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.

But successes are usually accompanied by setbacks and challenges. Even after witnessing these incredible use-case wins for COMSATCOM integration and adoption, the federal government has still been slow and hesitant to fully implement and deploy these satellite technologies that can support the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) mission of providing its military with a resilient space architecture.

Though officials frequently point to this space architecture as a top priority for the department, the government acquisition process of commercial space assets – which could truly propel the U.S. ahead of its foreign adversaries and near-peer competitors – was still sluggish and arduous in 2022.

To learn more about the trends, progress, and challenges the commercial satellite industry faced within the federal acquisition space in 2022, and to get an outlook on how COMSATCOM can support the federal government and the DoD’s mission requirements in 2023, the Government Satellite Report was able to catch up with SES Space & Defense’s Senior Vice President of Strategic Development, Jay Icard.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): Over the past year, what overarching trends is the commercial satellite industry seeing and experiencing as it pertains to government acquisition? What successes has the industry experienced? What new challenges have come up?

Jay Icard: We’ve seen the government shift away from the lowest price technically acceptable procurements to using best value, which is good! The number of networks has remained flat, meaning the commercial industry repeatedly competes for the same contracts.

Having said that, the U. S. Space Force awarded some significant COMSATCOM contracts last year, such as the CSSC II contract for the U.S. Navy, which is over $900M ceiling – not a small effort. They also released some new solicitations, such as the Global X-band Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), which should prove to be an enabling contract for MILSATCOM-COMSATCOM integration in the near future.

One concerning challenge that has been popping up these last few years pertains to the current talent pool. If you look at the needs for talent on the government acquisition side, they need personnel to develop the requirements with their customers. They need personnel to evaluate the proposals, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find experienced personnel that wants to work on COMSATCOM acquisitions.

“Along with assuming full acquisition and procurement authorities for COMSATCOM, Space Command should work with Space Force to create Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budgets for select procurements of COMSATCOM.” – Jay Icard

It’s not common for people to go to college and major in COMSATCOM engineering. The government and industry compete from the same resource talent pool. Our industry is not something you learn in a couple of months.

The 2016 “Analysis of Alternatives” study, mandated by Congress, required the Department to look at how military and commercial systems could collectively provide a resilient enterprise architecture. The study found that leveraging both military and commercial systems into an integrated hybrid architecture would save taxpayer dollars. That said, we need government professionals that understand the SATCOM acquisition business.

U.S. Space Force and U.S. Space Command are working to integrate COMSATCOM, and they choose from that same talent pool, because there’s still a finite number of professionals with the required skillsets. It’s an industry-wide dilemma. I’ve had a number of discussions with Space Force, Space Command, and industry leaders about this topic.

GSR: What are the possible solutions for those skill gaps in the workforce?

Jay Icard: We’ve spoken with Space Force about immersion. For example, in the past, there have been immersion programs where civilian or military personnel would spend time at a vendor’s facility within an operations or engineering team to learn about how the vendor works and operates.

I participate in the U.S. Space Command’s Commercial Integration Cell (CIC), a group of ten industry partners that work with the command to improve the operational effectiveness of space operations. Within the CIC, we have explored several ideas about bridging that skills gap. Immersion of personnel is one of the ideas that are out there. We know it is an effective method, but it requires a deliberate plan that makes sense for all parties to invest the resources to make it successful.

GSR: Has the government and military made any headway with tearing down the bureaucratic challenges that hinder commercial satellite acquisitions? Has there been any progress or new challenges that have come up? How can government and industry work together to make the process faster while meeting military requirements?

Jay Icard: I believe the government is working on it. They have stabilized their organization and where the COMSATCOM purchasing organization is going to sit within Space Systems Command.

Along with assuming full acquisition and procurement authorities for COMSATCOM, Space Command should work with Space Force to create Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budgets for select procurements of COMSATCOM. For example, the government should consider the POM budget for ground infrastructure and network configuration projects to use existing commercial space assets and place into service MILSATCOM-COMSATCOM roaming configurations discussed in the Space Force Vision for SATCOM. But in general, Space Command and Space Force should see where the POM process can be used to ensure a stable and methodical approach to accelerating the availability of COMSATCOM solutions for military requirements.

“First, we must address where we anticipate conflict and where there may be surge needs. That’s first and foremost.” – Jay Icard

We’re not talking about billions and billions of dollars. Small investments could create a lot of capability with COMSATCOM integration in a short amount of time. But first, the organization needs to be set, and the roles and responsibilities tightened up, and I think they have that now.

GSR: Has establishing the U.S. Space Force and having one centralized service for space simplified the commercial satellite acquisition process?

Jay Icard: I believe it will, and I think the measures of success are straightforward. When presented with a mission need from a service or COCOM:  1) Have we reduced the time to acquire a COMSATCOM service? 2) Have we reduced the time to activate a COMSATCOM service? Those are the fundamental measures of success.

So if I have a need for a certain amount of throughput or network availability in a specific area – How long did it take me to acquire? How long did it take you to activate? That’s where the rubber meets the road.

GSR: What are the top SATCOM needs and requirements that the military and government are looking to fulfill in 2023?

Jay Icard: First, we must address where we anticipate conflict and where there may be surge needs. That’s first and foremost. Are we ready to surge? Do we have the capacity in place to fulfill a surge requirement? In any other networking discipline, it’s busy hour traffic management. Are we ready for the busy hour traffic?

Second, do we have plans to fulfill the future capacity needs? As our capacity consumption grows over the next five years, do we have enough MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM to fulfill that need? Where are the gaps? What are the plans to fill those gaps?

And it could be that we have the space assets to fill the gaps. But do we have the ground assets configured to utilize the space assets that are available to us? Do we have the contracting mechanisms to access the space and ground assets in a timely manner?

“Are we using our assets and skills and implementing those capabilities now and in a short timeline with small amounts of money? Or are we studying to do it five years from now?” – Jay Icard

GSR: On December 23, 2022, President Biden signed the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In the 2023 NDAA, there is a portion that directs the DoD to lay out a strategy and requirements for the protection of DoD satellites. How can the satellite industry assist in realizing these strategies and requirements for a more resilient and defendable national security space architecture, as the law states?

Jay Icard: Accelerate the employment of COMSATCOM integration into military missions, making the enemy’s targeting calculus more complicated. It’s a low-cost and near-term solution to protect MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM assets.

Suppose an enemy focuses their resources into a space asset and successfully disables it. In that case, they will only affect a small percent of the traffic if effective COMSATCOM integration has been employed. To me, that’s been the priority for years now, and that’s the purpose of COMSATCOM integration.

I think the other “tests” we ask in an effort to accelerate COMSATCOM integration include: Are we utilizing the contracts that we have? Are we using our assets and skills and implementing those capabilities now and in a short timeline with small amounts of money? Or are we studying to do it five years from now? Are we studying a problem that we could solve with small and timely investment that could have real mission effects in the near term?  I think that is a test that all of us in the industry and in the policymaking side need to ask ourselves.

To learn about how SES Space & Defense’s new O3b mPOWER constellation can support missions across the federal government and military, click HERE.

