expert control of the Boeing teams, the satellites are being manufactured and tested to the highest standards. The first launch is on schedule for late this year with full global coverage on course to be achieved by the end of 2014.

“GX Aviation is changing the face of inflight connectivity. It will be the world’s first global Ka-band network, specifically designed to provide connectivity to aircraft. It will enable a whole range of new services for both passengers and crew.”

I-5 F1 Completing Final Tests

The first of the three GX satellites, Inmarsat-5 F1, has undergone the final stages of system level performance testing at the El Segundo, California, facility before it is shipped from Los Angeles International Airport to the Baikonur Cosmodrome launch site in the Republic of Kazakhstan. The satellite is scheduled to fly on an Antonov An-225 heavy transporter in early November, in preparation for a scheduled early December launch.

Launch System

The ILS Proton Breeze M launch vehicle will take the 6,100kg Inmarsat-5 F1 spacecraft to geostationary transfer orbit. From there, the satellite will deploy its solar arrays, with a span similar to that of a Boeing 737. The satellite will then be positioned in geostationary orbit above the Indian Ocean region, around 23,000 miles from Earth.

Inmarsat-5 F2

The second satellite (Inmarsat-5 F2) is in the final stages of its assembly process at the Boeing plant, before it begins a series of tests that simulate the extremes of temperature experienced in space. This will ensure that the heat transfer technology works perfectly. This enables the electronics inside the satellite to operate at room temperature, despite a difference of around 300°C between the back and front of the satellite.

I-5 F2 will also undergo rigorous simulation testing of the launch conditions, both through vibration and acoustic testing. The acoustic testing uses nitrogen to subject the satellite to up to 152 Overall Sound Pressure Level (OASPL). The satellite’s data transmission and receive capabilities will also be thoroughly tested, including tests over Inmarsat’s Global Xpress ground network.

Fourth GX Satellite Purchased

Inmarsat recently triggered an option to purchase a fourth Inmarsat-5 satellite, under its existing contract with Boeing. The program schedule from Boeing has a satellite delivery date of mid-2016.

Inmarsat-5 F1 (right) and Inmarsat-5 F2 (left) in Boeing’s El Segundo facility. Photo courtesy of Boeing.

Inmarsat-5 F1 in the A1 chamber at the Boeing Satellite

Development Center. Photo

courtesy of Boeing.

Command Center

Michael C. Gass, President + CEO, United Launch Alliance

Michael Gass is the president and chief executive officer for United Launch Alliance (ULA). In this role, Gass serves as the principal strategic leader of the organization and oversees all business management and operations.

Before joining ULA, Gass served as vice president and general manager of Space Transportation for Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, responsible for the Atlas, Titan, and Advanced Space Transportation product lines and all space launch activities. Prior to this assignment, Gass served as vice president, Atlas/Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) programs, for Lockheed Martin Space Systems and as vice president of the Atlas launch vehicle program. He was responsible for the Atlas II, III, and V launch vehicle programs and held additional senior operational and management positions.

Gass also served as vice president of Production and Materiel Operations with responsibility for all Lockheed Martin Astronautics launch vehicle and spacecraft programs. Before this position, he led the Atlas launch vehicle final assembly and tank fabrication areas through the transition phase of an accelerating production rate and relocating the operation from San Diego, California to Denver, Colorado.

Gass served in a number of management positions with General Dynamics for 14 years before its Space Systems Division was acquired by Martin Marietta, which merged with the Lockheed Corporation in 1995 to become Lockheed Martin Corporation. Gass held positions as program director for Atlas launch vehicles, director of facility services and strategic planning, and supervisory and staff positions in production operations. Gass contributed to the creation of the Atlas Centaur commercial business plan.

Gass also is a leader in the communities where ULA employees live and work. He serves on Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper’s Education Leadership Council and co-chaired former Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter’s P-20 Education Commission—groups that have worked to improve the state’s educational system. He has volunteered for a number of non-profits, including Denver Rescue Mission, Mile High United Way and Project C.U.R.E., among others. Gass attended the Sloan Fellows Program at the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology where he received a Master’s degree in management. He also graduated from

Lehigh University with a Bachelor of Science degree in industrial engineering.

MilsatMagazine (MSM)

Your breadth of experience is most illustrative of an

executive who lives and breathes the launch business.

How d id you in i t ia l l y decide to involve yourself in

this industry?

Michael Gass

I am fortunate to work in an industry of great people, serving a great cause, and one in which I can thoroughly enjoy what I do. I had no great plan to join the space launch industry. After graduation, I was working for a consulting firm doing a project for the Navy in San Diego, California. My wife and I said San Diego “is the place you want to be” and a good friend was working for General Dynamics. I joined the company so we could enjoy Southern California.

MSM

Was it the joint venture between Lockheed Martin and The Boeing Company that promoted you to head up the new United Launch Alliance (ULA) effort?

Michael Gass

Yes, but prior to the start up of United Launch Alliance, I was the leader of Lockheed Martin’s Space Transportation business. I was significantly involved in the integration of the General Dynamics launch business when it was acquired by Lockheed Martin (formerly Martin Marietta). I would have to say my leadership experience in launch, as well as mergers and acquisitions enabled the board members to select me for the honor to lead the ULA team.

MSM

Why was the ULA JV conceived in 2006 and what was its primary commission?

Michael Gass

United Launch Alliance was formed in December 2006, largely in reaction to changes in the launch services marketplace. However, you have to go

back further than that to understand the context.

(Photo: January 20th, 2011, was an important day for ULA—this was the company’s first launch of a Delta IV Heavy rocket from the west coast from Vandenberg AFB. A classified spy satellite for the U.S. National

Reconnaissance Office (NRO) was boosted into space. Photo courtesy of ULA.)


25MilsatMagazine—November 2013

Lockheed Martin and Boeing developed their respective families of launch vehicles (Atlas V and Delta IV) as part of the highly successful Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Program. That program pursued development of a family of launch vehicles to meet all of the National Security Space (NSS) launch services requirements. That was the approach envisioned by the 1994 Space Launch Modernization Panel chaired by Gen. Tom Moorman.

EELV has been an incredibly successful program. The Air Force opted to keep two families of vehicles based on a belief the Commercial Communications Satellite Industry would be the predominant customer for the EELV Launch systems, which was shortly followed by this market not materializing. The end result was the NSS community got two new launch vehicle families, with higher reliability and higher mission flexibility than the heritage systems they replaced and still delivered savings that exceeded the target of 25 percent of the costs from these heritage launch systems.

This lack of robust commercial launch market and significant delays to national security spacecraft launches due to developments in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s put significant financial strain on both EELV providers. Both companies were giving serious consideration to exiting the business. However, with the Air Force and National customers both in the midst of recapitalizing every satellite constellation simultaneously, the country couldn’t afford not to have a reliable launch service capability once the satellites were ready. Senior government officials identified the requirement for assured access to space, coupled with this environment and having two new launch systems ready to support the NSS requirements, but being utilized in an inefficient manner, the concept of ULA was formed.

The ULA merger offered to provide two launch systems, with one infrastructure and one team. It represented a significant savings opportunity which the U.S. Government has been the beneficiary. ULA invested in the necessary consolidation and made a contractual commitment of more than $150 million per year of savings as compared to separate company operations. ULA has delivered and continues to deliver savings that have exceeded those original estimates.

It’s interesting to note that the U.S. Government is again looking at establishing a similar market environment it found itself in just 10 years ago, specifically looking to establish competition in a launch market that will not support multiple launch companies in an efficient manner as defined in multiple studies performed over the last decade, with the intent of saving costs.

This new environment, which I have lived through before, could very easily negate any potential savings expected by having competition. As I have already described, ULA was formed explicitly to support the U.S. Government launch requirements and the men and women of ULA and I stand ready to compete but with relentless focus on meeting our customers’ critical mission needs as demonstrated with our unprecedented demonstrated reliability.

MSM

How did ULA successfully develop their family of reliable launch vehicles?

Michael Gass

Our parent companies really developed the Delta IV and Atlas V families of launch vehicles. The systems benefited immensely from more than 100 years (50 years each) of launch experience and learning from the combined heritage of Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Our continuing challenge is to continue the record of success, one launch at a time, while continuing to deliver the requisite cost efficiencies.

The ULA journey has been about melding the different approaches, which were each successful, into a single company and culture that continued to drive costs down and reliably deliver to orbit our nation’s most critical space capabilities. The September launch of AEHF-3 on an Atlas V marked the 75th successful launch performed by ULA. We’ve deployed first of a kind missions for MILSATCOM (AEHF, WGS, MUOS) , Missile Warning (SBIRS), GPS (IIF), a myriad of NRO missions, commercial missions, and some pretty astounding science missions for our NASA customers, including sending spacecraft to the radiation belts, the moon, Mars, Jupiter, and Pluto.

That success doesn’t happen by accident. It’s the result of the incredible efforts of more than 3,500 men and women dedicated to the idea that we can reliably

launch the full spectrum of space capabilities on a dependable schedule, all while continuously driving for increased efficiency. At ULA, we call that Perfect Product Delivery. The evolution of ULA is an on-going journey with the most visible fruits of the endeavor being successful launches.

I’d also highlight that since ULA was formed in 2006, we’ve reduced our infrastructure by 30 percent, and our staffing by 25 percent since we were originally formed. We’ve consolidated our Atlas and Delta teams into one team launching two families of rockets. None of that happens by accident.

At ULA, we take pride not only in the improved capability and operational reliability, but improvements in underlying service to our customers. For example, we recently had a Navy MUOS launch delayed until Jan 2015 at the request of the customer. Our system of slot manifesting provided the ability to accelerate a GPS launch and a commercial launch. The inherent system flexibilities enabled us to accommodate all three missions within nine months of the first launch date, with little to no impact. That kind of manifest flexibility, coupled with the schedule dependability delivered by today’s EELV, is invaluable. Just a few short years ago that kind of change would have rippled through the entire manifest, driving cost increases to a multitude of satellite customers. We take a lot of pride in delivering our customers’ hardware reliably both when and where they need it.

MSM

You have witnessed, first hand, the evolution of the launch vehicle—looking forward, where do you see the market moving over the next few years?

Michael Gass

A number of new entrants are entering the market, and as evidenced by the International Space Station (ISS) cargo program, providing some much needed logistical support. Both SpaceX and Orbital Sciences have successfully visited the ISS now, and we understand more than most companies how challenging this business is. We have a lot of respect for those accomplishments.

Going forward, I don’t see a large increase in the market demand. Government budget challenges could slow the pace of the NSS market, but the potential growth in areas like commercial crew could fill in some of that demand. I see our NSS demand peaking in the next three or four years, and then falling back a little in the out years, about the time commercial crew starts to pick up. Of course, much of that projection will depend on budget deliberations, both NSS and NASA, and decisions on the extension of ISS service life into the next decade.

MSM

What imperatives will be responsible for the overall reduction of launch costs for the industry? What has ULA undertaken to help in this regard?

Michael Gass

The budget imperatives driving cost reduction are bigger than just launch. The country has budget and debt challenges that will impact defense and other parts of government across the board. Much of the focus on launch cost in recent years has to do with the overall space budget. The last decade was dominated by satellite development delays. Large development programs like SBIRS and AEHF drew most of the cost attention. Once those programs entered the production phase and the other large space programs were terminated (e.g.: Space Based Radar and TSAT), EELV was the biggest budget item on the cost radar. The transition to satellite production also resulted in an increase in the manifest as we deploy the newly developed satellite constellations. For the early years of ULA’s existence, we were only launching three or four satellites annually. Now we’re at a pace of about one a month. That makes us a larger cost target.

