During this DiSC session, experts from NATO, RUSI, Telespazio Germany, and Technische Universität Chemnitz examined how rapidly changing geopolitics and adversarial threats are redefining space, and the impact they will have on the space industry, space governance, and global economies.

NATO Works Toward Deterring Space Threats
Helle opened the discussion by asking Daniel Hilgert, NATO’s Senior Space Coordinator, how space capabilities are currently helping to stabilize and deter threats in NATO territories. Hilgert explained that he has observed a trend among global militaries toward increased reliance on commercial satellite services, which he views positively in terms of deterrence but notes that it also poses challenges.

“It creates a lot of vulnerabilities, especially when it comes to SATCOM and space-based ISR,” explained Hilgert. “We’ve seen that a lot of nations are heavily relying on single providers, though the commercial market is so diverse and vibrant. This is something that we really need to think about when it comes to threats in the space environment.”

According to Hilgert, NATO is launching numerous initiatives to address these vulnerabilities and to deter geopolitical threats.

“We’re developing a marketplace for space services, which is very important to diversifying our [SATCOM] sources and becoming more resilient,” said Hilgert. “We’re also working on threat sharing and exploring how we can unclassify, or downclassify, information that we can share with commercial partners, but also incentivize commercial partners to share information with us.”

Hilgert said NATO is also developing a new program, THOR, to address how to execute offensive counterspace operations and capabilities.

“THOR is really about trying to develop playbooks to see what actions we would take for X, Y, and Z scenarios, and what kind of capabilities we would need to procure to execute those playbooks,” said Hilgert. “[THOR] is going to be really important. It will not be a one-time effort; we will do this continuously because we see how Russia and China are learning how we operate, are adapting themselves, and updating their technology accordingly. We need to update ourselves as well.”

Top Geopolitical Threats in Space
Helle delved deeper into the space threat topic and asked the panelists which, from their perspectives, are the most concerning counterspace events or geopolitical behaviors that have recently occurred or may occur in the future. Dr. habil. Antje Nötzold, Research Associate and Lecturer at Technische Universität Chemnitz, has certain capability advancements coming out of China at the top of her list.

“When we look at space and counterspace activities, I’m not just worried about all the dog fighting we see between Chinese and U.S. satellites, which are now becoming real maneuvers and operations,” said Dr. Nötzold. “What [concerns me the most] was what happened in July, when the Chinese managed to have a successful docking of satellites in geostationary orbit and refueled a satellite. Why [does this concern me the most]? Because it shows that China is ahead of the United States. It brings more ambiguity to the whole dynamic, as we don’t know much about China’s intentions. I would say it also changes a lot of the dynamics for future in-orbit service operations.”

For Professor Trevor Taylor, Director of the Defence, Industries and Society Programme at RUSI, avoiding kinetic combat in the space domain to maintain everyday life on Earth is one of his top concerns.

“Much of our social and commercial life depends on assets that are in space,” said Professor Taylor. “After learning about the Kessler effect, if combat occurs in space, it’s going to be very difficult to control. If two parties are at war, such control becomes very difficult. I would like to see more effort to keep the combat piece out [of space].”

Dr. Ivan Janes, Chief Systems and Products Officer at Telespazio Germany, cited SATCOM security as his primary concern. For Dr. Janes, security across all segments of the SATCOM triad must be strengthened to maintain the critical infrastructure services people depend on.

“Satellite services are embedded in the critical infrastructure services on Earth,” Dr. Janes said. “The energy, military, healthcare, and financial sectors depend on the availability of space services. We have a space, ground, and link segment for all space services. All those layers are only as strong as their weakest link. We must make sure that all the links are hardened to the level that we need.”

Hilgert believes that world governments must heavily invest in bolstering resilience measures in the space domain and be proactive by preparing for any type of crisis that may affect space services on Earth.

“I think the biggest threat is not actually in space, but on this planet,” said Hilgert. ”[Space domain threats] threaten our economies, our societies, and our militaries. We really need to be more proactive. I think we are all pioneers in this respect, because, for NATO, space is a new operational domain. We can really try to get things right, be proactive, and prepare for a conflict before it happens. [We must] invest in [SATCOM] resilience for our civilian infrastructure.”

More news from DiSC 2025:

Learn about the benefits and barriers of optical ground terminals for the military, HERE.

The post How Geopolitics is Reshaping the Space Domain appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

During the event, Via Satellite’s Senior Editorial Director, Mark Holmes, sat down with SES’s CEO Adel Al-Saleh to take a deep dive into some of these innovations and challenges. Throughout their discussion, Al-Saleh explored a wide variety of topics, such as the competition in the satellite industry, the need for fast and agile R&D cycles, the fast-changing environment, as well as which markets are well-positioned for growth in the satellite space in the near future. Al-Saleh also talked about the partnership with Lynk Global that will address the high-growth direct-to-device (D2D) segment.

Debunking stereotypes
Holmes opened the session by asking how satellite operators and providers can keep pace with Starlink’s recent string of contract deals and wins. Al-Saleh answered by pointing out that all of the major satellite players are winning massive deals and contracts, but Starlink’s wins are more frequently covered by the market media and quickly amplified. “Yet, if you look at the performance of other companies, we can observe that often their business is growing. While Starlink is definitely doing a great job, I think we’re all winning our fair share of big deals. There is incredible demand in the market, and it’s growing,” reassured Al-Saleh.

Al-Saleh cited SES’s recent MEO Global Services (MGS) deal with NATO, the Luxembourg government, and the U.S. Department of Defense as a major win that exemplifies the growing demand for MEO services by the government and military. “It’s a big deal,” said Al-Saleh. “There are deals that are in the triple-digit millions.”

Al-Saleh encourages a closer look on the business performance of the big satellite players, that is generally signaling the industry success. “We’ve got to look at the performances of the businesses, they demonstrate that there’s plenty of demand in the marketplace,” explained Al-Saleh. “I think the narrative needs to shift a little bit more towards this. Especially if we do not talk about just one deal, but look at our performance consistently over multiple quarters.”

Acceleration on Innovation Cycles
One topic that came up during the discussion was whether SES will continue to work with traditional suppliers when investing in next-generation technologies for GEO satellites, or if the company would look for alternative approaches in how it invests in new technology.

Al-Saleh explained that the industry needs to move away from the waterfall development style and move towards becoming faster and more agile as it pertains to evolving satellite networks in an iterative way. “That means the supply chain needs to adapt and change,” he said. “I think there’s a willingness to change, but they’re challenged in doing it. So we’ll see over the next few years whether it’s evolved.”