The post SESSD Senior Vice President on the state of COMSATCOM in 2022 and what’s in store for 2023 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

But building, operating, and maintaining a network in the incredibly harsh and extreme conditions in remote Alaska is harder than it may seem. While the climate and large size of the state would clearly cause problems, there are other challenges that are less obvious. These include the local fauna, and even the disparate cultures of the native peoples that the network providers are looking to serve.

In the second part of our discussion with Vickie, we take a deep dive into these challenges and explore the way they impact what local organizations should be looking for in their industry partners.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): Why are microwave networks utilized for connectivity in these more remote locations?

Vickie Kelly: In some areas, satellite services are the only solution for delivering coverage and connectivity. For example, the Aleutian Islands, a chain of islands that separates the north Pacific Ocean from the Bering Sea, are so remote that satellite connectivity is the only option for the people there. There are also remote locations in the interior of Alaska that are only accessible via small plane that can only get connectivity with satellite.

Building a microwave network is a terrestrial solution that enables you to provide high throughput connectivity to these remote locations at a fraction of the cost of satellite. However, satellite services are still needed to provide backhaul services and connect those microwave networks back to the Internet. to get to some of these remote sites, but you still need to get back to the Internet.

However, while microwave is a lower-cost solution to satellite, it does have a high maintenance cost. Continuing to operate and repair the microwave infrastructure that comprises the network can be incredibly expensive and difficult.

For example, in one instance, a bull moose would not allow maintenance crews to get to damaged microwave equipment to fix the connection. This resulted in the maintenance crew hiring a helicopter to get to the equipment.

GSR: What unique challenges do industry partners face when building, operating, and maintaining networks in these regions? Is it the same as operating anywhere else in the globe, or do the remote location and harsh climate impact operations?

Vickie Kelly: The climate and environment certainly impact operating and maintaining a network like ours. As we discussed, the climate can make it difficult or impossible to get to the hardware for maintenance purposes. The incredible distance dictates traveling by helicopter or small plane, and those can’t fly when the weather is bad.

Also, as we discussed, the fauna of the area has been known to create its own challenges. We’ve even had foxes chew through the wires of our microwave network infrastructure. Despite having fences and other security solutions in place, the foxes found a way to get to the equipment. Apparently, they learned how to climb fences.

But there are challenges that don’t result from the weather, environment, and animals. There are also challenges that result from the different cultures and people that you serve and work with.

“…the climate can make it difficult or impossible to get to the hardware for maintenance purposes. The incredible distance dictates traveling by helicopter or small plane, and those can’t fly when the weather is bad.” – Vickie Kelly

When you’re working in remote areas of Alaska, you’re also working with the different tribes of those regions. Each of these tribes has its own culture and traditions. Culturally, you have to be very astute. You have to understand what their beliefs and traditions are, and understand if what you’re asking for may offend or betray those traditions and beliefs.

To help ensure that the people within our organization understand and respect these different cultures, we actively work to provide employment opportunities to locals. We employ and train them to help operate and maintain the equipment that’s near their town. We’ll hire them as guides and for transportation for our staff.

But we also provide them with employment opportunities because they bring additional cultural awareness to our organization, as a whole.

GSR: In addition to building, operating, and maintaining these networks, there must be other challenges and requirements that the local government faces. What other services are provided by industry partners?

Vickie Kelly: That’s an excellent question. In many cases, these organizations lack trained IT staff and support to help deliver many of the services that they need as technology becomes more essential in their daily operations. In those instances, we also provide the services that they need to make online capabilities possible.

For example, we provide bandwidth monitoring to ensure that the bandwidth is being used efficiently. We provide quality of service and bandwidth prioritization to ensure that the most mission-critical applications and workloads get priority. We deliver content filtering for schools to help keep children safe. We also provide services to help keep healthcare organizations in compliance with HIPAA requirements.

“The emergence of next-generation NGSO satellite solutions at MEO and LEO promises to offer extremely low latency, extremely high throughput satellite solutions that could provide fiber-like connectivity to practically anywhere on the globe.” – Vickie Kelly

We also enable content caching for school districts that allows them to download content so that it lives on a server locally. This means they don’t have to rely on broadband connectivity to utilize those assets.

GSR: Considering the importance of the network and the service that it delivers – as well as the unique challenges of the region – what should organizations in places like Alaska be looking for in an industry partner? What attributes, expertise and experience are necessary to operate in these environments?

Vickie Kelly: One of the most important things these organizations in Alaska need to be looking at is the contention ratios of the providers. If the bandwidth is contended, there is a good chance that it will not be available for them when they really need it – or that it won’t offer the high throughputs that they need for particular use cases or applications.

This can be difficult for end users because many network and service providers have become very good at hiding the language about the fact that their bandwidth is contended. They need to read between the lines and ask difficult questions to ensure that they’re going to get the service that they need when they need it.

“In some areas, satellite services are the only solution for delivering coverage and connectivity. For example, the Aleutian Islands, a chain of islands that separates the north Pacific Ocean from the Bering Sea, are so remote that satellite connectivity is the only option for the people there.” – Vickie Kelly

I also think they should be looking for providers that not only offer a solution for today but are also innovating for the future. Just because microwave networks are the best solution for meeting the bandwidth requirements of these remote communities in Alaska now doesn’t mean they always will be.

We’re at a very exciting time in satellite and broadband connectivity. The emergence of next-generation NGSO satellite solutions at MEO and LEO promises to offer extremely low latency, extremely high throughput satellite solutions that could provide fiber-like connectivity to practically anywhere on the globe.

These organizations need to be looking for industry partners that not only recognize how this industry is evolving but are also investing in the future of these technologies. They need to be looking for organizations that have the resources, knowledge, and capabilities to bring these new technologies to bear to help meet their mission requirements.

To learn more about the next generation of NGSO satellite solutions that can deliver high throughput, low latency connectivity to remote locations, click HERE.

The post Bears, foxes, and bull moose – the unique challenges of maintaining networks in Alaska appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

When people could no longer go to a government building or office to file paperwork, submit an application, or pick up an important document, it became essential that government organizations give them digital and virtual alternatives. Information had to be made more readily available on government Websites, people needed to be able to download and submit applications for citizen services online, and AI solutions were needed to answer basic questions about government services and policies since many public servants were out of the office.

But what happens in that environment when government organizations want to go digital, but lack basic connectivity? What happens when the constituents they serve don’t have access to high-speed Internet access? And what impact does it have when modern applications and solutions that are hosted in the cloud simply can’t be accessed or utilized by an organization?

This is exactly the problem facing many of America’s rural and remote locations, such as the remote, sparsely-populated areas of the country’s largest state, Alaska.

We recently sat down with Vickie Kelly, a business development manager at SES Space and Defense that calls Anchorage, Alaska home, to discuss how the company is leveraging satellite and microwave networks to bring basic connectivity to school districts and government organizations in Alaska’s wildest regions.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): When it comes to connectivity for public schools and government organizations in remote parts of Alaska, what options do they have? Are typical, terrestrial broadband networks available to them? Why or why not?

Vickie Kelly: In Alaska, connectivity is a case of the “haves” and the “have-nots.” In an urban area, you do have connectivity by fiber that – while a bit more expensive than in the lower 48 – still offers quality connectivity. But the broader portion of Alaska is not urban. It’s defined as remote.