To address that, ULA has relentlessly focused on driving efficiencies, all the while mindful of maintaining the mission assurance essential when you’re orbiting critical national treasures in the form of NSS and NASA Science spacecraft. ULA Perfect Product Delivery focus is in driving reliability and efficiency in every process. With reliable processes, you have more speed and flexibility, lower

cost—(Perfect Delivery) and it enables mission success (Perfect Product). The results of these efforts are illuminated

in our performance metrics that show the improvement trends in less rework, less part shortages, less out of position work, and reduced

mission integration cycle time.

Photo: A ULA Atlas V 541 launch vehicle with payload on the launch pad. Photo courtesy of ULA.


Every element of our value stream has shown these improvements, all resulting in fewer resources required for each unit of output with greater overall reliability.

We’re not alone in driving cost reduction. The Air Force is implementing a block buy strategy that will commit to 36 cores over the next five years and bring much needed stability into our supplier industrial base versus the inefficient practice of buying one or two launch services at a time. It’s kind of analogous to buying a case of soda at a warehouse store versus buying individual cans at your neighborhood convenience store; you get a much better unit price in bulk.

The Air Force also moved away from a cost plus award fee contracting approach focused on mission assurance, to one that has a fixed incentive for mission success and cost target fee sharing approach. This focused the reward and incentives on the right priorities and enables ULA to push back on non value added US Government requests. The Air Force’s strategy also allocates some of their projected missions for potential competition if a new entrant becomes certified in time to support mission launch requirements. ULA is pursuing a larger block buy of 50 cores so that we can deliver the larger economic order quantities savings to our core customer, NSS, while enabling us to market the remaining launch services to customers needing the reliability and dependability at a reasonable price that separates our product in the marketplace at a cost competitive price.

MSM

What will ULA attempt to accomplish as far as ensuring the military and government agencies are able to gain space for their critically needed payloads, which further the breadth of MILSATCOM to shorten missions and save warfighter lives?

Michael Gass

ULA, with our narrow focus on successfully launching critical USG spacecraft, including the broad spectrum of MILSATCOM capabilities, will focus on continuing to successfully place these critical assets into their proper orbit when the user needs them.

MSM

What are your thoughts regarding Hosted Payloads and how will such benefit the MAG and commercial environs?

Michael Gass

Hosted payloads are a subset of the disaggregation approach the Air Force is assessing as a way to provide more resilient capability. There’s really nothing new about hosting payloads, except the approach of hosting NSS payloads on commercial satellites, as successfully demonstrated with the CHIRP program. Like any rideshare, hosted payloads offer some promising benefits, but aren’t without their own challenges.

From a launch provider perspective, you’d like to see whatever marriage of payloads and buses happen early in the integration process to avoid late changes that can introduce uncertainty. But the payloads have to synchronize timing (launch window) and location (orbital parameters) with a suitable host, and do that in the context of the government procurement process. It’s one of those cases where the rocket science gets somewhat overshadowed by acquisition and political challenges.

Philosophically, the appeal of the approach is understandable. As the nation tries to lower the overall cost of space capabilities, you want to leverage every ounce of orbital capability, so any kind of rideshare, hosted payloads, secondaries, or dual launch has the potential to provide a major cost lever to help garner those cost efficiencies. The challenge will be synchronizing compatible missions early enough to allow the integration to occur without late disruptions in operational flows. ULA has a wide spectrum of capabilities on our launch families to support the incorporation of these approaches into the overall NSS space architecture.

MSM

Will ULA become involved in the multiple payload launches of small satellite “bundles,” such as nanos, picos, micros and so on? What are your insights into the future of small satellite launches and use?

Michael Gass

We’re very energized about the potential of dual launch and secondary payloads. We have an entire catalogue of rideshare capabilities and have demonstrated most of them. We’re developing a dual payload canister for our intermediate vehicles that will essentially allow us to launch two primary spacecraft on the same rocket. The first target is GPS III dual launch capability on Atlas, but the capability will allow for a multitude of dual launch pairings.

Dual launch is a subset of rideshare, and rideshare or secondary payloads isn’t something that’s new to us. We’ve launched multiple Iridiums and Globalstars on Delta II. We launched the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) paired with the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) on Atlas V and employed an ESPA ring with both STP-1 and the Delta Heavy demo. If you dig back further in Lockheed and Boeing heritage, you’ll find more examples of dual launch/rideshare including a DSCSII/III stack and commercial JCSAT/Skynet on Titan. More recently, we orbited 11 cubesats last November on Aft Bulkhead Carrier (ABC) with the NROL-36 mission out of Vandenberg Air Force Bas in California and we’re slated to place another 12 cubesats into orbit with NROL-39 this December.

As our users evolve their space architectures to provide more resilient solutions that include smaller SVs, the military utility of those systems will increase, and I think you’ll see more emphasis placed on accommodating their needs as part of our launch services. From our prospective it takes longer to turn the overall space architecture within any given mission area than it takes to deliver the launch solutions. The space program has to evolve their ground and user segments in addition to their satellites, so they tend to have a longer acquisition cycle than the launch systems. But as they develop demonstrations for those potential capabilities, it’s imperative that we offer a full range of rideshare capabilities that provide an efficient, reliable, dependable option for deploying and testing those concepts.

MSM

ULA has had 75 successful launches to date. With this tremendous legacy, how will ULA continue to be innovative with their launch and support offerings?

Michael Gass

We don’t normally count the string of successes. In this business, each launch is critical, so we think of it as one launch in a row. Our team of great professionals will continue to relentlessly drive efficiencies in our infrastructure, our processes and our products while continuing the focus on mission success that serves our nation so well. Our recent efforts have emphasized span and cycle time reduction. We’ve done detailed assessments of our factory and launch site flows to find opportunities to

consolidate processes and drive work out of our standard flows. Probably the most visible example was based on the reliability of our products, processes and infrastructure where we enabled the deletion of Wet Dress Rehearsals (WDR) for Atlas V at Cape Canaveral. The new construct saves about a week of launch flow each mission and significant costs in commodities and labor.

Given our launch rate for east coast Atlas and the maturity of the system, the WDR wasn’t really required anymore. Streamlining our production and launch cycles allows us to perform more missions, and to provide more confidence in our schedules. Our pursuit of Perfect Product Delivery has also garnered substantial improvements in quality across the board. Our key metrics on non-conformances and work traveled from the factory to the launch base have consistently seen below family, new record lows or zeros in our recent launches. That’s been another major factor in executing successfully and on time.

On the hardware side as with our processes, we continue to look for best practices. We continue to progress on developing Common Avionics that we’ll use for both our Atlas and Delta launch services, and we’re anticipating our first common RL10 upperstage engine, the RL10C, that will also support both families. In the longer term, we’ll continue to innovate and adapt to changing space architectures. Like any major aerospace company, we’ll dedicate a certain amount effort to nurturing long-term, high payoff efforts both in technologies for future product offerings and in our people to ensure we remain the leader in reliable and dependable launch services for our nation’s most critical NSS and space exploration capabilities. While I don’t see us straying from that core mission, we’ll continue evaluating contributing concepts and business cases that help us provide value to our customers.

MSMThe launch of the AEHF-3 satellite on September 13, 2013, aboard a ULA Delta V launch vehicle. Photo courtesy of ULA.


MSM

Will we see ULA become more involved with commercial launches, especially for off-shore customers?

Michael Gass

ULA and the commercial marketing groups of Lockheed for Atlas products and Boeing for Delta products will stay engaged in the commercial market. As an example, Lockheed’s Commercial Launch Services group recently won a Mexsat 3 mission that will launch on a ULA Atlas V.

MSM

An area of concern throughout the industry is that of properly trained personnel to fulfill crucial company positions. There is a current lack of STEM training in middle and high schools and at the college level—how important is it for the industry to promote STEM in the education system? Careers in the satellite and space industry? Is ULA involved in any such efforts?

Michael Gass

When United Launch Alliance was formed, we decided that one of core value tenants would be our support to the community. Our community support is focused on numerous STEM activities that are enabled by the company with funds and an incredible spirit of volunteerism by our employee team. We have programs that reach schools at every level to include partnering with universities on research projects. More than 20 ULA leaders sit on education related non-profit board of directors.

We have a world class intern program that helps us connect with college students from freshman year and on to ensure we keep our pipeline full. ULA has a unique advantage—we can share the excitement of launch—we’ve got smoke, fire, noise, and an element of danger to spark the attention of the young mind. Then we connect the dots of education to the jobs that make these missions happen.

MSM

Lastly, when you look back upon your career, what projects and/or missions truly bring a sense of satisfaction to you?

Michael Gass

The most difficult question. First, I have to say with the greatest of pride is how well the United Launch Alliance team came together. Partnering with our Chief Operating Officer, Dan Collins, we took two former competing teams, and integrated them, the numerous disparate processes, and consolidated infrastructure, and asked numerous people and families to relocate, all while continuing to deliver mission success. A great team was formed from some great heritages—I am humbled to be called their leader.

At ULA our mission statement is “Launching the quest for knowledge, peace and freedom.” I have had the honor and privilege to meet the end-users of the satellites that we put into orbit or send on journeys to explore the heavens. I take the greatest satisfaction in knowing that I played a small part in supporting their most noble missions. When you hear about how a satellite we launched helped save a life or when a rover lands on Mars—I know how much attention to detail was applied by so many people to make those miracles happen, and I am awestruck every day to be part of that team.

Photo: A ULA Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle lifts off.


Article courtesy of Air Force Space Command and is the combined work of several subject-matter experts.

Resiliency + Disaggregated Space Architectures—Part Two

Note: This is Part Two of MilsatMagazine’s coverage of Air Force Space Command’s White Paper on “Resiliency and Disaggregated Space Architectures.” Part One provided an overview of the new security environment driving the need for resiliency, and established common definitions for “resiliency” and “disaggregation.” Part One is available within the October issue of MilsatMagazine (http://www.milsatmagazine.com/story.php?number=1915825642).

Attributes Of Disaggregation

Disaggregation is a strategy to affect multiple elements of our overall space architecture. Its purpose is to provide options within architecture to drive down cost, increase resiliency and distribute capability. Disaggregation has other benefits —systems are allowed to be less complex, easier to maintain and affords the Air Force the ability to lower per-unit production costs and improve industrial base stability. Given program of record acquisition decisions we are facing in pending budget deliberations, the timing is right for reassessment of the historical paradigm of fielding monolithic space systems that result in costly, and vulnerable, space architectures.

Although the primary focus of this article is on disaggregation of the space segment, it is important to note that disaggregation should be considered at an enterprise level, to include connecting nodes, ground systems, command and control, and launch vehicle architecture. System planners should consider all aspects of an architecture, including additional ground entry points, added complexity for mission planning and command and control, and commercial or foreign elements intertwined with the DoD ground segment.

Disaggregation offers significant leverage in keeping pace with advancing technologies and associated benefits in terms of requirements discipline, sustainment of the space industrial base, achieving affordability, and deterring adversary action against U.S. space systems. Each of these opportunities is described below, with considerations for operational impact and costs.