Al-Saleh also believes that the current innovation and R&D cycles in the satellite industry must evolve: “When we think about starting a project, a particular constellation, or a big satellite, we start with a white piece of paper every time, and then it can take four or five years to introduce a new model. That is too long in our industry.”

SES’s goal is to introduce innovative, new space technologies regularly and fast. “Rather than waiting in a five-year cycle to get to another milestone and launch a constellation, we need to do it much more frequently,” he said. “It’s a challenge for the industry, that everybody understands and it will be interesting to see how it evolves.”

Markets Poised for Growth
As for the markets that are best positioned for satellite growth in the near future, Al-Saleh is placing his bets on the government and cruise industries. “The vertical government market is the largest and the most attractive market for satellite technology and operations,” he said. “And it will continue to be for the foreseeable future. I’m also very excited about the cruise business. It continues to grow, and there’s an insatiable appetite for more bandwidth in these big floating cities.”

Al-Saleh also believes that the automotive industry should not be counted out. “The automotive industry has put out its architecture for the connected car, and they have made it very clear that they will complement the terrestrial network in the cars with satellite networks. And with direct-to-device technologies, smaller terminals, and more powerful satellites – I think there’s more to come. Just watch that space.”

The post SES’s CEO Adel Al-Saleh on the Satellite Industry Potential, Challenges and Innovation at SATELLITE 2025 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The nature of the public-private partnership will effectively see the EU and European Space Agency (ESA) committing government funds towards expanding existing MEO and LEO constellations. The resulting satellites will comprise a new satellite network called Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite (IRIS²), which will provide essential satellite communications services for the EU government and militaries, while also giving the partner companies additional satellite capacity that can be leased to allied nations and commercial customers.

This connectivity will also be assured and secured by its multi-orbit nature. By leveraging both LEO satellites and MEO satellites, the IRIS² constellation will be more difficult for adversaries to target. It will also enable the EU to enjoy the resiliency benefits inherent provided by two different orbits.

But why is the EU building its own sovereign satellite service at a time when commercial investment is increasing, and are there more commercial satellite capacity and constellations available for use than ever before? One only has to look at what’s happening in Ukraine to understand why this capability is now essential and no longer a “nice to have.”

In the early days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, some of the first casualties were the terrestrial networks that connected Ukrainians and enabled critical communications. The adversary understood the role that communications play in a coordinated defense and almost immediately eliminated this essential infrastructure. This left Ukraine looking to satellite communications from companies like SpaceX to deliver mission-critical communications.

The EU has seen the importance of assured SATCOM for defense and national security. They also see its potential for delivering connectivity to rural and remote areas – making IRIS² an important investment for Europe’s future. However, IRIS² will do more than provide critical connectivity for the EU. It will also usher in a new era of MEO satellite capability that offers connectivity anywhere on the globe and brings some of the most exciting technological advancements to MEO.

Inclined, optical, and new era for MEO
Part of building out IRIS² includes the development and launch of 18 new MEO satellites. These satellites will be in inclined orbits, specifically to offer high throughput, low-latency connectivity to the regions that could not be serviced by existing SES MEO satellites in an equatorial orbit.

Most communications satellites in GEO and MEO orbit above the Earth’s equator. This optimizes the satellite coverage over populated areas of the Earth but limits the coverage in higher latitude regions. By launching MEO satellites into inclined orbit, SES and the EU will effectively enable the IRIS² constellation to provide global service – enabling better and more complete access for EU nations including delivery of critical high throughput, low latency services to the polar regions, which are becoming increasingly more trafficked and contested due to a variety of factors including climate change and resulting resource competition.

However, connectivity to the polar region is just one advancement that will be evident in IRIS². The IRIS² MEO architecture will feature optical intersatellite links that will enable rapid communication between satellites and provide users much more flexibility on where to land their data.

Optical communications between satellites has been explored heavily by LEO satellite operators for use in their constellations – and for very good reason. By enabling satellites to relay data between themselves in the vacuum of space, satellites can more rapidly and effectively get data to its final destination on Earth. Enabling this capability on IRIS² MEO satellites will enable more seamless communications between even the most distant places on Earth.

While IRIS² will result in new satellites being added to the existing MEO constellation operated by SES, these satellites are not the only ones SES plans to add. The IRIS² satellites will be joined by other new satellites that SES will procure and launch into MEO as part of its next-generation MEO satellite constellation. The rapid increase in new satellites in MEO provides a myriad of new opportunities for global governments, and opens the door for new, innovative capabilities in space through the use of hosted payloads and secondary missions.

These payloads could include scientific missions, Earth observation missions, or could bring advanced communications, sensor, computing capabilities into space – including artificial intelligence (AI) and edge computing capabilities.

The IRIS² sovereign satellite initiative will bring secure, assured, and reliable satellite connectivity to the EU when it enters operation in 2030. But it will also usher in a new and exciting era for MEO satellite constellations. The investment in IRIS2 is sparking the further advancement of communications satellites in MEO, and it will result in MEO capacity extending to practically every corner of the globe and the introduction of exciting new capabilities to MEO satellite networks.

The post IRIS2 Poised to Deliver New Era of Global MEO Coverage appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Here at SES Space & Defense, we are well positioned as both a satellite operator and an agnostic integrator, providing a strategic advantage in delivering resilient COMSATCOM solutions to our government and military customers. While SES is a satellite owner and operator in both MEO and GEO, we also have strategic agreements with LEO operators and other GEO operators that enables us to offer global mission-ready solutions, supporting the warfighter across LEO, MEO and GEO. Our customers require very diverse capabilities to ensure resilient SATCOM, and being able to offer a true multi-orbit technology agnostic strategy is critical for our customers.

Enhancing Mission Assurance with Strategic Relationships and Agnostic Integration
The two main impacts of multi-orbit capabilities are high availability and greater security. By having multi-path, multi-orbit, and multi-frequency offerings, we achieve resiliency through redundancy. SES Space & Defense enhances security by keeping traffic off the public internet. Instead, it routes through our private network, where we can maintain stricter control over security. Having multi-orbit solutions also enables us to seamlessly provide continuous, high-availability solutions when experiencing a significant failure. The traffic is automatically rerouted through our software-defined network, and the customer is completely unaware of any outage, reducing the risk of a single point of failure. Simultaneously, our technicians can work on any outage in the background while the customer maintains connectivity.

For example, we have a customer that requires high availability, which we have traditionally provided through a mixture of our GEO networks and terrestrial connectivity. Around three years ago, through one of our partnerships with a LEO provider, we began integrating LEO into that customer equation. Recently, there was a failure on one of the LEO orbits, which was the primary means for the customer to communicate. As soon as we experienced that failure, our GEO capacity picked up the slack immediately, and the customer maintained uninterrupted service.