Connectivity for our remote school districts and government organizations is not typical. And there are a number of reasons for that.

Alaska is two-thirds the size of the lower 48 states combined. It’s huge and stretches over a large area containing numerous different topographic and geologic features. It’s almost impossible to run fiber in that environment due to the sheer scope and the terrain. The state’s high risk of natural disasters also plays a role, with frequent earthquakes that can disrupt fiber installation or damage existing fiber lines.

Also, it may sound humorous to those in the lower 48, but fiber and other infrastructure and hardware can be impacted by the local fauna. We’ve seen numerous instances of fiber being chewed and hardware being damaged by bears, foxes, and local animals.

Combined, these factors have resulted in many of the more remote, rural areas of the state having no connectivity via typical, terrestrial networks – like fiber.

GSR: Why is this a problem in these regions, specifically? What could high throughput connectivity enable these districts to do that isn’t possible without it?

Vickie Kelly: We just had an excellent example of how impactful a lack of connectivity can be due to the COVID-19 pandemic. When schools had to shut down, the majority of students had no home Internet. Schools found themselves assembling paper packets of assignments for kids that their parents would pick up.

That seems unreal in this time of connectivity – especially in the lower 48 – but it’s the reality in many of these small, remote towns and villages.

“We’ve traditionally leveraged a proprietary microwave network…to deliver connectivity to more remote places in Alaska. We supplement that microwave network with satellite services…and we’re increasingly looking at NGSO satellite offerings to deliver higher throughput, low latency connectivity to these regions.” – Vicky Kelly

Many teachers in urban areas take Internet-enabled tools for granted. Educational videos on YouTube. Cloud-based learning applications. Video teleconferencing for distance learning. These applications require broadband Internet to access, and low latency to use effectively, or else they’ll time out.

That’s particularly problematic in this region because they need these capabilities – potentially even more than urban school districts and districts in the lower 48.

For example, remote schools are very small. Teachers are generalists and teach multiple classes and subjects. In this environment, distance learning via video teleconferencing could be used to bring in faculty that teach more niche classes – such as foreign languages, music, or even advanced placement classes. This could enable schools and districts to deliver a more diverse, well-rounded educational experience to students.

I used to work in a school district that offered band and orchestra through distance learning via video. That’s a valuable resource for students, but it’s not possible without broadband connectivity.

But that’s only one example of a capability or application that these students can’t access because of their remote location. There are many more, and the number is increasing as technology advances and becomes a more fundamental part of education and curriculum.

“In Alaska, connectivity is a case of the “haves” and the “have-nots.” In an urban area, you do have connectivity by fiber that…still offers quality connectivity. But the broader portion of Alaska is not urban. It’s defined as remote.” – Vicky Kelly

For example, gaming is widely becoming a recognized part of school athletics, with many schools and school districts launching competitive gaming teams. That’s not possible for many of these remote school districts without fiber connectivity. In fact, it may not even be possible with traditional GEO satellite connectivity.

GSR: How have industry partners helped deliver connectivity to these regions in the past? What types of networks are utilized to deliver these services and capabilities to these regions?

Vickie Kelly: To the more remote locations in Alaska, industry partners have had to rely on either microwave networks or satellite services to deliver connectivity. However, there have been some plans proposed to lay additional subsea fiber to connect some more rural, remote areas. And for the urban areas, there are terrestrial fiber and copper networks that are providing connectivity.

We’ve traditionally leveraged a proprietary microwave network that we own, operate, and manage independently to deliver connectivity to more remote places in Alaska. We supplement that microwave network with satellite services where necessary, and we’re increasingly looking at non-geostationary (NGSO) satellite offerings to deliver higher throughput, low latency connectivity to these regions.

GSR: Are these networks only for public schools, or are they also used for other public sector use cases?

Vickie Kelly: Our microwave network is used to support a lot more organizations than just schools and school districts. In fact, one of our first customers was the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC), an Alaskan Native non-profit corporation that provides health and social services to tribal members across much of the rural, remote parts of Alaska.

“Many teachers in urban areas take Internet-enabled tools for granted. Educational videos on YouTube. Cloud-based learning applications. Video teleconferencing for distance learning. These applications require broadband Internet to access…” – Vicky Kelly

For the TCC, we support healthcare clinics with the connectivity necessary to access essential online medical applications and services. We also enable telemedicine solutions that provide access to healthcare for people that need to stay in their homes, or when the weather makes it impossible to fly out to see a doctor or specialist.

In addition to our contributions to the local healthcare community, we also use our network to provide connectivity to tribal administrative offices and government entities. We provide connectivity to village police departments, fire departments, and emergency medical services. We also enable Radio over IP (RoIP) services for first responders.

Since the start of the pandemic, we’ve also begun to explore providing access to high-bandwidth connectivity for students and homes.

In our next article on the Government Satellite Report, we’ll feature the second part of our two-part conversation with Vickie, when we discuss the challenges that companies face when building, operating, and maintaining a network in these remote parts of Alaska.

The post Shortening the gap between the connectivity “haves” and “have nots” in Alaska appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

But there are multiple other reasons why government and military users, specifically, should be interested in SES-17. The satellite has been called, “built to deliver managed services,” at a time when the U.S. government and military are increasingly interested in moving towards purchasing satellite as a service. The system that controls and managed SES-17 is also the same that SES will leverage to manage its soon-to-be-launched O3b mPOWER MEO satellite service – opening the door for military and government users to access a multi-orbit satellite solution as a service.

To learn more about SES-17 and how it could benefit military and government organizations in need of commercial satellite communication (COMSATCOM) services, we sat down with Amit Katti and Carolyn Cuppernull of SES Space and Defense.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): In late June, SES announced that SES-17 was “fully operational.” What exactly does that mean? What transpires from satellite launch to a satellite being “fully operational?”

Carolyn Cuppernull: Fully operational suggests that the satellite has reached orbit as planned, after months of in-orbit raising and testing. This also means that the Very High Throughput Satellite (VHTS) is ready to offer managed broadband services across the Americas and the Atlantic.

SES-17 is the first satellite with a 100 percent digital payload, which means that it can be managed automatically using the SES Adaptive Resource Controller.” -Amit Katti

We can offer a flexible and cost-effective way to deliver high-quality broadband services. The SES-17 next-generation ground system is optimized for the delivery of high-throughput bandwidth that, when combined with SES-17’s advanced satellite capabilities and our service lifecycle expertise, enables the creation and delivery of tailored services.

GSR: SES-17 is considered a “high-throughput satellite (HTS).” What does that mean? How is an HTS different from a traditional satellite in GEO?

Amit Katti: Fundamentally, a high-throughput satellite (HTS) allows for frequency reuse across several spot beams, considering each of those beams can deliver hundreds of Mbps in throughput. SES-17 is a VHTS, which means that it has potential to deliver hundreds of Mbps across 200+ spot beams in a specific configuration.

In addition, SES-17 is the first satellite with a 100 percent digital payload, which means that it can be managed automatically using the SES Adaptive Resource Controller (ARC). ARC is a component that allows dynamic capacity allocation and resource management on the spacecraft.