Increased Technology Refresh Opportunities

Current satellite systems have developmental timelines of up to 14 years1. Once on orbit these systems routinely exceed 10 years of life. During development, incorporating advances in technology is often difficult as it slows design development and adds significantly to system costs. Once on orbit, hardware upgrades are not practicable. This combination results in technology being “locked in” for what may be a lengthy period of time.

This is a substantial drawback considering the pace of technology change, rapidly evolving user needs, and constantly changing tactics, techniques and procedures of adversaries. To remain responsive to these demands requires mission flexibility and an adaptable acquisition process. Through less complex satellites employing more flexible designs, disaggregation facilitates the incorporation of new technology before the end of a space constellation’s lifetime. In this regard, it represents an evolution of system acquisition that enables adaptable platforms, software, and capabilities to more effectively match emerging needs.

Improved Requirements Discipline

As discussed, one consequence of our historical approach to space system design is an extended development timeline. Coupled with rapidly advancing technology, these timelines and associated acquisition paradigms may place pressure on program managers and system developers to adapt and incorporate new requirements during the design phase—to make systems exquisite, in other words—adding significantly to their costs2. Disaggregation and the potential to refresh technology, as discussed above, provides an opportunity to enforce stricter requirements discipline with all the associated value in cost and schedule. That is, program managers have increased opportunity to lock in a firm requirements baseline that will not be deviated from, as they know there may be increased opportunity to incorporate system changes later, even after satellites have begun launching. This model of “constant adaptability” is a significant deviation from current acquisition practices, and could improve affordability and resiliency.

Increased Launch + Space Industrial Base Stability

As noted in the most recent National Space Policy, the U.S. space industrial base plays a vital role in providing and sustaining space capabilities and national security. Continuous incorporation of new technology into space systems and higher rates of production will also enable industry to remain on the cutting edge of technology and provide additional business stability and incentives. Higher throughput and more stable production rates should produce a larger market for space-qualified parts, thus providing incentives for more companies to enter the marketplace. Improving stability is an important factor in maintaining critical system expertise and sustaining “one-of-a-kind” manufacturing capabilities.

Disaggregation could a l so fos ter hea l thy compet i t i on and assist with distributing w o r k l o a d o v e r multiple contractors. Pay loads f lown on separate spacecraft groups could be provided by different contractor t e a m s , p o t e n t i a l l y dividing large contracts, creating industrial competition and allowing technology insertion on independent timelines. While beneficial, this approach wou ld requ i re increased focus o n i n t e g r a t i o n efforts, starting with stated requirements, and spanning multiple contract team products.

Depending on the approach to disaggregation employed, it could lead to more frequent and predictable launch profiles. An increased launch rate may smooth episodic launch schedules, providing a more stable workload for the launch industry. Further, increased frequency of launch would allow industry to amortize the significant specialized manpower costs associated with the operation and maintenance of launch capabilities, while helping to sustain individual suppliers whose only customer arises with each individual launch.

Higher production throughput and increased stability may further enable incorporation of commercial best practices3 and competition into national security space architectures when commercial best practices align with system requirements. Commercial best practices in satellite system designs have been shown to minimize the amount of redesign required for different missions, reducing cost and production time.

For example, the commercial satellite bus market has demonstrated the ability to produce satellites in 24 to 36 months and at much lower price points than DoD has been able to achieve4. Less complex systems may also increase the willingness for sponsors to forgo the costly mission assurance associated with current launch vehicles and accept increased risk.

Increased Affordability

The DoD is facing a fiscal environment that requires innovative approaches to deliver required mission capability. Declining budgets will mean fewer resources available for system sustainment, procurement, manpower and operation. These factors, combined with cost escalation in the space domain that far exceeds the Consumer Price Index5 , drives a requirement for systems that are less costly to manufacture, operate and maintain. Smaller, less complex and lighter systems may shorten procurement timelines, save upfront RDT&E investment and reduce risk in technology development.

Combined, these characteristics of disaggregated space architectures may lead to cost savings. Increased production lots would also allow manufacturing production lines to be utilized for longer periods of time at optimized production rates, thus reducing per unit cost and leveling procurement spikes. A good example of this effect is the Global Positioning Satellite system, where larger production numbers provide a more stable manufacturing environment and long-term facility and equipment utilization.

Previous satellite system acquisition programs have experienced large cost overruns and schedule delays. While root causes vary by program, a common reason for cost increases is the difficulty of integrating multiple payloads onto a single bus. This often proves to be technologically challenging and can significantly delay fielding a system.

http://www.milsatmagazine.com/story.php?number=1915825642

http://www.milsatmagazine.com/story.php?number=1915825642

MilsatMagazine—November 2013 29SatMagazine—November 2013

In the National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) program, complexity associated with integrating multiple, diverse sensors on a single platform grew to be so expensive and difficult to manage that the program was canceled, opening the possibility of a future gap in capability6. Disaggregation reduces this type of integration risk by focusing on less complex designs that may provide singular functions (or components), but operating together provide a capability comparable to the original monolithic design.

Smaller programs of record across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) may also provide advantages in program execution, as large, single investment programs are sometimes needed to act as “bill payers” in times of budget decline. Less costly programs can smooth erratic spikes in program funding profiles, most often associated with a launch event or satellite production. These spikes have a negative impact on other programs in the portfolio, as budgets are typically capped at a pre-determined ceiling and other program schedules may need to be modified to accommodate the short-term increase in spending.

As noted by a recent report from the Government Accountability Office, more action is needed to identify opportunities to leverage the governments’ buying power through increased efficiencies in launch acquisitions7. In addition to any savings realized in terms of satellites, lighter, smaller systems may benefit from reduced launch costs by combining multiple payloads on a single launch vehicle or by reducing the size and complexity of the required booster.

Today, launch services are projected to consume approximately 30 percent of AFSPC’s budget over a 20 year plan; advancing launch capability to create an overall balance between affordability, performance and resilience for space must remain a top priority.

Improved Deterrence

Given U.S. dependence on space systems that are often difficult to defend or protect, it is in our best interest to deter attacks on these systems in the first place. Two characteristics that are often associated with deterrence theory are “imposing costs” and “denying benefit.” This follows the “carrot and a stick” idiom for offering rewards and punishment. Repercussions for adverse behavior in space should be apparent while any benefit for attacking space systems should be uncertain.

Disaggregation improves this deterrent posture by compl i ca t ing an adversary’s targeting calculus and increasing t h e u n c e r t a i n t y o f successful attack. Smaller payloads that are more easily produced, coupled with rapid/responsive launch capability, also increase the ability to reconst i tute quickly, denying benefit to be gained from a successful attack. In short , the goal is to make attack against our systems as difficult as possible, while increasing the possibility of capability survival in the face of hostile action8.

I f , as many exper ts asser t , an a t tack in space i s inev i tab le , disaggregation will enable new tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) to take advantage of the unique attributes of a dispersed architecture9. Mission flexibility may be increased, offering alternatives to how we could “fight through” an attack in space rather than relying on our current valuable, and vulnerable, monolithic satellites. In addition, some missions such as nuclear attack w a r n i n g w o u l d b e understood to be clearly

“off limits,” or the aggressor would risk nuclear escalation.

Additional Study

As a strategy, disaggregation requires careful analysis and mission-specific assessment. Given the vulnerability inherent in current space architectures, combined with the danger of an escalating threat, our future architectures demand a thorough examination of the potential benefits of disaggregation.

There are specific challenges that need to be addressed. Using disaggregation to off-load complexity from the space segment could transfer this complexity to other parts of the system. Consideration needs to be made for increased ground entry point assets, terrestrial communications, and processing requirements for the ground segment, along with additional demands on frequency allocations and satellite Telemetry, Tracking and Control (TT&C) operations. Thus innovative satellite operations concepts need to be examined along with disaggregation to avoid transferring the satellite savings to ground segment costs.

Higher technology refresh rates put pressure on our ability to mature and transition technology in our space acquisition; it will require greater emphasis on acquisition flexibility and adaptability. If not carefully planned and assessed, each new insertion could lead to changes in the communications and ground segments to adapt to new signal formats, higher data rates, commercial standards, increased data storage needs or multi-level security solutions to meet the latest cyber standards.

With regard to using hosted payloads on commercial and allied systems, attention needs to be paid to military requirements for radiation hardening, redundancy, and other protective measures. Being secondary to the primary satellite operator also increases the chances for conflict of interest; for example, the primary operator may want to relocate the satellite when the secondary payload operator, in this case the DoD, does not. These issues are currently being addressed in DoD policy and at the Hosted Payload Office in SMC.

While improvements to industrial base stability offer significant advantages, more detailed study is required in launch costs, range operations and ground system complexity to ensure less costly yet increased numbers of satellites don’t offset expected savings. Less complex satellites could cost significantly less than legacy systems, but an increase in the number of platforms on orbit may eventually offset this savings through increased life-cycle costs from additional launches and ground system costs.

On the other hand, lighter, less complex satellites may lead to smaller launch vehicle requirements or enable multiple payloads per launch, leading to even greater affordability. These system trade-offs are being carefully assessed within each applicable architecture.


Conclusion

Today, our current space architectures are vulnerable to attack. Our adversary’s counterspace capabilities and actions continue to grow in sophistication, number and employment with the intent to hold our space systems at risk. If the premise is accepted that national security space assets will someday be attacked, then we have a military and moral obligation to examine protective measures that minimize this risk and protect our nation’s warfighters, citizens, and economy. Standing still in an environment populated with intelligent adversaries seeking to contest our leadership in space and the operational advantages it affords is a strategy for falling behind.

Disaggregation is an innovative opportunity to stay ahead of our adversaries, to change their targeting calculus, and to mitigate the effects of a widespread attack on our space assets. In addition, resilience serves as a deterrent, which may be the best way to preserve our capability by avoiding an attack.

While disaggregation is only part of the equation for space system resiliency, it offers the possibility to increase technology refresh opportunities, improve requirements discipline, increase launch and space industrial base stability, increase affordability and improve deterrence. The existing Cold War paradigm of protecting space systems through the threat of mutually assured destruction may no longer apply to today’s security environment; it must be augmented by a natural evolution of the current status quo, toward innovative and creative solutions such as disaggregated space architectures.

References1 Pawlikowski et al, “Space: Disruptive Challenges, New Opportunities and New

Strategies” 34.

2 “Prevent project cost overruns with these four essential processes”, TechRepublic, http://www.techrepublic.com/article/prevent-project-cost-overruns-with-these-four-essential-processes/1038752, Viewed 7 Mar 2013

3 True higher production throughput is achieved through proliferation of disaggregated payloads that have been further simplified.

4 Futron Corporation, Satellite Manufacturing: Production Cycles and Time to Market, May 2004, 2, http://www.futron.com/upload/wysiwyg/Resources/Whitepapers/Satellite_Manufacturing _Production_Cycles_0504.pdf.

5 According to the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) for 2006 through 2011, funding for development and procurement of major unclassified space systems grew by more than 40 percent in 2006 (to $6.9 billion from $4.9 billion in 2005).