As for the enhanced security these partnerships provide, one example is a high-profile customer that operates multi-orbit networks as part of a Primary, Alternate, Contingency, and Emergency (PACE) plan. We take their traffic from a LEO provider before it hits the public Internet and put our security wrapper around it through our terrestrial network. From there, it is delivered to the customer’s home base, resulting in a higher level of assured security that accompanies high availability.

Interoperability Challenges Between Providers
One critical component of agnostic integration is the interoperability between multiple providers. Achieving this on the satellite side is admittedly not overly difficult, though there are critical components of the process that must be selected and managed meticulously to enable successful integration. This includes selecting the right appliances and software that are built to standards that can be properly integrated.

Some operators have proprietary modem systems and they may operate at differing levels of security. But, if we can intercept the traffic at a point where we can integrate it with the incoming traffic from the other networks, it is not overly complicated. It can be done, and it’s been proven. At SES Space & Defense, we’re doing it efficiently and successfully applying it in real applications.

Though the satellite process is relatively easy, there is a slight challenge on the ground side. Industry has not yet perfected a single solution antenna with multiple, software-defined waveforms on a terminal that can go from orbit to orbit or satellite constellation to satellite constellation. Some manufacturers are close to achieving this technology but a significant challenge remains in scaling down the required equipment to enable multi-orbit operations across multiple fleets effectively.

In many cases, you must have a proprietary system or a system that’s designed for a specific waveform on a specific satellite, and that’s the biggest challenge. Industry is catching up and some companies are currently working on multi-orbit, single-terminal products that would scale down the equipment needed for the operation. But, overall, the ground side of the industry is not quite there yet.

Agnostic Integration Influencing DoD Procurement
One big question about agnostic integration is how it will affect procurement strategies and partnerships between the DoD and industry. Everyone wants multi-orbit, multi-frequency, high-availability, and resilient networks. However, without someone to integrate the solution, contracting officers often need to issue multiple contracts for the various components required to build a fully integrated network. That equates to additional time, additional money, and different management across the different platforms that need to be integrated. On top of that, the government will have to do more work to integrate it themselves.

From a procurement perspective, the government is increasingly recognizing that industry can take on the integration process, serving as a one-stop solution. Much of the government’s recent approach reflects this shift, as they seek industry-led solutions and integration. Given the advantages in time, cost, and technology, industry is often better positioned to handle this than the government itself.

The post Agnostic Integration: Delivering High Availability, Resiliency, and Secure SATCOM to the DoD appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Through the contract, end-users will also have the option to leverage commercial SATCOM as a managed service (SaaMS) capabilities through SES or sovereign network services created and operated independently by participating governments.

To learn more about the mGS contract—also known as LuxMEO— and the scope of SATCOM services it will provide to NATO, the Government Satellite Report sat down with Gus Anderson, SES Space & Defense’s VP of Strategic Business Development.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What is LuxMEO and mGS? What is this program about?

Gus Anderson: LuxMEO is a U.S. government term for the mGS contract because the government understood this contract to be a partnership among long-time allies — the United States, Luxembourg, and NATO — to make secure, resilient, broadband O3b mPOWER MEO satellite capacity available to all NATO members. The contract has been many years in the making and was awarded to SES by the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) on September 2nd.

“Because the constellation is in MEO, we need fewer satellites for continuous global coverage. We have already launched eight of these satellites, with an additional five satellites to be launched.” – Gus Anderson

The program is designed to provide bulk O3b mPOWER capacity to any NATO member. Currently, Luxembourg and the U.S. have signed up for a collective 10 gigabits per second which they can use to support national and multi-national defense and national security missions.

GSR: What satellite technologies, operational capabilities, and service agreements fall under the mGS contract?

Gus Anderson: MEO services under the contract can be activated anywhere globally between 48 degrees north and 48 degrees south. The satellite technology behind the contract is the O3b mPOWER constellation. Because the constellation is in MEO, we need fewer satellites for continuous global coverage. We have already launched eight of these satellites, with an additional five satellites to be launched.

There are two types of services available to mGS users: commercial managed services and sovereign services.

The commercial managed services make use of our existing commercial gateways for fast activation. These services use SES hubs at the SES commercial gateways and will need to use a particular set of SES-issued terminals and equipment that have been certified to be O3b mPOWER-ready on the remote end-user side of a network.

The other mGS terrestrial service available is sovereign services, which enable end-users to establish their own gateways at any location and utilize their own equipment – essentially creating their own wholly proprietary government networks using O3b mPOWER capacity. As a trusted provider to NATO and allied governments, SES Space & Defense can provide technical assistance to governments wanting to create such sovereign networks.

In addition, mGS offers a hybrid sovereign solution, whereby participating nations can deploy co-locate proprietary equipment at SES’s commercial gateways to create their own secure networks using the existing antenna infrastructure at SES’s commercial gateways.

The most important point of this is that the O3b mPOWER infrastructure is designed to be agnostic to equipment, meaning end-users, participating nations, and all the customers who are going to use the mGS contract can bring their own equipment to this network, subject to some basic certifications to ensure that their technology will be compatible with O3b mPOWER.

“NATO and the participating nations are pre-purchasing bandwidth capacity on O3b mPOWER that will then be used by their nations and the mission partners.” – Gus Anderson

To that end, we have our own government technology certification (GTC) program, and we are already running select equipment through this program. We’ve been approached by end-users, especially inside the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), who have modems and terminal equipment they’re interested in using with O3b mPOWER. We are working closely with the manufacturers to ensure the equipment is prepared for the GTC process.

GSR: How will this contract change SATCOM for NATO?

Gus Anderson: The most important piece of this contract is the bulk capacity purchase. NATO and the participating nations are pre-purchasing bandwidth capacity on O3b mPOWER that will then be used by their nations and the mission partners.

This contract construct allows an end-user to simply activate bandwidth already on a purchase order, accelerating the government’s access to O3b mPOWER. Everyone knows that the acquisition process could often take months, so we’re looking at being able to activate bandwidth initially in a matter of weeks. As we improve and automate the process, we expect bandwidth activation time to be reduced to days, even hours.

To learn more about the mGS contract, click HERE.

The post SES to Provide NATO with Bulk Capacity, Sovereign Services via MGS Contract appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Without PNT capabilities – and without resilient and redundant solutions that can withstand adversarial attacks – warfighters would essentially enter the field blind, putting the mission and, more importantly, their lives at risk.