The ARC system supports our strategy to provide a multi-orbit service using O3b mPOWER and SES-17, given that both these space assets are “managed” by ARC.

Our service offering consists of an integrated service portfolio that allows the military and government users alike to utilize the full benefits of platforms hosted on SES-17.” -Carolyn Cuppernull

SES-17 offers 200 configurable spot beams connected to 16 gateways that are capable of changing power and frequency based on the mission needs delivering increased throughout, better link optimization, and performance. SES-17 also offers HTS Ka-band GEO spot beams covering the Americas and includes unparalleled scalability, enabling the ability to increase capacity where and when it is needed without additional hardware costs.

Using global terrestrial MPLS network we can provide enterprise grade end-to-end connectivity solutions tailored to unique customer requirements.

GSR: SES-17 has been positioned as an example of two major trends or changes that we’re witnessing in how the government and military utilize commercial satellite – the movement towards shared services, and the integration of COMSATCOM services into the military’s satellite architecture. How does SES-17 align with managed services? What about this satellite makes it ideal for satellite managed services?

Carolyn Cuppernull: SES-17 was launched to primarily provide fully managed services. Our service offering consists of an integrated service portfolio that allows the military and government users alike to utilize the full benefits of platforms hosted on SES-17.

This means that SES Space and Defense will be able to provide fully operational COMSATCOM terminals on pre-defined – yet customizable – service plans that the government can fully utilize on Day 1. This also allows the end-users the flexibility to start the network small, as small as a single terminal, and ramp up the number of terminals added to a network within no time, because we have invested and stood up the hub-side architecture at multiple gateways.

In addition, the system architecture is designed that regardless of which gateway the traffic lands, it is terminated at SES Space and Defense’s Point of Presence (POP) in Ashburn and Los Angeles on the Global Terrestrial Network (GTN). From there, we are able to re-route the services to end-user locations or the internet as needed.

We add inherent security layers on top of the standard data path to make our managed services secure for the military to use.” -Amit Katti

With capacity on SES-17 offered as part of a managed service, U.S. government and military customers can use high-throughput satellite with submeter antennas. Programs like TROJAN – which utilizes small form-factor terminals – could benefit. There are also benefits for military Comms-on-the-Move (COTM) use cases.

GSR: What about the integrated commercial and military satellite and the network architecture? What about SES-17 makes it a satellite that could be easily and seamlessly utilized by the military?

Amit Katti: We add inherent security layers on top of the standard data path to make our managed services secure for the military to use. When the traffic terminates at one of SES Space and Defense’s GTN POPs, the traffic is routed on a secure network designed for the U.S. government community.

We also apply specific policies and controls defined by the U.S. government on the end-to-end network, therefore extending the security layer all the way to the end-user terminal.

Since the satellite can deliver more throughput using smaller terminals, it enables the military to spend less on HUB hardware for its Satellite Communications (SATCOM) solution. That’s critical because it enables more service availability to the warfighter.

GSR: Why does the military want these things? Why would they want to integrate COMSATCOM services into their military networks?

Carolyn Cuppernull: It comes down to efficiency and scalability. Because SES-17 offers fully managed services, the military can deploy a network for a single terminal, a cluster of terminals, or a combination of mobile and fixed terminals. The service offering and ease of deployment – is consistent across any form of deployment. This makes deployment super-fast and extremely scalable.

The COMSATCOM platforms utilized to provide these services offer high throughputs – up to 100s of Mbps per terminal. That makes for a very compelling use-case, especially for using this service for training purposes in the contiguous United States.

Cost is also an important factor. The government is always seeking a less expensive solution which supports their requirements for size, weight, power, and expense. SES-17 delivers that.

GSR: We know that SES is poised to launch the O3b mPOWER satellite service in the very near future. How will O3b mPOWER impact these two trends?

Amit Katti: SES-17 is equipped with ARC, an industry-first software system that dynamically and autonomously optimizes space and ground resources on demand.

ARC will also be integrated into O3b mPOWER, enabling managed connectivity integrated into our multi-orbit GEO-MEO fleet creating an interoperable network.

To learn more about SES-17, click HERE.

The post SES-17 is Fully Operational – What that Means for the Government and Military appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

This week, we conclude our conversation with Jon, as he examines whether or not the military will shift away from the military’s own WGS satellites and commercially-operated GEO satellite services in favor of NGSO solutions, as well as give an update on the highly anticipated, official DoD report on the use of NGSO satellites.

Here is what he had to say:

GSR: Congress appears to be pretty focused on NGSO satellite right now, but do you anticipate the military moving away from WGS and commercial GEO solutions in the immediate future? Is there a need for GEO satellite in a world with LEO and MEO satellites?

Jon Bennett: I think there is a need for GEO, and that goes back to the “Fighting SATCOM” effort. COMSATCOM integration – which is an appropriate mix of military satellite communications and commercial satellite communications capabilities – is something that the U.S. Space Force has talked about and worked hard to implement. Fully recognizing and achieving that goal will take time, but there is hope that the Department will get there eventually. That said, I believe there is still a need for GEO birds and I don’t think we’ll ever get away from WGS.

For example, if a special operations team needs MILSAT to communicate at the tactical edge, they have direct access to WGS capabilities as those operations are heavily prioritized. Whereas with COMSATCOM, you’ll need to have an identified demand signal, a contract vehicle in place, and the ability to onboard that capability with the necessary ground segment and networking infrastructure. Integrating commercial capabilities into the DoD enterprise architecture would give the warfighters the ability to leverage next generation and forward leaning innovative assets across the board.

If you just look at WGS, Father Time is clearly coming into the picture and limiting that constellation’s shelf life. Bottom line, those satellites are getting old. So, ask yourself, “What’s the cost associated with replacing a WGS satellite?” We, the commercial sector, already have assets that are paid for, flying, and delivering to U.S. government agencies right now. The capacity is available. So, if the military constellation of WGS satellites is starting to wane and its shelf life is diminishing, the DoD needs to hop over to commercial. That’s going to be imperative when it pertains to military dollars associated with the government’s demanding requirements.

Congress’ directive is really an assessment of the vulnerabilities and the overall resiliency of space access to national security missions across the board.” -Jon Bennett

Congress cares and wants to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. And it is an extremely smart investment for them to leverage commercial capabilities, especially when you have commercial solutions that are close to providing the level of security features that you see in WGS satellites.

That, to me, is why it would behoove the military to leverage their WGS assets, but also integrate commercial capabilities into their enterprise architecture. The Hill remains well aware of the opportunities presented by integrated SATCOM capabilities at GEO, MEO, and LEO for delivering robust, flexible, and manageable enterprise solutions for the DoD.

GSR: We know that the NDAA instructed the DoD to author a report about its use of NGSO satellite. What is the current status of that? Has it been submitted?

Jon Bennett: Though we haven’t seen the report yet, the DoD has been hard at work on that effort. Congress is continuing to hold the department’s feet to the fire with that NDAA language.

Congress’ directive is really an assessment of the vulnerabilities and the overall resiliency of space access to national security missions across the board. If you look at not just last year’s NDAA, but this year’s also, there are additional requirements being levied by members of the Armed Services Committee.