6 For an empirical description of the exponential relationship between space system cost and complexity, and the potential gains to be realized from emphasizing less complex space systems, see David A. Bearden, “A complexity-based risk assessment of low-cost planetary missions: when is a mission too fast and too cheap?” Acta Astronomica 52 (2003): 371-379. Further discussion of the strategic possibilities inherent in the relationship between complexity and cost are covered in Howard E. McCurdy, Better, Faster, Cheaper: Low-Cost Innovation in the U.S. Space Program (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001) and Liam Sarsfield, The Cosmos on a Shoestring: Small Spacecraft for Space and Earth Science (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1998).

7 “DoD is Overcoming Long-Standing Problems, but Faces Challenges to Ensuring Its Investments are Optimized,” Government Accountability Office (GAO), 24 April 2013.

8 While this approach does not deter attacks to components of the system on the ground, terrestrial systems can be “hardened” and are in general more accessible to initiate repairs or replacement than a system in space.

9 In 2001, the “Space Commission,” led by the Honorable Donald Rumsfeld, warned of a potential “Pearl Harbor in Space.” More recently, it has been noted that “the principles of war and the logic of competition remain as they have always been” and this will inevitably lead to competition, contestation, and/or war in space, especially between the U.S. and the People’s Republic of China, is inevitable. See Everett Carl Dolman, “New Frontiers, Old Realities,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 78-96.

Artistic rendition of the NPOESS satellite.

The 45th Space Wing successfully launched a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket carrying the third Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF-3)

satellite from Space Launch Complex-41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on Spetember 18, 2013.

http://www.de-ice.com/

Command Center Ken Peterman, Vice President, Government Systems, ViaSat

Mr. Peterman leads the Government Systems segment that develops and produces network-centric IP-based secure fixed and mobile government communications systems, products, and services that enable collection and dissemination of secure, real-time digital

information between command centers, communications nodes, and air defense systems. Mr. Peterman has more than 30 years of experience in systems engineering, strategic planning, portfolio management, and business leadership in the aerospace and defense industries.

From July 2012 to April 2013, Mr. Peterman served as president and CEO of SpyGlass Group, a company he co-founded that provides executive strategic advisory services to the aerospace and defense industries. From 2011 to July 2012, he served as president of Exelis Communications and Force Protection Systems, and from 2007 to 2011, he served as president of ITT Communications Systems, which are both developers and providers of command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance products and systems. Previously, Mr. Peterman was vice president and general manager of Rockwell Collins Government System Integrated C3 Systems and Rockwell Collins Displays and Awareness Systems. He earned a B.S.EE degree from Tri-State University (now Trine).


Mr. Peterman, thank you for taking the time to address our readership. How did you initially become interested in the communications and ISR market segments?

Ken Peterman

That is an interesting question as I have been involved in defense communications for more than 30 years, initially as a young satellite communications design engineer when I first worked with some of ViaSat’s founders. However, the communications and ISR markets are particularly exciting today.

As seen during OEF/OIF, DoD demand for SATCOM has grown from 2.3Gbps in March 2008 to 31.6Gbps in the summer of 2012—this is expected to continue for the foreseeable future as the technology supports enduring, global C4ISR mission requirements. To affordably meet this growing demand, DoD is earnestly looking for ways to adapt existing business practices and acquisition strategies to take advantage of the value of high-capacity commercial SATCOM capabilities, such as those at ViaSat. The focus is on the technology to deliver bits to the user as well as the quality and availability of those bits that are delivered.

MSM

What prompted your career move to ViaSat from your position as CEO at the SpyGlass Group?

Ken Peterman

ViaSat has one of the most innovative and creative cultures I’ve ever seen and the company can truly present a superb growth story. I have many friends and colleagues who work here and I have maintained close relationships with them. Now, with our Government Systems segment continuing to gain momentum, this is a particularly interesting time to join the ViaSat team.

There’s fast growth in other areas of the company, as well, and t h o s e e l e m e n t s a l s o helped prompt the need for my new role here. ViaSat also deepened leadership in a couple of our business segments at the same time I came onboard.

MSM

What are your goals as the G.M. of ViaSat’s Government Systems division? With $139 million increase in year-over-year revenues, will your division be further expanding its business influence into the private sector, such as first responders and state and local security components, to further drive revenues?

Pictured: The ViaSat KG-250X HAIPE™ IP Network Encryptor


Ken Peterman

One of the first goals is to communicate what ViaSat can accomplish in support of DoD. We are no longer the small products company we used to be—we have the expertise and scale to take our place alongside other top tier prime contractors and can, and will, play an increasingly larger role in meeting DoD capability gaps in an affordable manner. Our unique culture of innovation plays a large role in pursuing that goal.

People are often surprised by the breadth of systems and services that ViaSat offers. We have a plethora of great ideas and highly talented people who can solve the toughest challenges brought before them. We have a unique way of looking at communication systems and have a track record of bringing new dimensions of value to our government customers that our competitors have difficulty in matching. We need to spread that word to the marketplace, and we are doing just that through a variety of channels.

As you mentioned in your question, one of those new product areas is our high-speed services for the enterprise. We’re already seeing success in targeting first responders, law enforcement, anti-piracy forces, and critical infrastructure providers, such as utilities, with our communication and cybersecurity systems and services.

MSM

The DoD continues to demand more and more satellite bandwidth, even as troop drawbacks occur across the globe—how can ViaSat assist in their ever-increasing appetite for more services and bandwidth? Ken Peterman

There’s no doubt of the need for commercial SATCOM to help fill that need. We agree with the recommendations of the Defense Business Board in their recent report to the Secretary of Defense. The essence of those recommendations is; that they need COMSATCOM to meet their needs; that it makes more sense economically and in terms of development times; that the DoD is not using the opportunities now available in the marketplace; and that DoD can do a lot more to optimize its strategy and structure to take advantage of those opportunities to gain the performance and economic advantages in the commercial marketplace.

We’re experts in satellite technology and our mission is to constantly drive down the cost per bit of satellite bandwidth—that should be highly attractive to DoD in the current environment where the need for more bandwidth is steadily increasing, all the while defense budgets are not. We can show them demonstrations of these new capabilities today with ViaSat-1. Plus, we can work with the agency to either lease available capacity or build new, similarly optimized satellites dedicated to DoD needs.

MSM

In your opinion, what new technologies and services within COMSATCOM will benefit military, agency, and government (MAG) organizations?

Ken Peterman

Advances in commercial, high-capacity satellite (HCS) technologies and business models are effectively optimizing total system life cycle costs by focusing on the end-to-end value proposition and these same advances hold significant benefits for MAG organizations. HCS has already dramatically increased the COMSATCOM supply (measured in bits of capacity and coverage footprint), and reduced the capital cost of COMSATCOM capacity by over 100-fold over the past several years. This is remarkable and timely from a defense communications and ISR market perspective.

MSM

What role will mobile SATCOM play in ViaSat’s offerings? Is COTP (Communication-On-The-Pause) being replaced by COTM (Communication-On-The-Move)? What technologies or products can ViaSat offer to aid in this move for critical mobile and transportable communications?

Ken Peterman

In addition to the cost-efficiency of HCS bandwidth, our technology enables terminals to be reduced in size and cost as well. We have a new portable terminal that packs inside a standard suitcase, at less than 50 pounds, and the unit can easily be checked in on a commercial flight. In a commercial environment, terminals also need to be easy to set up by nontechnical personnel. Think of the benefits for first responders, or even today’s more dispersed military forces—they can more easily transport this gear, set it up in minutes, and have a high-speed broadband connection virtually anywhere.

Just about any recent crisis situation you can name—super storm Sandy, the Colorado floods, the plant explosion in Texas, wildfires in California—has had one or more relief organization on the ground within days, using our new HCS services to provide emergency communications in support of their relief mission.

This year, you’ll also see a new HCS in-flight broadband system, Exede In The Air, start operations for JetBlue. This technology represents a new way to provide in-flight connectivity. Instead of one bucket of bandwidth that everyone on the plane must share, Exede In The Air establishes a dedicated 12Mbps service to each passenger. That type of mobile service translates directly to Command and Control (C2) or VIP aircraft.


It’s surprising how poor the service is aboard some of our most important military planes today. However, this capability, enabled by HCS, can turn that amenity around and give personnel high-speed connections similar to what is available to them on the ground. This is an enormous game-changer in terms of affordable capability.

MSM

What advantages/disadvantages are there to high throughput satellite (HTS) technology? What would be the recommended path for the DoD to follow in order to take advantage of HTS? What role will ViaSat play within the HTS environment?

Ken Peterman

The biggest advantage of HTS, or HCS as we refer to it, is the low cost per bit. Traditional Ku-band can cost around $225 million per Gbps of throughput, while our HCS system cuts that to about $3.5 million/Gbps—an order of magnitude improvement in terms of savings. A secondary benefit from such a large reservoir of bandwidth is the resiliency and redundancy so gained. The pipes are bigger and also provide resiliency and security.

One often cited disadvantage is that the systems are “closed.” In other words, you have to use a single vendor for space assets and ground systems. We don’t see it that way. We look at satellite networks as complete eco-systems. Some of the improvements we are incorporating into these satellites would offer capabilities that are currently impossible to use, given the current state of ground networking equipment.

There are also recent examples of the DoD having a satellite launched, but with no compatible ground terminals for usable connectivity. That means capital costs are sitting on orbit with no way for users to benefit from those assets. We believe in optimizing capital investment and network performance when both space and ground systems are worked on in parallel—the entire system is optimized and ready to operate from day one of the satellite’s commissioning.

For the government, the advantage of that whole-system approach is that an end-to-end acquisition strategy is facilitated, one that can be consolidated under a single service program office, and that yields a synchronized, cost-effective, rapidly fielded capability.

MSM

Would these new satellite assets be DoD owned, or leased from satellite operators such as ViaSat?

Ken Peterman

First and foremost, we believe that DoD must be extremely attentive to the attributes of the commercial satellite selected and its specific performance characteristics to maximize the agency’s associated return on space capital investment. That is absolutely vital. Further, that point differentiates our position from much of the rest of the industry on this important Pathfinder COMSATCOM initiative. Then, where COMSATCOM services are available, the DoD should lease that capacity.

However, commercial technologies advance so rapidly that lease periods must be established that are short enough in tenure to enable the DoD to readily transition to more advanced and economical commercial bandwidth as such becomes available. Where there is no COMSATCOM geographical coverage, DoD should replicate best commercial technologies. This could be accomplished by acquiring “clones” of proven, commercial HCS systems that maximize their return on space capital investment and position them on orbit to provide the DoD required capacity where it’s geographically needed.

MSM

Do you see a growing need for smaller satellites (i.e., nano, pico, micro and so on) as assets for MAG related communications and ISR needs? (If the answer is in a positive vein, the following question is appropriate)—Given their ability to be part of a multiple payload, their time to launch and cost reduction factors, how will ViaSat take advantage of their capabilities?

Ken Peterman

ViaSat is actively engaged in exploring these smaller alternatives and much of our commercial and defense technologies are readily applicable to these markets. We think that they have applicability to certain special missions and operational scenarios and, where appropriate, we are engaged in that.

MSM

What is the new DoD acquisition process and are you gaining traction with these procedures? Does timeliness to market remain a major issue? How are cost factors being ameliorated for all involved parties?