To learn more about the role GPS and PNT play in modern warfighting, as well as the commercial solutions that the military is leveraging to provide assured, continuous PNT to the warfighter, the Government Satellite Report sat down with SES Space & Defense’s Senior Director of Innovation and Satellite Programs, Bryan Benedict.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What role does space-based satellite PNT play in modern warfare? Why is PNT so important for today’s modern military?

Bryan Benedict: PNT is vital in providing both the location and time elements of any military engagement. PNT lets warfighters know where they are and where their objective is located. It essentially answers the “where” and “when” questions.

PNT is so essential to operational success that if a mission is being planned and PNT is unavailable, that operation may be delayed. It is also worth mentioning that various munition systems use GPS as a source of PNT data for targeting purposes.

There are a number of global navigational satellite systems (GNSS) in use by other countries. The U.S. version is GPS. The European solution is called Galileo. China, India, and Japan have their own systems as well.

GSR: Why would the military be concerned about assured PNT? What challenges or threats are there to modern PNT solutions?

Bryan Benedict: The primary challenges and threats to modern PNT are jamming and spoofing. Jamming involves using signals at the same frequency to make the GPS signal unusable. Spoofing involves sending signals that are masquerading as GPS but are intentionally designed to provide erroneous information to the user. Another threat is that adversaries could physically damage the GPS fleet through an anti-satellite (ASAT) missile attack.

Currently, assured PNT for the U.S. military is provided by resilient GPS. It provides ways to work around the loss of some GPS assets or signals and allows PNT even in the presence of jamming. GPS itself is a very low-power signal, and is relatively easy to jam. Alternative PNT allows PNT determination when the GPS fleet is severely degraded or absent all together. SES Space & Defense is working now with other companies to determine how we could leverage our MEO and GEO satellite networks to provide alternative PNT to the USG.

“Not all GPS satellites are M-code capable and not all GPS receivers can process M-code signals. Full M-code capability by the military is expected by the end of 2025.” -Bryan Benedict

GSR: What steps is the military taking to increase the resiliency of PNT signals from space? What is M-code? Has the military officially adopted M-code? What roadblocks exist?

Bryan Benedict: In order to increase the resilience of GPS signals, the military is making it harder to successfully jam and spoof GPS signals. M-code uses next-generation cryptography, higher power and more than one frequency to work around an adversary’s attempt to disrupt GPS usage.

While the military has adopted M-code, roadblocks still exist. Not all GPS satellites are M-code capable and not all GPS receivers can process M-code signals. Full M-code capability by the military is expected by the end of 2025.

To increase the resiliency of PNT, the government has been looking to boost resiliency through the addition of satellites in both the GPS layer and possibly, commercial PNT satellites at other altitudes. They’re definitely encouraging the development of alternative PNT signals from other orbits, including the lower MEO and LEO orbits, as well as through use of alternative frequencies.

The Space Enterprise Consortium awarded a contract to a company that was developing PNT concepts for GEO orbit. If you look at the Chinese Beidou system, they incorporate MEO satellites, similar to GPS, but they also leverage GEO and inclined GEO spacecraft. That means that if their MEO signal is degraded, the Chinese still have the capability to provide regional PNT using their GEO spacecraft.

As far as challenges that currently exist for developing alternative PNT systems, I don’t think the U.S. military has been able to implement M-code on PNT spacecraft outside of MEO. Some of the alternative PNT companies that are trying to do PNT from LEO may not be able to utilize the benefits provided by M-code.

“Commercially provided alternative PNT solutions for the military could provide a stopgap if GPS fleet signals become degraded. If GPS is not possible, commercial PNT would step in.” -Bryan Benedict

GSR: Why would a commercial PNT solution be desirable for the military? What new capabilities or functionality would these new services offer?

Bryan Benedict: The U.S. military would like to have a PNT function that does not depend on GPS, as it is not as resilient as they would like it to be. GPS is a prime target for U.S. adversaries through spoofing, jamming and ASAT attacks. Commercially provided alternative PNT solutions for the military could provide a stopgap if GPS fleet signals become degraded. If GPS is not possible, commercial PNT would step in.

The military is looking for more than one commercial alternative PNT solution. Questions arise whether commercial PNT will be available when needed and whether it can be trusted. Technical challenges exist when alternative PNT is provided outside of the GPS frequency bands and outside of GPS orbit. Ideally GPS receivers could be modified to accept signals from other orbits and other frequencies.

GSR: Why would they need commercial PNT solutions if a new generation of M-code PNT satellites (GPS Block III) is being launched?

Bryan Benedict: While M-code PNT satellites are more resilient to jamming and spoofing, they are no more resilient to an ASAT attack. Commercial PNT would provide an alternative if the GPS fleet becomes unusable.

GSR: Is there a market for commercial PNT outside of the U.S. government?

Bryan Benedict: That is an excellent question. Companies and organizations that rely on GPS – such as banking, utilities, shipping, airlines, and commerce – are dependent upon GPS but frequently have workarounds should GPS not be available. One of these solutions may involve the use of cell towers or other fixed RF transmitters.

“PNT would be a global service, and SES has worldwide satellite network supported by critical ground infrastructure. Providing commercial PNT is an excellent way to provide vital services to the U.S. government.” -Bryan Benedict

I don’t believe there would be customers for commercial PNT as long as they had government-provided alternatives, including GPS and Galileo. It’s unlikely that all of the government provided PNT services will become inoperative, so commercial customers don’t have a strong reason to invest in an alternative PNT system when other government PNT solutions remain available.

GSR: What does SES have planned in regard to commercial PNT services/solutions? Why is this a marketplace that SES is looking to enter? How is the company uniquely qualified to offer these services?

Bryan Benedict: SES is working with small businesses that are developing alternative PNT solutions. Why are we looking to enter this marketplace? First, we believe alternative PNT is a function that the government would like to procure, and SES Space & Defense is organized to serve the U.S. government in particular.

SES Space & Defense is well qualified because of our multi-orbit satellite systems. Future MEO and GEO satellites can host future PNT payloads. PNT would be a global service, and SES has worldwide satellite network supported by critical ground infrastructure. Providing commercial PNT is an excellent way to provide vital services to the U.S. government.

The post PNT – Answering the Where and When During Warfighting Missions appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The host satellite, SES-14, moved to its final destination in Geostationary orbit (GEO) in October of that year, where it became operational, sending important imagery of the Earth’s upper atmosphere to researchers at NASA and the University of Colorado’s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) courtesy of the GOLD payload.

In the six year’s that the GOLD mission has been operational, it has witnessed impressive geomagnetic storms caused by solar storms, and sent back imagery to Earth that was previously unobtainable for researchers. This has led to multiple published studies and the potential for better prediction of space weather, which can impact satellites and other systems on Earth.