They are requiring knowing how the acquisition process has been impacted. They also want to know what the contracts with commercial providers look like. And the Hill wants to understand, at the current state of play, if the use of commercial capabilities can accommodate unforeseen demand signals.

For example, if the INDOPACOM were to pop, and there is a conflict between China and Taiwan, does the DoD have enough capability from a MILSATCOM or a COMSATCOM perspective to address that demand signal? To us, the answer is no. We are not seeing the Department scheme for potential surge requirements. So, how do you improve the plan for commercial satellite communications across the military departments? They must plan accordingly, right? The Department needs to address and build out the requirement for NGSO satellite integration. Congress must be willing to support a long-term sustainable budget that enables the Department to leverage the necessary capabilities in defense of our national and economic security interests. The NDAA is getting after this issue but we are not where we need to be, yet.

Modernizing DoD’s decision-making processes for combat operations is paramount, and the Hill understands that leveraging commercial and its next generation end-to-end SATCOM solutions will only enhance ABMS.” -Jon Bennett

The report that was put in the FY22 NDAA is really holding the department accountable on multiple fronts. Congress is hungry to understand how the department is going to leverage COMSATCOM capabilities. This year, next year, and certainly for the long-term future. The Hill is well aware of the increasing importance of delivering resilient global SATCOM for the joint warfighter. Congress wants to see a long-term investment strategy on integrating commercial NGSO satellite capabilities in support of a secure, resilient and disaggregated multi-band/multi-orbit enterprise architecture.

GSR: Based on what you heard at these demonstrations for lawmakers, and what we’re hearing from the military, how far away are we from NGSO satellite seeing wide use across the DoD? What would need to happen for that to become a reality?

Jon Bennett: The reality is that the military has been using non-GEO satellites in their services since 2016. When SES launched their O3b MEO capabilities, LEO players hadn’t even bent metal. And in 2016, the COCOMs saw the benefits of the original NGSO COMSATCOM capability in MEO. O3b offered very high-throughput, low latency capabilities that really enabled the Pentagon decision makers the ability to act on intelligence in real-time. We’ve been doing that since 2016, so it’s been a reality for six years already.

Based on the demonstrations with lawmakers and what we heard from them several weeks back, they are extremely interested in the security features. The threat landscape is evolving for the worse. We’re seeing more and more threats posed to our national security interests, without question. So, understandably, you have Members of Congress and their staff wanting to understand how these SATCOM assets are built to an inherently resilient, robust, and secure capability set that mitigates the threats posed.

We walked them through that and other areas of interest. We talked about the advanced battle management system (ABMS), and how it allows commanders and warfighters to share more and better information faster. Modernizing DoD’s decision-making processes for combat operations is paramount, and the Hill understands that leveraging commercial and its next generation end-to-end SATCOM solutions will only enhance ABMS.

Congress wants to see the Department work towards identifying the necessary tools and acquisition models to integrate COMSATCOM systems more effectively and efficiently into architecture.” -Jon Bennett

So, how is SATCOM an enabler to ABMS? The members of Congress were certainly interested in that question. As we provide Capitol Hill with further information as to the roles and responsibilities that SATCOM providers have on the Department’s Enterprise Network Architecture, Congress is going to fully appreciate that SATCOM is the backbone to any theater operation in support of the warfighters.

GSR: Should funding be made available, and should the DoD decide to invest that funding in commercial NGSO satellite services, what would be needed from a hardware standpoint? How long would it take to get these services rolled out to the warfighter in a meaningful way?

Jon Bennett: On the heels of this NDAA, the Hill continues to be supportive of integrating COMSATCOM capabilities into the national security space communications architecture. Congress wants to see the Department work towards identifying the necessary tools and acquisition models to integrate COMSATCOM systems more effectively and efficiently into architecture.

When it comes to the hardware, one of the things that we were able to demonstrate during our Congressional visit a few weeks back, was showcasing the Army’s bread and butter terminal, the Phoenix E-Model terminal. The Army assessed the potential Phoenix E-Model MEO capability during the Project Convergence 21 network modernization exercise last fall. Since Project Convergence, the Army has been able to “MEO-ize” their Phoenix terminal. We call it MEO-ization. Think about upgrading and modernizing legacy equipment and what that means from a dollar standpoint.

When military services couldn’t leverage their current terminals, they’d have to buy new terminals. And the costs associated with those terminals are astronomical.

We were able to work with the Army and help them convert their terminals so they could talk to our MEO satellites. Think about that. We were able to reconfigure an older and heavily leveraged piece of equipment so that it could now talk to multiple assets in multiple orbits at multiple frequencies. The ability to leverage those capabilities at the tactical edge into the fight is incredible. Think about the dollars saved! That’s awesome.

Commercial strongly encourages the Department to clearly articulate and prioritize these critical commercial satellite communication integration efforts in the next budget request.” -Jon Bennett

When it comes to rolling these services out to the warfighters, there was a concern back in 2016 when CENTCOM didn’t want to pay for the service. But that was okay because the commercial industry can lease these terminals to them. They don’t have to buy them. It just becomes a fully end-to-end managed service, which enables capabilities to be rolled out to the warfighter in a meaningful way. We can do that easily at a high level of efficiency. It’s something that we’ve done before. It’s something that we continue to do.

As we work with the different military services, and their respective hardware requirements, it’s only going to get better, especially when O3b mPOWER comes on board. We are launching later this year and will be operational next year. And the military services fully understand that O3b mPOWER is a game-changing capability. They want to get their hands on it.

I will end with this though…as the Department works to implement a new strategy for comprehensive satellite communications capabilities, to what extent will the Department leverage multi-orbit capabilities and commercial partnerships to achieve cost efficiency and enhance resiliency?

Commercial strongly encourages the Department to clearly articulate and prioritize these critical commercial satellite communication integration efforts in the next budget request. I believe, as does Congress, the Department’s approach to resiliency, flexibility, and security, must include plans to secure multi-orbit and multi-band capabilities. But once again, the support to investment in commercial needs to be there.

To read part one of our conversation with Jon Bennett, click HERE.

The post Will the U.S. military shift away from WGS satellite in favor of NGSO solutions? appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

In an effort to help Congress better understand the different use cases, services, and emerging solutions that NGSO satellites can provide to all military domains, as well as highlight the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) benefits that NGSOs can deliver to the U.S. government, SES Space and Defense recently conducted a series of congressional NGSO demonstrations on Capitol Hill.

To learn more about why now is the time for the U.S. government to take advantage of NGSO capabilities, and to get an update on what NGSO technologies and military use cases the company demonstrated to Congress, the Government Satellite Report was able to catch up with SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Government Affairs, Marketing, Corporate Communications, Jon Bennett.

Here is what he had to say:

Government Satellite Report (GSR): A few weeks ago, SES Space and Defense held demonstrations of its NGSO satellite solutions for lawmakers in Congress. What was the company demonstrating? What capabilities were you looking to show these Congresspeople?

Jon Bennett: Whenever we are in front of Congress, especially when we work with the Armed Services Committee or other Committees of Jurisdiction, we want to highlight the game changing impact satellite solutions have on U.S. national security.