Ken Peterman

We’re making progress. The Defense Business Board study cited earlier is just one example. Another is the DISA Pathfinder RFI issued earlier this year. I want to emphasize that the DoD hasn’t done anything “wrong” in the past—it’s just that commercial technologies have advanced to the point where they now can take advantage of a different way of doing business. The commercial norm is

about three years from design to inserting a satellite on orbit, while the DoD historically takes about seven years to accomplish the same mission. There was a time when the DoD used to build their own cell networks and computers, as well, but they would never do that today.

The DoD is now beginning to understand that commercial satellite technology has reached the same point in its development: Commercial companies can do it faster and cheaper and also provide far better state-of-the-art technology that can be readily applied to meet DoD requirements such as security, resiliency, anti-jam, and so on.

MSM

Given your more than 30 years of experience, when you look back over your career, what project(s) or mission(s) that you’ve been involved in bring you the most sense of satisfaction?

Ken Peterman

I have many good friends in the communications and ISR market segments, in industry and government, and I have really enjoyed partnering together with them to address the many challenging problems that we face. Many times in my career, we have worked together to construct teaming, partnering, and joint venture relationships to better enable us to solve large complex challenges in the U.S. and global markets—including satellite communication programs, terrestrial line-of-sight communication programs, and security and counter-IED programs.

Through these partnering relationships, with both industry and government, we have successfully addressed customer requirements, filled capability gaps, overcome market challenges and created enduring friendships that together have been some of the most rewarding experiences of my career.

More info: http://www.viasat.com


Artistic rendition of the ViaSat-2 satellite.

http://www.viasat.com/

http://www.mobility.vsatevent.com/


By Aaron Lewis, Director of Media + Government Relations, Arianespace

The HPA Corner The International Aspects...

With ongoing discussions surrounding the manufacturers, operators and integrators experience in the hosted payload arena, it’s important to note that the launch community is no stranger to this type of access to space.

Whether commercially-hosted government payloads, or commercially-hosted commercial payloads, launch providers have been delivering these assets to space for decades. In some cases, certain launch providers could be deemed pioneers in the hosted payload arena.

In 2005, Arianespace launched the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) for the Federal Aviation Administration, on board an Ariane 5 from Europe’s spaceport (CSG) in French Guiana. Then, in 2011, the Commercially Hosted Infrared Payload (CHIRP), a U.S. Air Force infrared sensor, was launched on the SES-2 satellite via Arianespace, again on an Ariane 5.

In 2012, International Launch Services launched Intelsat’s IS-22 satellite via a Proton rocket, which carried a UHF-hosted payload that serves the Australian Defense Force.

These missions all represent resounding successes, with the hosted payloads continuing to provide crucial services to government customers today. With each of these launches, the hosted payload model was vindicated.

With the responsibility of launching these payloads comes the expectation—and the absolute necessity—for significant security provisions. In the case of Arianespace’s French Guiana facility, the French Navy, Army and Foreign Legion, and the Gendarmerie (national police) form several impenetrable security layers around any launch campaign that occurs within the CSG.

Other tight security protocols strictly control access to any spacecraft resident within the base’s preparation facilities and provide 24 hour monitoring of sensitive technologies. Badging check-points are a must, and when needed, an enhanced security regimen is also part of the overall launch plan.

These activities are an integral part of being a trusted partner in the satellite launch industry. Moreover, all of these steps are taken in order to practice strict adherence to U.S. export control laws, rules and regulations.

Top: Artistic impression of the SES-2 satellite. Image courtesy of Orbital Sciences.

Bottom: CHIRP, the U.S. Air Force experimental missile warning sensor aboard the SES-2 satellite. Photo courtesy of SES.

The launch of the Intelsat IS-22 by International Launch Services (ILS). Photo is courtesy of ILS.


Question for HPA members:

How should policy evolve so foreign launches of U.S. Government payloads can take better advantage of trusted launch providers?

“Our customers have proven that there are no barriers to launching a hosted payload on ILS Proton—whether it has a civil, military or other sensitive government application. In fact, the majority of ILS Proton launches within the past twelve months were either hosted payloads or dual-use payloads for a wide range of customers from all corners of the world. U.S. policies may need to be adapted or modified to include this cost-effective and schedule efficient launch solution very early in the program development process. This would enable all parties involved—from the launcher, the satellite manufacturer, operator and integrator—to properly assess the technical feasibility as well as the benefits, of commercial launch.”—Dawn Harms, Vice President of Marketing, Sales and Communications, International Launch Services (ILS)

“A waiver is currently required to fly on foreign “trusted” launch vehicles. As the United States government evolves to utilization of Hosted Payloads, such as through the U.S. Air Force’s Hosted Payload Solutions (HoPS) initiative, foreign launch vehicles will inevitably be used due to the primary commercial host satellite and launch vehicle selected. Because of this, a more streamlined waiver process is needed.”—Jim Simpson, Vice President Business Development, Boeing Space & Intelligence Solutions

“Remove the language from the U.S. Space Transportation Policy that requires U.S. Government payloads to be launched on space launch vehicles manufactured in the United States. Most trusted launch providers fit within the comfort zone of U.S. diplomatic strategies and support U.S. interests for free market economics, sound security measures, and technology safeguards. Opening up the launch vehicle market internationally for U.S. Government payloads will foster healthy competition and drive down costs, which benefits U.S. Space Acquisition and the U.S. taxpayer in today’s fiscally constrained environment. Policy must change now so the U.S. can afford to modernize U.S. Space capabilities through the employment of timely, resilient and disaggregated space architectures that will only be possible from a wide range of Space Launch choices.”—Eric Moltzau, Senior Principal Director, Intelsat General Corporation

“An update to the U.S. Space Transportation Policy, last published in 2005, is nearing completion. This policy update will likely allow a limited set of U.S. Government offices to take advantage of capabilities offered by trusted launch providers while continuing more stringent approval requirements on other payloads. If that is the case, the change didn’t go far enough. The current U.S. export control laws provide ample protection for U.S. technology and hosted payloads should be treated no differently. SES, Orbital, SAIC, and Arianespace proved that launching classified hardware from French Guiana can be done. During the launch preparation for SES-2 and the Commercially Hosted InfraRed Payload (CHIRP), we had to make only minor changes to Arianespace’s standard procedures to launch hardware classified at the DoD secret level. As the U.S. expands its international outreach in select National Security programs like WGS, AEHF, perhaps it is time to include launch in those discussions also.”—Tim Deaver, Vice President, Corporate Development, SES Government Solutions

“While it doesn’t seem as though hosted payloads have been around very long, the truth is that the U.S. government has been hosting various payloads on satellites for 50 years. Commercially hosted payloads bring a unique set of requirements for security, ITAR, IP protection, and other considerations. The mission is always the first concern whenever the U.S. government contemplates launching a hosted payload, for there can be little room for error when the nation’s interests are at stake. The current process already allows for commercial hosting. By definition it is not easy, since the interests of the commercial host and the payload provider often differ. The current process already assesses against these factors, so major changes seem unwarranted. Furthermore, many other governments have policies that limit the field of launch providers, so greater access domestically should be balanced with greater access into the international market. Finally, the U.S. government has evaluated non-U.S. launch services because of the perceived shortage of commercially available U.S. launchers. Space-X, Orbital Sciences, and Lockheed Martin are all on a path to provide plenty of affordable indigenous lift, thus fulfilling any perceived gaps.”—Robert R. Cleave, President, Lockheed Martin Commercial Launch Services

“Arianespace is a proven, trusted provider of launch services for the commercial space sector. Recent successes by SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Orbital’s Antares indicate there will soon be two new affordable American options for commercial space lift. However, [until these new launch service entrants establish routine operational tempo] the commercial world will remain predominantly reliant on foreign launchers. Currently, U.S. Space Transportation Policy requires that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) along with the National Security Council (NSC) grant an exemption when U.S. Government payloads are planned to be launched on non-U.S. rockets. Consequently, it is very important that U.S. Government sponsors of commercially hosted missions seek this exemption very early in the planning cycle to legitimize the hosted payload mission concept before formal Analyses of Alternatives are commissioned. By the same token, OSTP and the NSC should have the authority to grant exemptions at least on a conditional basis during this early concept forming period. We hope that the policy will be modified to be more transparent and to provide for time limits on the government’s exemption deliberation process.”—Dave Anhalt, Vice President + General Manager, Iridium PRIME

“The U.S. Government should lift policy restrictions that keep federal agencies from using foreign commercial launch services, within the confines of export licensing regulations carried out by the U.S. State and Commerce Departments. This assumes we’re talking about U.S. policy and non-U.S. launch of U.S. Government payloads. The hosted payload builder and Government team should weigh the program cost benefits of a potentially lower cost hosting and launch with the cost of additional security at both the host integration facilities and launch base. While it may have served us well in the past to guarantee a customer base for U.S. launch providers, there is little need for explicit policy as the export licensing process should suffice. There are launch nations that will not pass government scrutiny, of course, with North Korea and China among them. But NATO-member nations and others with which we have close alliances could be acceptable. Let the market and negotiations determine the best deal where there are not overriding technical and security constraints.”—Tim Frei, Vice President, Communication Systems, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems

For further information regarding the Hosted Payload Alliance, please access their website

http://www.hostedpayloadalliance.org

About the authorAaron Lewis, Director of Media and Government Relations for Arianespace has been with the company since 2004. Previously he served for a decade in the U.S. House of Representatives in various policy and communications strategy roles. He has a degree in Classics and the History of Math and Science from St. John’s College, Annapolis, Maryland.

Command Center

Michael C. Payne, CEO, Vislink, Inc.

Michael C. Payne is the CEO of Vislink, Inc. Michael has over 25 years of experience in the wireless video communications industry. Positions held during his tenure at MRC included Chief Technology Officer, Vice President of Marketing & Business Development

and Director of Engineering. Michael holds a U.S. Patent for: Methods and Apparatus for Transmitting Analog and Digital Information Signals.


Vislink has been in the video contribution business for more than 50 years, beginning with analog microwave radios and now expanding into end-to-end video solutions for broadcast, government, law enforcement, military, and emergency services worldwide. To what do you attribute the company’s longevity and success?

Michael Payne

Vislink is committed to providing solutions that have value to our customers on the day they are delivered, and retain that value over the life of the product. We leverage the strength of our combined brands to offer integrated solutions for the most challenging video contribution applications.

Vislink’s development team has been able to consistently introduce innovative wireless communications solutions that enhance our customers’ video workflows. Our management team is infused in the marketplace to stay in tune with technological trends and drive those into our development roadmap.

Our engineering team is a world-class grouping of top talent, who are able to actualize these ideas, from development, through rigorous testing, to final product. Our expertise includes analog video, digital video, Internet Protocol, RF microwave, and satellite technologies. Finally, our customer service team works tirelessly to deliver world-class service around the globe.

MSM

How is VISLINK addressing the needs of the military and law enforcement markets?

Michael Payne

We realize that military and law enforcement markets also require reliable, go-anywhere communications and video equipment. Field personnel need to be able to rely on communications with command authorities in the field and in tactical situations, and live go-anywhere transmissions allow for action made decisions based on real-time information. With this in mind, we developed a product portfolio with enhanced portability and increased durability in extreme environments, whether it be the summit of Mount Everest or the dust and heat of the Middle East.

For example, our updated Motorized MSAT satellite terminal provides communication links quicker and easier than ever before. This can make all the difference in surveillance scenarios, and enables disparate teams of military personnel to stay connected whatever the situation. (Please see the product sidebar on the following page.)