To learn more about the GOLD mission and what it has accomplished in its first six years in operation, we sat down with Dr. Richard Eastes, a Research Scientist at LASP, and one of the driving forces behind the GOLD mission.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What is the NASA GOLD mission? Why is it important?

Dr. Richard Eastes: The GOLD mission is a NASA mission of opportunity. GOLD stands for Global-scale Observations of the Limb and Disk. The limb is just the horizon. The disk is the view of the Earth that you get when viewing it from GEO. I would assume your readers have all seen NOAA satellite images from GEO, that’s the disk.

The existing views that we get of the disk essentially cover one hemisphere. More accurately, they probably cover about a third of the disk. Including the limb – the horizon – as well, about half of the Earth is covered by GOLD’s observations.

For this particular mission, we’re looking at the upper atmosphere, above 75 miles or 120 km. Traditionally, we have studied these areas and the effects of space weather using imagery from satellites in low earth orbit (LEO). But that’s a very restricted view that limits how often you can image any one particular area or anomaly.

If we identify a point of interest and image it from LEO, it could take upwards of 12 to 24 hours until we can image it again. Atmospheric changes can happen quickly, in only an hour. For us to understand what is happening and see any changes as they occur, we need the ability to take a sequence of images. This allows us to track changes more effectively.

We’ve studied the upper atmosphere’s climate extensively. But when we try to go beyond the climatology, that’s the seasonal changes, there’s difficulty in understanding the short-term changes. That’s especially important for space weather, and that’s the type of data you need to really make progress beyond the climatology we have now.

GSR: How does GOLD get that information? What is the payload comprised of, and what does it do?

Dr. Richard Eastes: The GOLD mission essentially involves launching an instrument into orbit. That instrument includes two cameras that are capable of what we would call spectral imaging. That means we can separate the different wavelengths of light in the images, and we can look at different emissions, or light, from oxygen and nitrogen in the upper atmosphere.

With the GOLD instrument, we can see where light from the Earth’s atmosphere is coming from and how that light is stimulated by the short wavelength radiation in the Sun, and also by the aurora.

These types of emissions are what we’re looking at. We’re looking at that light and those emissions to help us understand how the upper atmosphere is changing. So, by looking at the different colors – essentially our wavelengths of light – we can understand what the composition of the atmosphere is and how that’s changing.

In comparison to previous missions, GOLD is unique in its ability to image the disk and see the temperature. By combining the data coming from GOLD, we can get a much better idea of what is occurring in the upper atmosphere.

Since the GOLD instrument is in GEO, we can continue to look at the same locations and see how these measurements and data change over time. We can image rapidly, in less than half an hour, and see those changes in real time versus having to come back the next day. That’s massively important for gaining a better understanding of space weather and its impact on our Earth.

“The more we observe with missions like GOLD, the more we can build models that enable us to predict the frequency and severity of solar storms and geomagnetic storm events…these models will enable us to identify when a geomagnetic storm is coming, and how serious it will be, so we can prepare accordingly.” – Dr. Eastes

For example, there was a massive geomagnetic storm this past May. That was an incredible opportunity for GOLD to shine, and for its findings to stand out. We were able to sit there and watch how things change in the space environment, or how the space weather changed as it was happening. That’s something we haven’t been able to do before for the upper atmosphere.

GSR: How was the NASA GOLD payload placed in orbit? Did NASA launch its own purpose-built satellite for the GOLD mission?

Dr. Richard Eastes: I mentioned that GOLD is a mission of opportunity for NASA. That effectively means that the instrument is being flown on a satellite that serves another primary purpose. In the past, that usually meant the satellite is being flown for other scientific missions and purposes. In fact, missions of opportunity usually have some connection to the other scientific missions of that satellite.

However, GOLD is somewhat different in that it’s being flown as a hosted payload onboard a commercial communication satellite operated by SES.

GSR: Why was a hosted payload chosen for this mission?

Dr. Richard Eastes: Ultimately, pursuing GOLD as a hosted payload made financial sense. It was significantly less expensive to launch GOLD as a hosted payload than it would have been to launch it into orbit ourselves. Even launching satellites into LEO is expensive, and GEO can cost three or four times what a LEO launch can cost, so it would not have been financially viable to launch GOLD if we had to launch it ourselves.

Working with SES on GOLD has been an excellent experience. They have decades of experience flying satellites in GEO, and their satellites are highly reliable. Their knowledge of operating satellites enables us to simply give them a set of commands, which they upload to the spacecraft, and we can be confident that everything is done correctly. They then reliably deliver all data from GOLD to us at LASP.

I think the science community is impressed with what we’ve what we’ve been able to do, and how much we’ve been able to do by working with a commercial company and launching a hosted payload.

GSR: Was the process of launching a hosted payload difficult or challenging in any way?

Dr. Richard Eastes: The relationship wasn’t always without its challenges. There were certainly speedbumps and roadblocks that needed to be navigated – especially when it came to schedule. Candidly, commercial companies are used to operating much more quickly than science missions.

Thankfully, SES was able to get us involved very early in the process. This gave us an excellent picture of what was happening. They also took the time to meet with us and discuss the details. They brought in the people that could answer our important questions – including questions about interfaces and ensuring that our payload would interoperate with the satellite.

In fact, when we told them about challenges that we were working through with the payload, they often would give us suggestions and provide even better solutions than our team could identify. One example involved the power supply. There was some discussion about how we could adapt to the voltage of a commercial satellite. SES simply offered to provide us with the 28 volts that were needed to power the payload, and solved the problem for us.

Even during integration, we had someone there with the spacecraft vendor fulltime to help with monitoring the spacecraft and monitoring our instrument. If the vendor needed to move the payload they wanted to ensure t it wasn’t mistakenly  damaged so they had someone from our team ensure their activities wouldn’t cause a problem for us.

GSR: How long has the GOLD payload been delivering data to NASA and its mission partners?

Dr. Richard Eastes: Following launch, it takes a while for the satellite to get to GEO and begin operating. So, GOLD came online about six years ago this month (October of 2018). That’s when we started making our first observations.

At that time, the sun was going through what we refer to as solar minimum. The sun goes through an 11-year cycle, and it was solar minimum when GOLD came online. We’re about at a solar maximum now. So, we’re really halfway through one solar cycle at this point.

We’ve been delivering data that entire time. Throughout these six years, we have been making daily observations – multiple scans on the day side and multiple scans on the night side of each day.