When we held that demonstration, our first and foremost priority was to showcase what we’re doing for each of the combatant commands and their respective areas of responsibility (AOR). For example, what has SES Space and Defense done from a SATCOM perspective to support Navy equities for the Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM)? Well, that’s pretty easy.

We discussed our roll-on/roll-off Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) solution, what we call Navy MEO Wi-Fi. We showcased to our congressional stakeholders on the impacts SATCOM is having on the soldiers, sailors, and marines that have been in port, especially during the pandemic where COVID restrictions really limited our warfighters during port.

We showcased how we have been able to allow those folks – who have not been able to disembark their respective ships – to FaceTime with family, access online banking services, attend online schooling, etc. These are all things that we on the mainland take advantage of. So, we were able to demonstrate those connectivity strides and improved quality of life measures to Congress.

It all boils down to helping Congress understand why they should care about satellite communications, because communications is the critical backbone of any military operation.

GSR: Why was it important for legislators to see these capabilities?

Jon Bennett: Without communication capabilities being delivered warfighters would be going into theatre, blind. Tactical brigades would be severely hampered with operations potentially limited. The bottom line is that satellite communications offer real-time, highly accurate information to those that need to consume information and deliver actionable intelligence. We can’t deploy Stryker brigades without having the communication network, because those teams won’t be tethered to the decision makers, which leaves the warfighters uninformed. That can be disastrous, especially in the heat of battle.

If the U.S. doesn’t leverage SATCOM, we are certainly putting ourselves at an extreme disadvantage to our adversaries.” -Jon Bennett

We simply needed to express to our Hill stakeholders the need to provide resilient and diverse satellite communications is critical to meeting Department of Defense SATCOM requirements. At the end of the day, our demonstrations were dedicated to emphasizing how comms is the backbone to military operations. That’s what we wanted Congress to walk away with when we were finished.

GSR: Congress recently included some language about NGSO satellite in this year’s NDAA. Why is Congress so interested in NGSO satellite right now? Why would lawmakers be interested in the type of satellite solutions that the military is utilizing?

Jon Bennett: We always emphasize how space is an essential variable to the national security equation. I just mentioned how communications is the backbone to military operations, right? If the U.S. doesn’t leverage SATCOM, we are certainly putting ourselves at an extreme disadvantage to our adversaries.

When discussing why Congress is interested in NGSO, it goes back to General Raymond’s Fighting SATCOM initiative, which requires multi-band satellite communications – Ka, Ku, C-band etc. It also requires multi-orbit comms, such as geosynchronous (GEO), medium Earth orbit (MEO), and then low Earth orbit (LEO). What Fighting SATCOM does is that it allows the military to seamlessly transition from one orbital asset – the LEO, MEO, or GEO satellites – and at different frequencies to another.

That capability effectively complicates the enemy’s targeting calculus. For example, if adversaries like China, Russia, or North Korea degrades one of our assets from a MILSAT perspective, the military can then transition seamlessly to commercial capabilities at those various orbits and those various frequencies. That is why Congress cares about NGSO. Because for many, many years, GEO satellites are just sitting there. They’re big, fat, juicy targets, right? So, it is a lot easier to degrade those assets.

Whereas with your MEO assets – like O3b MEO and our soon-to-be-launched O3b mPOWER constellation – those satellites move equatorially. They’re constantly moving, which is a critical attribute to have for resilient SATCOM. Creating a highly secure and resilient asset that belongs in the space SATCOM ecosystem is just one aspect of why Congress has been showing interest in NGSO capabilities.

For us, the medium Earth orbit is our absolute sweet spot, because it’s uncontested and uncongested.” -Jon Bennett

From a security perspective, it allows the ability to mitigate threats through that resiliency, security, and redundancy. It all ties back to Fighting SATCOM and the ability to protect space assets, improve space situational awareness, and create missile warning and tracking capabilities, to name a few. If you have satellites in all three orbits able to track them in a scenario where an inbound missile is coming at high velocity and speed, we absolutely need that low latency at all layers to be able to track said missile threat. Congress is keenly interested in that, especially in the early rapid advancements you’re seeing with our adversarial nations. This is another reason lawmakers are interested in deploying the appropriate mix of military and commercial satellite solutions within the DoD Enterprise Architecture.

GSR: From a mission assurance and security standpoint, how does the military benefit from leveraging commercial NGSO satellite services?

Jon Bennett: First, let me explain what NGSO means. NGSO or Non-geostationary satellites occupy a range of orbital positions (LEO satellites are located between 700km-1,500km from the Earth, MEO satellites are located at 10,000km from the Earth), and do not maintain a stationary position, but instead move in relation to the Earth’s surface. For us, the medium Earth orbit is our absolute sweet spot, because it’s uncontested and uncongested. There isn’t any other commercial entity out there that has MEO assets, like we have in O3b and the soon-to-be O3b mPOWER. We have been operating and servicing the U.S. government in MEO since 2016.

The ability to operate in MEO is a lot cleaner, whereas with LEO there is a concern that it is going to be extremely congested. There are thousands of satellites moving at rapid speeds. And in order to get into space, you have to go into and through LEO, which raises a great amount of concern. I’m not saying there aren’t benefits from LEO, the Fighting SATCOM vision calls for assets in all three orbits. But there is a slight concern when it comes to space debris and having to go through LEO to get into MEO and GEO.

Another benefit of leveraging commercial, especially with NGSO, is the security, resiliency, and redundancy it provides. When you’re able to complicate an enemy’s targeting calculus, that ensures that the built-in security features of your assets can mitigate threats at the highest level.

To us, the greatest capability that we offer to the warfighter in all domains, whether it be in air, land, sea, or cyber, is what we call fiber-like latency.” -Jon Bennett

So how did we do that? When Boeing was designing and building our O3b mPOWER MEO capabilities, we leveraged reports, at the classified level, to help us understand and hone in on the security vulnerabilities that our satellites and space assets are currently facing. When we were building our next-gen capability in O3b mPOWER, we developed features that were built into the design phase, thus making O3b mPOWER inherently resilient and secure.

GSR: What new services, tools, and capabilities could these satellite solutions enable for the warfighter across the different warfighting domains?

Jon Bennett: Inherent security and flexibility are going to be key aspects. Those aspects are the heart of the new service tools and capabilities that O3b mPOWER is going to bring to the fight.

Simply put, O3b mPOWER has inherent security and flexibility through NSA CNSSP-12, and allows for command uplink decryption and telemetry downlink encryption while designed to meet ODNI stringent cybersecurity requirements

To us, the greatest capability that we offer to the warfighter in all domains, whether it be in air, land, sea, or cyber, is what we call fiber-like latency. We enable less than 150 millisecond round trip latency. It’s essentially fiber in the sky, and that’s what our MEO satellites offer.

There is a need for GEO, MEO, and LEO, because you need to have all three orbits to truly complicate an enemy’s attack and targeting calculus.” -Jon Bennett

Another emerging capability that we are offering is secure beam steering. We have 5,000 steerable beams at our disposal on these assets. That aspect is a definite gamechanger. Having thousands of customer beams per satellite has been previously unheard of. And if the DoD were to need it, we can also lump the beams together to get more throughput for the military.