The new MSAT was designed to accommodate the extreme conditions faced by law enforcement and military personnel, yet still be light-weight and simple enough for rapid deployment and one-man operations in a variety of scenarios.

We currently have more than 100 units throughout the world, including the Middle East, Caribbean and United Kingdom.

MSM

What is VISLINK V-Net and what is its significance to the marketplace?


The New Motorised MSATThis offering is a rugged, portable satellite data terminal that uses one-button auto acquire for operation in various environments.

Vislink’s rugged product is resistant to extreme environmental conditions and can operate within any environment, anywhere in the world.

Following the successful launch of the military-spec Mantis MSAT last year, the new Motorised MSAT adds the option of a 120cm reflector.

The terminal also provides improved data throughput rates of up to 10Mbps—this makes the MSAT the ideal system for surveillance missions in challenging or hostile environments.

With simultaneous three-axis motorization and one-button auto acquire, the MSAT terminal offers full support for two-way video, voice and data communications, and is designed for rapid deployment as well as one-man operation in a variety of scenarios.

Despite these additional features, the Motorised MSAT still weighs less than 25kgs.

Stephen Rudd, CEO of Vislink International Ltd., said, “The Motorised MSAT was developed in response to growing demand from military personnel for an automated version of our successful Mantis MSAT product. The new MSAT meets the same high-bandwidth connectivity requirements as the original unit, but now that it’s automated the MSAT can provide a communications link quicker and easier than ever before. This can make all the difference in surveillance scenarios, and can enable disparate teams of military personnel to stay connected whatever the situation.”

The Motorised MSAT is a full tri-band optioned system that can support X-, Ka- and Ku-band configurations. It is capable of delivering high-definition video and data from anywhere in the world and the feeds can be swapped in the field, building on the flexibility and portability that customers have come to expect from the MSAT range.

MSAT meets the MIL 810F & DEF-STAN military specifications for shock, vibration, sand and rain and is provided as a ‘one box’ solution incorporating antenna, modem and all electronics.

A high performance parabolic antenna is coupled, according to customer requirements, with interchangeable modem and encoder options. The terminal is available to operate in X-, Ka- and Ku-bands.

39

Vislink’s Motorized MSAT terminal.Michael Payne

VISLINK V-Net is a streamlined solution that integrates mobile, fixed and covert intelligence assets into a seamless flow of information. V-Net allows emergency response professionals to provide the highest possible level of crisis management by combining critical real-time video from a variety of deployed assets.

V–Net provides the complete wide area surveillance picture by collecting imagery from multiple locations such as police and fire assets (i.e., aircraft, watercraft, UAV, and so on), then distributing it via an Internet Protocol (IP) network to first responders, command staff, and EOC personnel at multiple locations. The encrypted video may be received by computers, tablets, and smart phones anywhere on the network.

V-Net integrates microwave, IP, 4G LTE, MESH, and satellite uplink networks providing an optimized solution. V-Net is VISLINK’s end-to-end surveillance solution with products ranging from miniature covert transmitters to sophisticated satellite terminals designed for the transmission of IP, video, audio, and data. V-Net represents the next step in video intelligence collection technology.

VISLINK has a number of unique features we developed to provide our customers with cutting-edge technology for their mission critical applications:

RangeMaster is an exclusive VISLINK feature that maximizes the video transmission range and allows video signals to reach four times farther than COFDM/DVB-T transmission. On a high-speed chase, RangeMaster will enable you to downlink images over greater distances than a system without RangeMaster.

DoubleVision supports the transmission of two simultaneous video feeds from a single transmitter. DoubleVision allows you to simultaneously downlink two video sources and associated imagery from a moving map, hoist camera, cabin camera, or any other video source monitoring vital mission information.

FadeFighter Technology is an exclusive and unique VISLINK feature that greatly reduces video break-up in dense metro area environments from fast-moving aircraft or ground-based vehicles. Momentary loss, or freezing of the video image, is common in metro environments when transmitting from moving platforms. FadeFighter works to minimize this effect.

MSM

Looking towards 2014, what is VISLINK’s vision?

Michael Payne

VISLINK is focused on growing its relationship with military and law enforcement agencies worldwide by developing interoperable solutions in support of interagency sharing and cooperation of mission critical real-time video. Vislink is the only secure communications manufacturer to offer integrated solutions that include satellite, microwave and cellular technologies.

We look to drive the next generation of Satellite Newsgathering (SNG), Electronic Newsgathering (ENG), and Cellular Newsgathering (CNG), and as a result, our current solutions portfolio and roadmap is rooted in multi-mode platforms addressing the broadcast and surveillance markets. http://www.vislink.com/


Vislink’s booth at IBC2013.

http://www.vislink.com/

By Lieutenant General Ellen M. Pawlikowski, USAF

Space Acquisition Issues In 2013


Space systems acquisitions for national security have always been very challenging. It literally is rocket science! Our ability to truly leverage the advantages that the space domain offers has always depended on the availability of state-of-the-art technology to apply

to our space capabilities.

The level of requisite technology has demanded top-dollar investment and zero tolerance for errors. One small flaw in a launch vehicle can result in complete loss of the space vehicle. One small flaw in the space vehicle can result in total loss of mission on orbit. If not done correctly, the launch of a satellite is an irreversible process with dire and prohibitively expensive consequences. From the days of the “Schoolhouse Gang” led by General Bernard Schriever to the Space and Missile Systems Center of 2013, space acquisition has always required a team of dedicated, technically competent professionals and a significant dollar investment.

Although there are many constants about space acquisition, there are also some significant changes about the environment of the twenty-first century that compel us to evolve the way we acquire our space systems. The national security environment of 2013 is vastly different than that of 1947, or even that of 2005.

First and foremost, our space systems are absolutely critical to our national security operations today. The world relies on space-based capabilities to provide humanitarian help in the aftermath of natural and technological disasters such as the Indian Ocean tsunami, the Kashmir earthquake, and the Japanese nuclear reactor incident to assess damage and evaluate the situation on the ground. Space-based capabilities provide rapid mapping and high-resolution imaging that have become important support tools in emergency relief operations. The capabilities also aid in executing logistics, staff security, distribution, transportation, and setup of telecommunication networks and refugee camps.

We also have a growing dependence on space-based capabilities for our military combat operations. Immediately after the terrorist attacks of 2001, small groups of elite American military units were deployed to Afghanistan to support the anti-Taliban Afghan fighters. Those units carried 2.75-pound precision lightweight Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers as well as satellite-based communication devices they used to pinpoint enemy targets and call in devastating air strikes against them. Because GPS-guided munitions strike with such accuracy, they greatly reduce the number of air sorties needed to destroy a target. This is a far cry from the Vietnam War when Soldiers would look at a map to call in friendly and enemy coordinates and then pop smoke so the aircraft could know where they were! Whether it is humanitarian operations in support of tsunami relief or combat operations in Afghanistan, we cannot accomplish the mission without our space capabilities.

Another change is the fact that the physical environment in which our satellites and space systems must operate is now competitive, congested, and contested. Currently, more than 60 countries, or consortia, are operating satellites, and citizens of 39 nations have actually flown in space. Of the 190-plus countries around the globe, over 120 now own at least part of a satellite. There are more than 1,000 active satellites in orbit today.

In addition, the total amount of space debris has increased considerably in the past six years, primarily due to two events. The first was in 2007 when the Chinese tested an antisatellite weapon against one of their weather satellites. That test created more than 3,000 pieces of trackable debris along with thousands of pieces of debris too small to track—objects that will threaten other satellites for decades, if not centuries, to come.

The second event was in 2009 when a dead Russian communications satellite hit an Iridium satellite, scattering about another 2,000 pieces of trackable debris around the Earth and, again, many more pieces too small to track. Even more troublesome are the estimated hundreds of thousands of small pieces of debris we cannot track in space today. Traveling at nearly 18,000 miles per hour, an object does not have to be very large to create havoc for fragile satellites. Furthermore, the cyber domain is becoming a realm of possibly devastating attacks on our space assets.

Lastly, the budgets available for acquiring and maintaining space systems are declining. We have traditionally focused our decisions about space systems exclusively on performance first, schedule second, and costs a distant third. We can no longer afford to do that. Affordability needs to be in the forefront of our acquisition planning and requirements discussions. This changing landscape provides both challenges and opportunities for space acquisition.

Mandates For Space Systems Acquisitions

This environment drives three mandates for space system acquisitions today.

First, we must continue to deliver on the space capabilities in the pipeline today. After several years (sometimes a decade or more) of development of these satellites and space systems, it is time to capitalize on that investment. We must consistently complete the build of these satellites and associated systems, safely and assuredly launch them into orbit, and turn over operations to Fourteenth Air Force.

41

Second, we must aggressively pursue opportunities to make these systems more affordable. We must ensure that we explore options to drive down costs as well as streamline and lean out our production and oversight mechanisms. In short, we make sure that every dollar counts. Certainly, we must maintain high standards for mission assurance. However, we must also make sure that we are not spending money doing things that provide no value and do not contribute to mission assurance. We must challenge the adage “We’ve always done it that way.”

Third, we must explore new architectures and constructs for providing space capability in the future. We must reassess our basic architectures and employment concepts against the changing threat environment, respond to the challenges, and leverage the opportunities presented by the competitive, congested, and contested space domain.

Our current space acquisition strategy and programs confront these mandates head on. For protected satellite communications (SATCOM), we are on schedule to ship and launch the third Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite in the fourth quarter of 2013. Soon, AEHF will have three operational satellites providing Earth coverage between 65 degrees north and 65 degrees south latitude. AEHF is scheduled to reach initial operational capability by June 2015, providing a 10-fold increase of communication throughput to the war fighter, compared to its Milstar predecessor.1

AEHF will provide more than 400 megabits per second (Mbps) of data-throughput capability as compared to Milstar’s 40Mbps. We will still continue to exploit Milstar’s capability, as AEHF satellites are backwards compatible and cross-linked with Milstar to provide an integrated, protected communications network for the United States and our allies. Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom are international partners to the program with planned initial operational capabilities in July 2013, March 2014, and May 2016, respectively.

For wideband communications, we launched the fifth Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS) in May 2013 and will declare full operational capability in early 2014. This will provide unprecedented wideband communications to U.S. and international partner users. We plan to launch the sixth WGS satellite in the fourth quarter of 2013. The WGS-6, which completes the three space vehicle (SV) buy for WGS Block II, is part of an international partnership whereby the Australian government purchased the SV in exchange for a certain percentage of bandwidth from the constellation.

Further down the pipeline, we are scheduled to launch WGS-7 in August 2015 to further augment the constellation. We also have plans for WGS 8–10 to deliver a new wideband digital channelizer that will almost double the capacity of the older systems. As was the case with WGS-6, international partners purchased WGS-9. New Zealand, Canada, Luxemburg, Denmark, and the Netherlands will get access to constellation bandwidth in return for their purchase of WGS-9.