GSR: There were recently two studies published based on observations from the GOLD mission. The first looked at changes to the ionosphere due to a massive geomagnetic storm. What causes storms like this? What impact did this storm have, and why was it newsworthy or significant?

Dr. Richard Eastes: The sun sends out clouds of plasma that we call coronal mass ejections. And when one of those hits the earth, it can generate and deposit a lot of power in the  Earth’s upper atmosphere. That power gets transmitted into particles that start flowing, which generates currents and magnetic fields.

While this disturbs the Earth’s magnetic field it also produces the aurora, which was one of the results in this most recent May storm. People saw the aurora really far south, potentially as far south as Florida. I even heard some reports that it was seen as far south as Puerto Rico. Typically, you must go up north to places like Iceland to see it. This was a very rare occasion where people much further south could simply walk out in their backyard and see the aurora.

But these changes don’t just cause the aurora. They also can interrupt HF communications that are used for numerous applications, including airplane communications. It can also interfere with GPS systems. I heard reports that during the May storm, there were numerous farmers in the Midwest who rely on GPS for precision agriculture to ensure chemical and seed distribution is done properly that couldn’t plant their crops during the storm.

There are so many systems that rely on GPS today. All of these systems – even automated construction equipment that is navigated by GPS – experienced outages and other disturbances as a result of this May storm.

GSR: In the second study, GOLD identified how a wave of plasma from the sun impacted the Earth. What role did GOLD play in identifying this? What impact did this wave of plasma have?

Dr. Richard Eastes: We don’t really see the plasma directly from the sun. What we see is the effects of that plasma when it reaches Earth. During the May event, we began our observations on the night side and then continued into the day side. We saw some things that we’ve never seen before.

We were able to get a picture of the neutral atmosphere and the ionosphere. We learned about the temperatures in the atmosphere and how that varies. We witnessed electric fields causing some of the nightside atmosphere to move at rapid speeds – as high as 400 meters per second – towards the poles.

It’s important to identify these changes because changes in the upper atmosphere have widely distributed impacts. While Earth’s weather is more localized – a storm in the Atlantic Ocean might have no bearing or impact on the Pacific Ocean – space weather changes impact the entire planet.

GOLD was essential in identifying these changes because of its ability to take images of an area at 15-minute intervals. When we were relying on LEO satellites for observation of the upper atmosphere, we could only generate an image every 12 to 24 hours. A lot can change in that time, and you lose the ability to see it changing and identify what’s happening and why.

Because of GOLD, we were able to sit there and watch things develop and see how the upper atmosphere changed.

GSR: Why are these new reports and findings important for NASA? Will they enable us to better predict things that could impact daily life on Earth? Are there impacts of these events that could be felt by civilians?

Dr. Richard Eastes: The May geomagnetic storm event was significant and impactful. But it wasn’t the most significant storm that our Earth has experienced. Back in 1859, the Earth experienced the Carrington Event, the most intense geomagnetic storm in recorded history. It was 10 times the size of the May event.

The Carrington Event impacted the Internet of the day – the telegraph system. In fact, I even heard stories of telegraph stations catching fire as a result. Imagine what a solar storm like that could do to our modern, technology-reliant society.

We learned from the Carrington Event. We were able to more accurately predict the May solar storm event, and we were able to prepare for it. We were prepared enough that it didn’t cause a significant number of serious problems.

It’s important that we see the effects, how things are changing, and how the Earth’s upper atmosphere is responding, because that’s where a lot of the currents are flowing. Seeing what happens in the upper atmosphere in advance of an event like this, and during an event like this, allows us to more accurately predict future events. We’ll identify the precursors and be able to prepare for an event. We’ll also be able to more accurately predict the severity of an event.

The more we observe with missions like GOLD, the more we can build models that enable us to predict the frequency and severity of solar storms and geomagnetic storm events. Much like how predicting a hurricane and its path enables us to evacuate and prepare an area, these models will enable us to identify when a geomagnetic storm is coming, and how serious it will be, so we can prepare accordingly.

Feature image: Bands of colorful airglow are visible above the limb of the Earth in this artist’s depiction of GOLD on the SES-14 satellite. (Courtesy NASA GSFC)

The post NASA’s GOLD Mission – How a Hosted Payload is Increasing our Understanding of Earth’s Upper Atmosphere appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Ahead of the event, the Government Satellite Report had the opportunity to sit down with one of the conference speakers, Juliana Suess – a space security Research Fellow on the Royal United Services Institute’s (RUSI) Military Sciences team and host of the podcast War in Space.

During our discussion, Juliana delves into the current state of the space threat landscape, as well as the role SATCOM and multi-orbit capabilities are currently playing in military operations today, and pulls back the curtain on some of the expected trends and hot topics that will take center stage at the event.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What does the space-based threat landscape look like for today’s militaries?

Juliana Suess: When we examine the counter-space weapons landscape, there is a whole host of different capabilities that range from temporary and reversible measures to the non-reversible and permanent damage end of the spectrum.

Though space has become increasingly contested within the last few years, I think what we’ve been seeing are counter-space attacks that fall on the temporary and reversible range in the electromagnetic spectrum or the cyber sphere, though kinetic tests against states’ own assets have also taken place.

GSR: What impact is SATCOM having on multi-domain military operations today? 

Juliana Suess: SATCOM is a key enabler for all operations. I think quite often there’s a misconception that space is an add-on luxury that militaries can begin to afford once everything else is in order. In reality, space-based capabilities are a requisite, because we need SATCOM as part of a military’s daily operations.

If we look at the UK Space Power doctrine, not only does it already state that the vast majority of operations couldn’t be sustained without space, but it also goes on to say that SATCOM is responsible for all beyond-line-of-site communications. So, whether it is an aircraft or a vessel at sea, all multi-domain operations are made possible through satellite communications.

Space is a connector. Without the information and data that we receive through SATCOM and space, a lot of modern military operations simply wouldn’t be possible.

GSR: What benefits are multi-orbit SATCOM capabilities providing to military operations today? 

Juliana Suess: Resilience is a key aspect as it pertains to multi-orbit SATCOM. For example, if an orbit was compromised through a Kessler syndrome-type event or through a large-scale attack on satellites that would make part of an orbit unsafe, having the resilient capability of migrating service to a different orbit and using those satellites is tremendously impactful.

There’s also a utility aspect in these orbits to be considered. For example, Low Earth Orbit (LEO) has very low latency. Communications that don’t have to be classified or tightly secured can leverage a commercial provider in LEO. Whereas more highly secure communication channels can then be reserved for the assets that sit in Geostationary Orbit (GEO).