GSR: When we say NGSO we’re effectively talking about LEO and MEO. Are there any particular advantages to these different orbits for the military? Why would the military want to choose services in one orbit over the other?

Jon Bennett: It all goes back to Fighting SATCOM. There is a need for GEO, MEO, and LEO, because you need to have all three orbits to truly complicate an enemy’s attack and targeting calculus.

Where you don’t have to rely on MILSAT at WGS, you can rely on COMSAT and seamlessly transition from one orbit to the another. And the standout advantages are the high throughput and low latency it provides. The closer you are to the to the Earth’s surface, the lower the latency will be. But the issue there is the lack of security on LEO assets. Look at what happened to the assets that were leveraged in Ukraine and how quickly Russia was able to degrade them.

With our MEO capabilities, the level of ability for the enemy to degrade is certainly not going to be the same. And there isn’t going to be a whole lot of packet loss. What that does is enable the U.S. government and its military to knowingly leverage a secure asset that has virtually the same level of latency as LEO. That to us is extremely important.

The ability for a Pentagon decision maker to act on intelligence in near real time from a tactical brigade unit, in theater and in the fight via ISR efforts is very impactful. For example, during the early days of Afghanistan, if you came across a treasure trove hardware with critical information on them, you used to have to rip out the hard drives, fly them back via a CH-47 Chinook, attempt to exfiltrate the information, and then days later you’ll be able to have some actionable intelligence.

We’re providing the ability to act on intelligence in near real time based on the fact that we offer low latency and high-throughput within those two orbital slots. That is why the military views LEO and MEO as particular advantages over GEO.

To learn more about NGSO and what to look for when selecting a satellite solution, click HERE.

The post SES Space and Defense demonstrates emerging NGSO satellite solutions to Congress appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Software and applications that used to be purchased on physical media and installed on government and military hardware is now hosted in the cloud and accessed online as “Software as a Service.” The physical network hardware and servers that used to comprise government and military networks have been replaced by cloud services and solutions that are referred to as “Infrastructure as a Service.” And the application and development platforms that used to be purchased for use by software development and operations teams is now available through cloud providers and other development platform providers as “Platform as a Service” solutions.

These are just three examples of a trend that some in the technology industry have coined “Everything as a Service” because of how pervasive service offerings have become. But there are very good reasons why the industry has moved in this direction. There are clear benefits to paying for services instead of buying physical assets.

Services can be acquired without a large up-front, capital expenditure. Instead, they’re available as a lower, recurring operating expense. Since many of these service offerings are online and connected, the government’s chosen vendor or partner can push improvements, patches, and new features to users quickly, easily, and – often – at no additional expense to the user. Also, since there is no need to purchase, take delivery of, and install a physical asset, scaling up to meet increased requirements is also easier, faster, and more seamless.

“Satellite as a Service is a better way for the government and military to meet their satellite communications requirements that ensures what is needed for the mission is always readily available.”

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, since the government is paying for access to a service, and not for a physical asset, they don’t have to worry about the technology they own becoming antiquated, outdated, obsolete, and incapable of meeting modern mission requirements.

Considering the pace of innovation that we’ve witnessed over the past decade, this may be the single most valuable benefit that service offerings can deliver to government and military users. And this is also a large driving factor in why the “as a service” trend is poised to transform the way the government does business with the commercial satellite industry.

Always on the cutting edge
There has been a massive wave of innovation in the commercial space industry, as a whole, over the past decade. Private industry has revolutionized space flight, satellite imagery, and even satellite communications in just the span of a few years – cementing private industry as the de facto leader in innovation in space.

In the satellite communications sector, there have been significant advancements in the quality and quantity of the satellite capabilities that are available to government and military users. Satellite operators launched high-throughput satellites (HTS) into geosynchronous orbit (GEO) that are capable of delivering incredible bandwidth and capacity to users.

But they didn’t stop there.

Today’s satellite operators are launching HTS constellations into orbits closer to Earth. These new HTS satellite constellations in MEO and LEO are delivering that immense bandwidth and capacity to users, but doing so with a fraction of the latency, making it possible for the government and military to send massive amounts of data – from voice, to large files, to HD video – to practically anywhere on the planet in real-time.

Traditionally, the government would lease space or capacity from these satellite operators on the spot market, and then purchase the hardware necessary to access it. If their mission required low latency, high-throughput satellite communications, but they didn’t have the proper hardware to access it, or the correct contracts in place to lease the bandwidth, they had to go without.

Satellite as a Service is a better way for the government and military to meet their satellite communications requirements that ensures what is needed for the mission is always readily available. In this acquisition model, the military effectively leases the most current, up-to-date, and cutting-edge ground systems and hardware needed to access satellite communications. The chosen satellite operator can then provide them with the bandwidth and capacity that’s optimal for their mission requirements.

“…since the government is paying for access to a service, and not for a physical asset, they don’t have to worry about the technology they own becoming antiquated, outdated, obsolete, and incapable of meeting modern mission requirements.”

As Carolyn Cuppernull of SES Space and Defense explained in a recent interview, “In this [Satellite as a Service] model, everything that is necessary for an end-to-end satellite network is delivered as a service. The satellite capacity, the ground hardware – including terminals and antennas – are all included in the service.”

With commercial satellite service providers operating satellite constellations in multiple orbits, purchasing Satellite as a Service effectively means that the government and military will always have access to the communications solutions best suited to their mission requirements.

Should they need to blanket a large area in connectivity and coverage, their Satellite as a Service provider gives them access to wideband satellite connectivity from GEO. Should they need to send HD video from ISR missions back in real-time to be analyzed, their Satellite as a Service provider gives them access to low latency, high-throughput capacity from MEO or LEO.

Regardless of the mission requirement, the government or military user will always have access to the satellite service that is optimized to the mission, and the hardware necessary to access that capacity. This is the value that Satellite as a Service delivers.

The importance of having access to satellite services from multiple orbits was highlighted by Rashid Neighbors of SES Space and Defense, who said:

“The government and military rarely operate in static conditions. The environment changes, the mission shifts and evolves. Having a satellite managed service that gives them access to the latest and greatest technologies, as well as a multi-orbit satellite constellation ensures that they’ll always have the communications and connectivity they need to accomplish their mission – even if mission parameters or requirements change.”

But is the government and military on-board with such a large, fundamental change in how they acquire satellite capacity?

RFIs show the time for Satellite as a Service is now
When it comes to embracing new things in the government and military, the challenge rarely lies in the technology or budgets, and often in the culture of the organizations involved. The government has a long track record of trying to operate in a consistent manner because, “that’s how it’s always been done.” So, it may come as a surprise that there have been strong demand signals for Satellite as a Service from the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).

According to an article by C4ISRNet’s Mark Pomerleau late last year, the U.S. Army is, “…trying to figure out what the best use and business cases are for owning or renting communications under a managed service model that could possibly replace the design of its logistics network called the sustainment tactical network.”

“Regardless of the mission requirement, the government or military user will always have access to the satellite service that is optimized to the mission, and the hardware necessary to access that capacity. This is the value that Satellite as a Service delivers.”

Part of this effort involved the release of an RFI asking commercial satellite operators to explain how they would deliver satellite capacity as a managed service. The RFI sought to understand how satellite terminal and hardware acquisitions would be conducted, how pricing would be structured, and how military communications could be assured and secured.