The GPS IIF will complete production of its 12 satellites by the end of 2013. [At the time of this writing] we plan to launch one GPS IIF SV in October 2013, three SVs in 2014, two SVs in 2015, and the final two SVs in 2016. We also expect the Next-Generation GPS Control Segment Block 1 to begin its transition to the operations process in 2016, providing GPS III SV launch and simulation as well as telemetry, tracking, and command capabilities. It will also enable GPS Blocks II and III on-orbit capability, including control of L1 C/A, L1 P(Y), L2 P(Y), L5, and L2C signals.2

Striving For Affordability

At the same time, we have a razor-sharp focus on making these systems more affordable. We have experienced shrinking budgets these past few years, and we have been finding innovative and creative solutions to be able to continue providing our war fighters and nation the space-based capabilities they depend on every day. We are changing our mind-set on our strategic and tactical outlook as we transition from development to production mode in a number of our programs. We’ve also reassessed many of our processes to ensure that we are as efficient as possible while maintaining mission assurance as our top priority.

Transition Programs from Development to Production

We have shifted from product development to production mode in several key programs, presenting many opportunities for us to make our systems more affordable. One example is in our Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS) program


Artistic rendition of an AEHF satellite. Image courtesy of Lockheed Martin.

Artistic rendition of a GPS III satellite. Image courtesy of Lockheed Martin.

The fifth Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS-5) satellite is encapsulated inside a United Launch Alliance Delta 4 5-meter diameter payload fairing prior to its

launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Base, Florida. Photo is courtesy of Pat Corkery, United Launch Alliance.


with the second Geosynchronous Earth Orbit / Highly Elliptical Orbit (GEO/HEO) block (GEO/HEO 3–4) contract in 2008. Due to a 12-year gap between the GEO/HEO 1–2 block and the GEO/HEO 3–4 block contract awards, we’ve faced challenges with obsolescence, processes, and procedures, which increased government oversight and contractor interaction. However, these increased interactions led to production and cost-savings initiatives.

Our plan for GEO 5–6 continues our block-buy strategy to leverage economic order-quantity efficiencies, and it benefits from having all developmental spacecraft/ payloads delivered on orbit with the exception of a complete ground system. Although there are some challenges related to parts obsolescence that require initial nonrecurring engineering and advance procurement efforts, we can realize savings from using a fixed-price, firm target contract since we are now acquiring the fifth and sixth of its kind.

GPS III implements processes established during development. Currently, GPS III SV01 is in the process of completing development integration and testing, with an expected completion date in the second quarter of 2014. Meanwhile, GPS III SV02 is at the beginning of the production line. It will begin assembly, integration, and testing in July 2013. GPS III SV03 and SV04 are on contract and have begun assembly level production.

GPS III SV05–08 long-lead parts procurement is also on contract, with production contract award expected in 2013. Because we have firm requirements, design proven through developmental testing, established manufacturing processes, and qualified suppliers, GPS III made a great candidate for fixed-price-incentive firm request for proposal, which reduces contract data requirements lists (CDRL) from 115 to 20. AEHF is also firmly in the production phase. As with SBIRS, we are focused on satellite block buy and production practices to shorten schedules and lower the unit cost.

Introduce Lean Processing + Production Flow

We have introduced lean processing and production flow into many of our major programs to identify and realize efficiencies in the way we conduct business. Working with contractor Lockheed Martin, our AEHF program office proposed new production timelines for AEHF-5 and AEHF-6, reducing 73 months to 63.5 months and 71.5 months, respectively. We were able to simplify the process by eliminating multiple mechanical reconfigurations and vehicle repositionings and executing streamlined testing.

For SBIRS, we are striving to resolve the challenges we faced due to small production quantities and multiple gap years between contract awards by aligning new contract awards to the delivery of the previous block. This way, we may maintain a consistent production-floor team and processing capacity. For example, we can time the GEO 5–6 staffing ramp-up to coincide with the GEO/HEO 3–4 effort ramp-down to sustain a steady battle rhythm on our production floor.

More specifically within our SBIRS production efforts, we have implemented several initiatives to streamline flow and reduce costs. Our GEO-3 single-line flow production saved $4.3 million in real dollars! These savings were made possible by true team effort with collaboration across government, industry, and subcontractor team members. Together, we championed several efforts, including a series of 21 recommendations to reduce single-line flow production to about 70 days as well as streamlined vehicle assembly flow, mechanical operations, test preparation, and test execution. We saved additional dollars by reducing unit thermal cycles and powered vibration tests.3

We maintained a minimum of three thermal vacuum cycles for electronic/electromechanical units, with an average savings of about 18 hours per thermal cycle per unit and a reduction of four cycles. This saved three days on a schedule of 24/7 critical-path operation.

Furthermore, payload integrator Northrop Grumman reused GEO-3 hardware for the GEO-4 payload test, saving us $1.3 million. It used fully integrated Flight 3 Payload Control Assembly to test both GEO-3 and GEO-4 payloads. Doing so eliminated tasks such as packing and shipping of payload-control assembly boxes and reintegrating test units.

For GPS IIF, we use a pulse-line production method based on lean processing and production principles.4 We continuously evaluate each of our four assembly and test work centers for rebalancing, ensuring that there is no production bottleneck at any one station. This has allowed a savings of 96 days in production from SV-4 to SV-5, the first two full-production GPS IIF SVs.

With GPS III, we have introduced and completed 59/59 (100 percent) manufacture-readiness design reviews to optimize build-process flow. We used 3-D modeling to digitally illustrate in real-time the manufacturing integration assembly and test hookup. This has reduced manufacturing work instruction by 70–83 percent.

Reduce + Eliminate Unnecessary Testing

We’ve further made our systems more affordable through reduction and elimination of unnecessary testing. By leveraging our lessons learned from the SBIRS GEO-1 campaign, we have reduced our GEO-2 planned duration by 55 percent to 105 days. Essentially, we were able to reduce development and testing for later iterations of software included in GEO-2. Whereas our system was unable to meet our suite of performance parameters until the fifth build for GEO-1, we are planning to achieve suitable performance using just three builds for GEO-2. We have also reduced the total number of sensor calibrations by assuming first-pass success, and we have eliminated unnecessary background collections for the GEO-2 test campaign.

Finally, we are scaling back the trial period for GEO-2. Because GEO-1 was a first-of-a-kind satellite and ground system, we put it through a 60-day trial period. For GEO-2, we are planning a 30-day period since it is the second delivery and we already have a good understanding of the payload.

We also leveraged lessons learned from prior efforts for GPS IIF. We gained significant confidence in the structural integrity of the first three SVs, which allowed us to eliminate acoustic testing for SVs 4–12. This amounts to a savings of approximately 15 days in each subsequent production flow. Meanwhile, GPS III has reduced cycle time by 57 percent through test reduction, extensive engineering, and prototype use.

Our AEHF program office and Lockheed Martin evaluated the test program to identify potential efficiencies and reductions. This resulted in reduced SV single-line flow testing for bus, payload, and SV-level tests. We also eliminated vehicle-level anomaly detection and resolution testing, which can be run on the Networked AEHF System Test Bed Tool or payload engineering model.

Reduce Unnecessary + Costly Oversight

Along with the programmatic streamlining, we have found further efficiencies in human resource management. The program operating plan (POP) defines and describes for each program the interaction and information exchange between the government and contractor. Some highlights of the POP include reducing the frequency of formal meetings/ reviews and streamlining informal interactions between the government and contractor. The POP also identifies the core set of meetings, roles, responsibilities, and authorities for such meetings as well as requirements for informal government and contractor interaction.

A Lockheed Martin engineer completes final preparations on SBIRS GEO-2 before the satellite’s shipment to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.

Photo is courtesy of Lockheed Martin.


With our WGS Program Office, we were able to reduce the number of required personnel by implementing a commercial-sector-like approach for the production of WGS 7–10. The Air Force deemed appropriate a commercial-like acquisition approach for the production of WGS 7–10 to account for the maturity of the production and acceptable Boeing plant. These seven government members have full access to Boeing data and meetings, but their primary role is risk identification.

This arrangement, along with closing Block II, allowed the government program office to reduce personnel by about 40 percent. Furthermore, using Boeing’s commercial processes will reduce production and government-specific reviews, such as program management and mission assurance reviews, to almost zero. The stable design of WGS affords us the flexibility to limit government oversight, which saves Boeing “standing army” costs while still delivering robust satellites.

Reduce Reporting Requirements

We have also significantly reduced reporting requirements from our contractors, which drives down costs. We have streamlined integrated baseline reviews to a one-day event and removed thresholds for variance reporting. Contractors now report only the variances they determine would have significant impacts on the contract.

Additionally, we greatly reduced the number of CDRLs from many of our programs.5 In order to make such reductions, we created the Data Accession List as a mechanism to deliver technical assessments and products to the government on an “as-needed” basis, maintained a streamlined list of programmatic-status CDRLs, monitored financial and small-business CDRLs for oversight, and focused on current needs so that we are not bound to outdated contractual obligations.

As a result, we reduced System Engineering and Integration CDRL items from 46 to nine for SBIRS. This allowed us to build up the flexibility to tackle emerging needs with decision-quality information. For AEHF-5/6, we reduced the total number of CDRLs by 48 percent and reduced government-approved CDRLs by 44 percent from AEHF-4. And for GPS III, we reduced CDRLs from 115 to 20.

Introduce Competition

Introducing competition is another way we are making our space systems more affordable. Full and open competition consistent with the Better Buying Power initiatives of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics was a major driver in cost reduction for our GPS Control Segment sustainment contract award. We were able to use the lowest priced, technically acceptable source-selection strategy and select a firm-fixed-price contract because the system is in the operations and sustainment phase of its life cycle, and therefore the requirements are well understood. As a result, the actual contract award came in at $119 million, a savings of $68 million from the original government budget / cost estimate of $187 million.

We also held a competitive source selection for the Command and Control System–Consolidated (CCS-C) Production and Sustainment Contract (CPASC). Including CCS-C production for WGS 6–9, production for AEHF 3–5, development studies, and sustainment, our estimate for the CPASC was $199 million. However, after we used predominantly fixed-price-incentive contract line-item numbers, set ceiling prices on those line-item numbers to prevent overrun expenses to the government, and provided a 50/50 share ratio in cost-incentive arrangement, the competition led to a six-year negotiated contract price of $133 million, including options. That’s a savings of $66 million.

Consolidate Baselines + Contracts

We have been working to increase efficiencies through consolidating baselines and contracts. For our SBIRS ground system, we initiated Increment 2 Completion (Inc2C) in November 2012 for a full groundprogram baseline, restructuring the Block 10 baseline into four incremental deliveries with one Program Executive Officer Certification and Operational Acceptance event for a primary operations center (MCS-2) at Buckley AFB, Colorado, and a backup operations facility (MCSB-2) at Schriever AFB, Colorado.6

Under the program, we have consolidated SBIRS satellite command and control operations from Buckley AFB (Defense Support Program), Schriever AFB (HEO1 and HEO2), and the Interim Test Center (GEO1 and GEO2) into MCS-2 and MCSB-2. This has allowed us to combine ground and system test activities early in the testing process and streamline test and verification processes in concert with the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center. Moreover, the incorporated simulator data allow earlier defect discovery within an operational environment, and we can increase use of flight-test assets for more robust system test resources.

Another major consolidation effort is the Consolidated Orbital Operations Logistics Sustainment (COOLS) contract, which will yield efficiencies by merging existing sustainment efforts supporting the Defense Satellite Communications System, Milstar, and AEHF constellations under a single contract. As the contractor shares component experts across an even broader range of programs such as Military SATCOM, SBIRS, and GPS, we expect to gain even more efficiencies. Through these efficiencies and scope reductions, the team predicts a 35 percent cost reduction by the end of the five-year COOLS contract.