GSR: What are some of the challenges, needs, and requirement trends you’re seeing from militaries as it pertains to satellite capabilities? What gaps still need to be bridged?

Juliana Suess: In the UK, we have SKYNET – our sovereign satellite communications program which covers a lot of the required satellite capabilities that we need. But when we specifically look at Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), the UK is still very reliant on the U.S, although at least some of those gaps could be bridged with commercial partners.

I think the challenge overall – and the UK is not unique to this – is just money. Space is expensive and space-based projects take a long time. For example, the UK could no longer be part of the EU’s Galileo space program, which is the EU’s answer to GPS. The idea was floated that the UK could build its own PNT system, but the funding aspect made it impossible for a country the size of the UK.

In terms of further trends that we’re seeing, I think resilience will be a continuing factor and consideration as we continue to build out space capabilities. That will translate to having onboard resilience elements such as inter-satellite links that allow satellites to jump over compromised ground segments. Having proliferated constellations in conjunction with multi-orbit capabilities will also be a continuing trend. Militaries will continue to not put all their eggs in one orbital basket, which will be incredibly helpful.

GSR: Next week, military and space industry leaders will convene at the Defence in Space Conference in London. What are the hot topics and trends you foresee being discussed at the event?

Juliana Suess: Since the conference will be an industry-heavy event, I think there will be a lot of discussions around the sovereign assets versus buy-in debate. The UK has put forward the Own-Collaborate-Access (OCA) framework through which it wants to view its space capabilities and the procurement of those capabilities. So, I think that’s definitely a topic that will be explored in terms of how to strike the right balance, as well as if commercial partners are brought into the fold how can they be protected from potential attacks?

When we saw the cyberattack against ViaSat at the beginning of the large-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that was a commercial provider that had the Ukrainian military as one of its clients. That cyberattack highlighted the vulnerability of commercial actors, especially when they’re being used by armed forces or states.

That brings me to the next trend that I think will have a lot of discussion around it, which is how do we keep pace with the threat? I think specifically for space, we need to make a lot more consideration of horizon scanning when it comes to threats because once you put a satellite into space, it’s could be in orbit for the next 10 to 15 years.

In terms of anticipating threats that we need to protect against, we must prepare our hardware and software before launch. In that sense, space is quite unique as we must make more considerations on future protection and resilience before they even become operational.

To learn more about the Defence in Space conference, click HERE.

The post From Sovereign Space to the Pace of the Threat – What to Expect from Defence in Space 2024 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

These services would ultimately be mission-critical to the agency, which would rely on them to replace NASA’s purpose-built, dedicated Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS). NASA and the US Congress have agreed to discontinue further TDRSS satellite builds and just let existing on-orbit assets fly out to their end of life.

But why is NASA relying on this new Communications Services Project (CSP) and industry partners for something so important as near-Earth space relay communication? And, after investing more than $275 million to seed this commercial market space, when will NASA – and other users – be able to leverage commercial relay services?

To get answers to these and other questions about CSP, we sat down with Eric Gunzelman of SES Space & Defense, a commercial satellite provider that was one of the six companies chosen by NASA for the CSP.

During our discussion, we asked Eric about why NASA is looking to the commercial satellite industry for this essential capability, how the agency will benefit from this arrangement, and the progress that SES Space & Defense is making with its partner, Planet Labs, on the LEO Relay System that is being developed in part with CSP funds.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What is the TDRSS? What does it do, and why does NASA need it?

Eric Gunzelman: Since the first TDRSS launched 41 years ago, its main purpose has been to provide space relay capabilities for NASA. TDRSS has provided space relay capabilities for many notable programs, like Skylab, the Space Shuttle, Landsat, and the International Space Station—as well as the Hubble Space Telescope and even some firsts, like the first pole to pole phone call in April 1989.

Overall, 13 TDRSS satellites were built but TDRS-2 was lost with the 1986 Challenger accident. About six of those satellites remain operational and three are available for operational relay support at any time. By allowing NASA to relay data from lower orbits to satellites in higher orbits, NASA could effectively communicate with science satellites and space station crews and receive data at any time. They could even transmit data and communicate when no ground station was in view.

They’re incredibly important because NASA needs assured communications and connectivity in orbit. Even when the space shuttle or the International Space Station orbits the Earth over an ocean, and they cannot see a ground station, they still need connectivity. TDRSS delivers that assured, mission-critical connectivity.

GSR: Why transition to commercial satellites for this purpose?

Eric Gunzelman: Candidly, the TDRSS constellation is expensive to operate for NASA and government funding could be used for new endeavors, such as the Artemis program, which has NASA going back to the moon. Given technology advances and expanding market opportunities in the commercial sector, space relay could now be provided as a commercial service. This lowers the cost of service for NASA when costs are spread over a larger commercial market.

Commercial alternatives will drastically lower NASA’s initial capital expenditure. NASA will no longer have to pay to build and launch a new generation of TDRSS satellites and service them. They’ll also deliver some other benefits, including increased capabilities, innovation, and capacity.

“Think about what airlines, shipping companies, and farms can do with real-time weather data and imagery from space. It could bring great precision and decision speed to the commercial industry, as well as government agencies, helping to provide greater insights and lower operational costs.” – Eric Gunzelman

Commercial satellite providers have made incredible advancements in their technology and solutions in the 40-plus years since TDRSS was launched. Today, COMSATCOM providers operate incredibly high-throughput satellites across multiple orbits, including LEO and MEO. This makes it possible to transmit large amounts of data in near real-time with very low latency.

Also, large commercial satellite providers expanded their constellations, and new providers came online in that time. There is a massive ecosystem of commercial satellites across multiple orbits that have a tremendous amount of capacity for government missions.

Today, TDRSS’s capacity is limited and requests for service can take weeks to get approved. This means that some requests for service either can’t be filled or will be deprioritized for other, more important missions. That won’t be an issue for commercial satellite providers since there is so much capacity available.

GSR: Where are we in this process? How far off are we from having commercial services replacing TDRSS?

Eric Gunzelman: In the latter half of last decade, NASA developed the supporting analyses and presented the business case to Congress. Legislation evolved and eventually declared that the U.S. government would let the TDRSS program fly out and let NASA work with the commercial industry to develop a space relay commercial market with requisite capabilities that can effectively replace TDRSS functionality.

“The test that we conducted was effectively the first-ever multi-orbit, multi-band commercial space relay link to a LEO flight-representative terminal on the ground. The next step in our partnership with Planet involves an actual flight demonstration.” – Eric Gunzelman

NASA competed the Communications Services Project (CSP) in 2021 and selected six companies for the varied approaches to space relay – different orbits, bands, etc. CSP gave these companies seed money to begin finding ways to turn their solutions into a relay system.