According to the article, the Army received approximately 20 responses to that RFI, all with differing approaches to a Satellite as a Service model. But, regardless of the responses and what they contained, the RFI, itself, is a positive sign that Satellite as a Service is the future for the DoD.

Space has been a hotbed of innovation and advancement over the past decade. If the government and military is going to take advantage of the advancements from the satellite industry, they need to rethink how they acquire satellite. Satellite as a Service is the key to ensuring that the government and military always has access to the latest, most cutting-edge technologies in space. And the RFIs and pilot programs being launched by the DoD are evidence that they’re moving in that direction.

The post Why Satellite as a Service is the Future of Government SATCOM appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Last December, President Biden signed the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22), but unlike previous years, FY22’s NDAA included some rather unique and noteworthy amendments and requests. For the first time in years, Congress has interestingly added a call in FY22’s NDAA which requires the DoD to report on its utilization of COMSATCOM services from non-geostationary orbits (NGSO) for delivering connectivity to the warfighter.

You may be asking, why are NGSO COMSATCOM initiatives all of a sudden such an important topic for Congress? Why does Congress care about the SATCOM connectivity for warfighters? And what COMSATCOM services does the military currently use, and what capabilities do they enable for the warfighter?

To answer these questions – and much, much more – the Government Satellite Report Podcast hosted SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Government Affairs, Marketing and Corporate Communications – Jon Bennett.

During the discussion, Government Satellite Report Executive Editor, Ryan Schradin, asked Jon about the current state of military connectivity, what connectivity data Congress is looking to gather, as well as what would the process would look like for Congress to provide the necessary funds to embrace NGSO COMSATCOM.

To listen to the podcast, click the PLAY button below:

The post GSR Podcast: Why is NGSO COMSATCOM in This Year’s NDAA? appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

On Wednesday, September 8, SATELLITE held the “Satellite Cybersecurity” session, where SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Corporate Development, Todd Gossett, moderated a panel discussion that included:

• Rebecca Cowen-Hirsch, Senior Vice President, Government Strategy & Policy U.S. Government Business Unit, Inmarsat, Inc.
• Dianne Poster, Senior Advisor, National Institute of Standards and Technology
• Jared Reece, Program Analyst, COMSATCOM Solutions Branch, U.S. Space Force

Today’s warfighters rely on space like they’ve never had before. Through advancements in satellite technology, the infrastructure of the U.S. military is now provided with critical warfighting capabilities that were not available in the past. But with each new advancement over the past few decades, these capabilities are now integrated so deeply into critical warfighting functions, it’s incumbent upon satellite providers, and the agencies that procure them, to ensure that those capabilities are available, when and where those warfighters need them.

One of the greatest and ever-growing threats to providing these capabilities to the military is today’s cyber threat landscape. As the attacks from nation-state hackers and other malicious actors become increasingly sophisticated, the potential for mission-critical IT capabilities or applications to be comprised or denied has risen. When capabilities and functions provided by satellites are interrupted, warfighters can lose communication and situational awareness, military operations can fail, and in worst case scenarios, American lives could be lost.

According to Gossett, “Both industry and government have taken a hard look at this over the past several years. And we are taking actions collectively to address this landscape that we’re now deployed in.”

Reece pointed out that, “With the transition away from strictly MILSATCOM to bringing in more commercial SATCOM, this is becoming a more impactful topic to the warfighter.” Though the innovation from industry is imperative for the success of today’s military, commercial systems and equipment must go through thorough evaluations and inspection to ensure that they have best-of-breed cybersecurity posture.

To combat these risks and threats, federal government agencies, the military, and industry are coming together to ensure that space systems, and the satellites they run on, have gone through rigorous cybersecurity evaluation and testing in order to prevent cybersecurity attacks.

Within the last few years, the White House, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the U.S. Space Force, and other federal agencies, have released directives and guidance specifically focusing on bolstering the cybersecurity posture requirements of current space systems and satellites, while simultaneously doing the same for new systems that are being brought into the market.

As space systems innovate and evolve in the future, cybersecurity threats will undoubtedly keep pace in their sophistication and boldness. It is imperative that new systems brought in from the commercial market have the highest level of cybersecurity possible. When these criteria are met, the federal government and military can rest assured knowing they are deploying space systems and satellites that were designed with the utmost innovation and security in mind.

One of these cybersecurity directives is the Space Policy Directive – 5 (SPD-5), which was released by the White House last year. SPD-5 serves as the nation’s first comprehensive cybersecurity policy for space systems. SPD-5 establishes key cybersecurity principles to guide and serve as the foundation for America’s approach to the cyber protection of space systems.

According to the directive, “It is essential to protect space systems from cyber incidents in order to prevent disruptions to their ability to provide reliable and efficient contributions to the operations of the nation’s critical infrastructure.”

Reece praised the directive by saying, “I was actually really excited to see this come out, because one of the things that our office has been doing for years is that integration that SPD-5 is asking for.”

Cowen-Hirsch echoed Reece’s sentiment by adding, “I think what SPD-5 has done is really elevate the focus of space as well.” She acknowledged that there have been many directives about systems cybersecurity, but she explained, “These have been largely focused on information systems, but not necessarily space. So that intersection between space and cyberspace and the threat vectors that we’re seeing, and the reality that the satellite is yet another node on those networks, is very significant.”

On the NIST side of the conversation, Poster explained, “At NIST, we do take SPD-5 as sort of a fundamental core basis of policy development for where we’re focusing cybersecurity efforts for not only satellites, but space systems.”

Not only does SPD-5 lay the groundwork for satellite cybersecurity policy, but it also underscores the importance of fostering “practices within U.S. government and commercial space operations that protect space assets and their supporting infrastructure from cyber threats.”

Luckily, many COMSATCOM providers are already meeting – or exceeding – the cybersecurity guidance in SPD-5. For example, SES is already ahead of the curve when it comes to implementing the recommendations in SPD-5. Gossett highlighted the fact that SES’s highly anticipated medium Earth orbit (MEO) satellite constellation, O3b mPOWER, is fully compliant with SPD-5. Gossett said, “We’ve spent significant time and effort trying to build in cybersecurity from a lifecycle approach into our latest satellite system, mPOWER…This is something that we bake in.”

The introduction of SPD-5 could ultimately provide two positives for the U.S. government and military. The creation of the guidance has established a baseline of security for commercial satellite services and solutions that can assuage any existing governmental concerns or fears about the security of satellite solutions. Seeing that a satellite service or solution meets the recommendations in the guidance ensures that the vendor puts a high priority on security and mission assurance.

This peace of mind is what will drive the second benefit – opening the door for government and military organizations to benefit from the innovation and cost-savings that comes from utilizing commercial satellite services. It’s widely acknowledged across the government that commercial industry is now the leader in space innovation. By eliminating a barrier that may have kept some government and military organizations from eschewing COMSATCOM services for purpose-built satellites, SPD-5 is making that innovation available for these organizations at a fraction of the capital expense.

The post How SPD-5 is paving the way for satellite and space systems cybersecurity appeared first on SES Space and Defense.