We are currently experiencing significant duplication of work because no single contractor is responsible for total system performance of the Eastern Range and Western Range, and the government must intervene whenever contractors work together.7 To eliminate some of that duplication, we are partnering with the 45th

and 30th Space Wings to select a single contractor for a consolidated Launch and Test Range System (LTRS) Integrated Support Contract (LISC) Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainment Contract (LISC OM&S) of more than $2.5 billion for 10 years. This effort is designed to enhance mission effectiveness and generate cost efficiencies at both the Eastern Range and Western Range, which allows us to reinvest the savings in the ranges.

Under the LISC, one contractor will be required to keep the range “green” (or “go for launch”). The government will hold the single contractor accountable to meet system metrics, and the contractor will bear the risk if the system does not perform. This construct allows the selected contractor to optimize manpower to meet mission needs and increase profits while providing a system that meets the government’s requirements. We released the LISC OM&S request for proposal to industry in late March this year, began source selection on 30 May 2013, and expect to award the contract the second quarter of 2014.

Planning For The Future

All of our ongoing efforts are allowing us to continue providing current capabilities for about another decade. But what happens after that? As the current congested, contested, and competitive space environment continues to evolve, we will also have to evolve our architectures to maintain space superiority. The following are the main concepts that are more fully discussed in an article I coauthored entitled “Space: Disruptive Challenges, New Opportunities, and New Strategies,” published in Strategic Studies Quarterly8.

Traditionally, our strategy has been to load multiple missions onto every spacecraft because the cost of launch has been prohibitively expensive. Now with robust constellations of satellites already set in place and a thriving commercial medium-launch market at hand, we are looking to exploit the new commercial trade space by reducing the size of our missions and spreading them across multiple launches. Doing so is beneficial to us in many ways. First, the up-front costs are significantly lower for us. Traditional gargantuan satellites can weigh up to 10,000 pounds, including spacecraft and fuel at launch. Of course, the more size, weight, and power a satellite requires, the heftier the overall price tag. By using much smaller

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida (May 24, 2013) – In the second launch in just nine days for the U.S. Air Force, United Launch Alliance (ULA) successfully launched a Delta IV rocket carrying the fifth Wideband Global

SATCOM (WGS-5) satellite at 8:27 p.m. EDT today from Space Launch Complex-37. Wideband Global SATCOM provides anytime, anywhere

communication for the warfighter through broadcast, multicast, and point-to- point connections. WGS is the only military satellite communications system

that can support simultaneous X- and Ka-band communications. Photo by Pat Corkery, United Launch Alliance.


free-fliers or payloads that are attached to host space vehicles, we can drastically reduce costs typically associated with traditional programs. This affords us both the flexibility to make quick-turn decisions when faced with unforeseen circumstances at the action level instead of waiting for approval up the chain and the ability to send updated technology into space more frequently.

We can further cut costs by employing commercial buses to leverage the commercial market. The government has traditionally emphasized use of unique buses for each launch, and the maintenance and repair costs of several one-of-a-kind buses have been monumental. To be sure, we had to develop first-of-a-kind spacecraft more out of necessity than preference in the early days of space exploration, but now we have a competitive commercial market of spaceflight-proven buses that we can essentially buy off an assembly line. Eliminating nonrecurring engineering along with the expensive knowledge legacy and maintenance that go along with these unique buses will lead to huge cost savings for us.

Leveraging the international space environment with cooperative programs and shared capabilities can further reduce cost while strengthening international relationships. As mentioned above, the WGS-6 and WGS-9 international arrangements allow us to get more assets into space, and we collectively benefit from increased data bandwidth. Another example is the Constellation Observing System for Meteorology Ionosphere and Climate (COSMIC), a joint Taiwan-US science mission for weather, climate, space weather, and geodetic research. The COSMIC payload science data are routinely downloaded every orbit and have demonstrated their value for operational weather forecasting, hurricane forecasting, and investigations of the atmospheric boundary layer.

Due to the success of the first COSMIC, Taiwan and the United States have decided to move forward with COSMIC-2, a follow-on mission that will launch six satellites into low-inclination orbits in early 2016 and another six satellites into high-inclination orbits in early 2018. The US Air Force will provide two space weather payloads that will fly on the first six satellites of COSMIC-2, and Taiwan will help with costs of the overall program, resulting in about 50/50 cost sharing between Taiwan and the United States for COSMIC-2.

Hosted payloads offer us another alternative to save up-front costs and to leverage the competitive and congested aspects of space. Because we are operating in such a crowded manifest, partnerships with both commercial companies and other nations will become increasingly important to access the spectrum we need. By reducing the size of our missions and riding on commercial or international hosts as payloads, we can multiply the opportunities we have to gain access to space.

As a corollary to cost, resiliency is driving us to consider alternatives to traditional ways of accessing space. Taking new orbits and nonspace systems is part of the new equation when examining potential architectures. For example, we are starting to examine orbits that are higher in altitude and more inclined than traditional orbits as space becomes more congested and contested. We are also looking at ways to improve the timeliness of our command and control systems to quickly send commands and adjust our spacecraft posture to known threats or space debris. These new options require the flexibility that disaggregation allows in order to be feasible. Moreover, distributing our assets improves our resiliency to attacks and system failure by not putting “all of our eggs in one basket.”

Because our past strategy has been to load multiple missions onto every spacecraft, if one of our multimission spacecraft goes down due to either technical failure or adversarial attack, all of those capabilities that our nation relies on will be lost. Distributing those missions across several platforms will ensure that we can continue to count on other capabilities should a spacecraft carrying one of our missions fail. Additionally, placing missions on buses hosted by commercial or international partners can really complicate an adversary’s decision to attack our capabilities.

Lastly, we need to develop new and robust architectures based on new technology and the foundational work we’ve conducted to develop methods of assessing future systems. For instance, the wide-field-of-view technology proven by the successful Commercially Hosted Infra- Red Payload technology demonstration gives us the ability to detect multiple objects simultaneously and increases detection accuracy. We need to leverage such technological advances along with improved processing time and improvements in cyberspace to continue to be the best Air Force in the world.

References1Milstar provides the president, secretary of defense, and the U.S. armed forces with assured, survivable SATCOM with low probability of interception and detection. The objective of the Milstar program was to create a survivable, secure, nuclear-survivable, space-based communication system, which was considered a top national priority during the Reagan administration. There are five operational Milstar satellites. The first two satellites (Milstar I) carry a low-data-rate payload that can transmit 75 to 2,400 bits per second of data over 192 channels in the extremely high frequency range. Encryption technology and satellite-to-satellite cross-links provide secure communications, data exchange, and global coverage. The other three satellites (Milstar II) carry both low-data-rate and medium-data-rate payloads. The latter can transmit 4,800 bits per second to 1.544 megabits per second of data over 32 channels. The higher data rates allow the user to transmit large amounts of data in a short period of time.

2 L1 C/A is the legacy civil signal, which will continue broadcasting in the future. Users must upgrade their equipment to benefit from the new signals. The military precise (P) code is encrypted by the military—using a technique known as antispoofing—and is available only to authorized personnel. The encrypted P code is referred to as the Y code. Civilian GPS receivers use the C/A code on the L1 frequency to compute positions—although high-end, survey-grade civilian receivers use the L1 and L2 frequencies’ carrier waves directly. Military GPS receivers use the P (Y) code on both L1 and L2 frequencies to compute positions. L5 is the third civilian GPS signal, designed to meet demanding requirements for safety-of-life transportation and other high-performance applications. L5 is broadcast in a radio band reserved exclusively for aviation safety services. It features higher power, greater bandwidth, and an advanced signal design. L2C is the second civilian GPS signal, designed specifically to meet commercial needs. When combined with L1 C/A in a dual-frequency receiver, L2C enables ionospheric correction—a technique that boosts accuracy. Civilians with dual-frequency GPS receivers enjoy the same accuracy as the military (or better). For professional users with existing dual-frequency operations, L2C delivers faster signal acquisition, enhanced reliability, and greater operating range. L2C broadcasts at a higher effective power than the legacy L1 C/A signal, making it easier to receive under trees and even indoors. The Commerce Department estimates that L2C could generate $5.8 billion in economic productivity benefits through the year 2030.3Unit-level thermal cycle and powered vibration tests screen hardware for design and workmanship issues by simulating the on-orbit operating environment that the units will experience. On-orbit performance of the GEO-1 space vehicle and ground test performance of the GEO-2 space vehicle demonstrated the sound design of the units under test and thereby provided confidence that the additional thermal cycles and powered vibration tests could be eliminated. This would save cost with a very modest but acceptable increase in risk for workmanship issues that might not be discovered until later at a higher level of assembly.4Similar to an aircraft assembly line, the GPS IIF pulse line efficiently moves a satellite from one designated work area to the next at a fixed rate. The GPS pulse line can accommodate four satellites at any given time. Wait time between tasks is reduced or eliminated by staging necessary parts and tools at the point of use at each workstation, creating a smooth process flow. Along the pulse line, satellites flow to work centers dedicated to four manufacturing stages: vehicle assembly, initial test, thermal-vacuum testing, and final test. The line delivers one SV to storage every two to three months.5The CDRL includes authorized data requirements for a specific procurement that forms part of a contract. It is comprised of either a single DD Form 1423 or a series of such forms containing data requirements and delivery information. The CDRL is the standard format for identifying potential data requirements in a solicitation and deliverable data requirements in a contract.6Increment 2 completion represents the ground program baseline that consolidates operations of the Department of Defense’s overhead persistent infrared satellite constellation supporting missile warning, missile defense, technical intelligence, and battlespace awareness missions. The constellation consists of three major systems: the Defense Support Program, SBIRS GEO satellites, and SBIRS HEO payloads. Increment 2 completion will relocate ground operations for each of these systems from their individual locations known as the mission control station (MCS) at Buckley AFB and the MCSB at Schriever AFB. Additionally, the Increment 2 baseline delivers a satellite command and control, mission processing, and external reporting architecture that allows for data fusion and fast, accurate reporting on infrared events around the globe.7The Eastern Range (ER) and Western Range (WR) are the national security space rocket ranges for the United States. The ER supports missile and rocket launches from the two major launch heads located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and the Kennedy Space Center, Florida. It is managed by the 45th Space Wing. The WR supports the major launch head at Vandenberg AFB, California. Managed by the 30th Space Wing, the WR extends from the West Coast of the United States to 90˚ east longitude in the Indian Ocean.8Lt Gen Ellen Pawlikowski, Doug Loverro, and Col Tom Cristler, “Space: Disruptive Challenges, New Opportunities, and New Strategies,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 27–54, http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf.

About the authorLieutenant General Pawlikowski is commander of the Space and Missile Systems Center, Air Force Space Command, Los Angeles AFB, California. She is responsible for more than 6,000 employees nationwide and an annual budget of $10 billion. As the Air Force program executive officer for space, General Pawlikowski manages the research, design, development, acquisition, and sustainment of satellites and the associated command and control systems.

This article is courtesy of the Air and Space Power Journal http://www.airpower.au.af.mil

http://www.airpower.au.af.mil

http://www.satnews.com/reg

msm nov 2013 cover satcom for net-centric warfare … · 2013-11-28 · msm nov 2013 cover...

Documents