The chosen companies are now in the process of maturing various solutions and conducting testing to ensure it will meet NASA’s needs and requirements by the 2026-2027 timeframe. Once they have various options across multiple bands and orbits, NASA will take those options and present them to NASA and U.S. government users so that they can design their relay requirements against what is available.

GSR: I understand that SES Space & Defense has partnered with Planet Labs for its CSP contract. What role does SES SD play in this? What role does Planet Labs play?

Eric Gunzelman: SES Space & Defense is providing the space and ground segment of our relay solution. Our MEO and GEO satellites, along with our ground segment, will provide multi-band, multi-orbit relay from LEO satellites.

Planet Labs will provide the NASA surrogate satellite, one of their Earth Observation satellites for the relay capability testing. They’re effectively using their LEO spacecraft and earth observation mission to approximate a NASA science mission.

While this sounds simple—relaying data from Planet’s LEO satellite to our MEO and GEO satellites—significant work needs to occur to enable this relay since it was not designed into our satellites originally. Nonetheless, SES prides itself in building open, agnostic architectures so incorporating relay as an additional function is highly doable.

“Given technology advances and expanding market opportunities in the commercial sector, space relay could now be provided as a commercial service. This lowers the cost of service for NASA when costs are spread over a larger commercial market.” – Eric Gunzelman

And for Planet, that work includes the design and development of space-rated LEO communications terminals needed to talk to our MEO and GEO satellites.  They have been an excellent partner for SES Space & Defense, shouldering much of the heavy lifting associated with developing and deploying the space-rated LEO terminals.

GSR: Is this something that only NASA and military users will benefit from? Or could these space relay solutions also benefit commercial users?

Eric Gunzelman: This new capability will be incredibly beneficial for commercial users as well as government users. Planet is a commercial satellite imagery provider, and we purposely teamed with them because they represent an excellent use case in which to demonstrate relay capability to NASA using a similar mission set but also do it from a commercially based platform in operation today.

As such, Planet as a representative of commercial satellite imagery services, shows how NASA could be one of many customers in this new market. And then, for almost any mission, relaying that data through MEO or GEO satellites provides a more responsive option for users verses waiting to overfly the next ground station before getting time-critical science data to the ground for NASA or others to analyze. This means the data can be delivered—including imagery—from space in almost real-time.

That can be huge for many industries. Think about what airlines, shipping companies, and farms can do with real-time weather data and imagery from space. It could bring great precision and decision speed to the commercial industry, as well as government agencies, helping to provide greater insights and lower operational costs.

GSR: Last month, SES Space & Defense and Planet Labs announced that the companies had successfully tested the service. What did this test involve? What’s next?

Eric Gunzelman: The test that we conducted was effectively the first-ever multi-orbit, multi-band commercial space relay link to a LEO flight-representative terminal on the ground. The next step in our partnership with Planet involves an actual flight demonstration. That is scheduled early 2025 and – if successful – sets the stage for the launch of our service offering.

The post Exploring the Benefits of CSP For NASA and Industry appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

At this year’s GOVSATCOM conference, multi-orbit SATCOM took center stage as representatives from SES Space & Defense, Viasat, and OneWeb convened for a special session, “The New Multi-Orbit Paradigm,” to examine the logistics behind making these on-demand satellite connectivity and communications capabilities a reality.

SES Space & Defense CEO, David Fields, kicked off the discussion by highlighting the implications of the satellite industry’s shift from geosynchronous (GEO) SATCOM capabilities to non-GEO solutions. “The shift to non-GEO has really added an incredible amount of complexity to what we’ve done over the past few years,” said Fields. “Operators now must think differently about how they manage the networks, manage that complexity, and how we are going to vertically integrate.”

Fields explained that SES Space & Defense is turning its attention to leveraging its GEO and Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) constellations for other space capabilities, like hosted payloads, sensors, space relay, and other future solutions that are coming down the pike. Focusing on other applications and uses of GEO and MEO constellations will enable the company to maximize the capabilities it delivers to its customers.

“The point is how do we make sure we deliver a Service Level Agreement (SLA) to customers like the Navy who have mission critical solutions and mission critical requirements,” said Fields. “This is really driving the change in partnerships…Everyone has to be invested in the mission’s success in order for that to happen.”

According to Fields, when it comes to multi-orbit SATCOM, SES Space & Defense has been an all-orbit provider for quite some time. “We have our own GEO fleet, and we have our own MEO fleet,” said Fields. “But we also partner with all the LEO providers as well.”

Fields explained that by partnering with LEO providers, SES Space & Defense is extending enterprises out to remote locations with a staggering number of applications that are being deployed. “It’s not about one orbit, but it’s about all the orbits,” he said. “It’s about what’s the application. Sometimes LEO is going to be the best application, and sometimes it may be MEO or GEO. I don’t think it’s an ‘or’ scenario. It’s an ‘and’ scenario. So how do we tie those things together?”

Expanding on this idea of applications leveraging all-orbits when necessary, Fields stated that it’s critical for providers to put the customer’s mission first and ensure its success. “If that’s not successful, we’re not going to be successful,” he said.

Andy Lincoln, Viasat’s Chief Engineer of Global Space Networks, agreed with Fields, saying that the future of SATCOM lies in the idea of hybrid networking. “The multi-orbits are all important because they have different capabilities and limitations,” he said. “They’re like children. You have to love them all, but sometimes for different reasons.”

Being able to meet the complex satellite requirements of multi-orbit military missions is a primary goal of the DoD’s hybrid SATCOM architecture. And the DoD has made major strides in giving direction and painting a picture of what capabilities and solutions it wants from the commercial satellite industry.

“I think the biggest piece that was missing in the past – when it came to government interaction – was the lack of conveying vision,” said Fields. “What [the DoD] has done in the past few years – through the hybrid SATCOM architecture – is laying out a roadmap and vision for where we want to go. That is critical.”

In addition to the DoD’s progress in articulating its architecture vision to commercial industry, the Department has also seen constructive improvements in the procurement and acquisition arenas. “A lot of positive things have happened in the last couple of years as managed services have been procured by the government,” said Lincoln. He explained that the government has a better understanding of off-the-shelf solutions, their terms, conditions, and features – as well as their capabilities and limitations.

“They’ve learned…that you can buy it or not buy it. That’s good training for the acquisition professionals in the government,” Lincoln said.

To watch the full GOVSATCOM session, “The New Multi-Orbit Paradigm,” click the video below:

The post Satellite Executives Discuss the Multi-Orbit Paradigm at GOVSATCOM 2024 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.