The ABMS program is revolutionary and has the potential to deliver new command, control, situational awareness, and intelligence capabilities to the battlefield. And the incredible bandwidth requirements of connecting the immense ecosystem of sensors and devices on the battlefield makes a multi-orbit satellite service – like the one operated by SES – essential for the system.

So the selection of SES Space and Defense satellite services to power the ABMS really isn’t that surprising.

What is surprising? The contract that was signed between SES Space and Defense and the Air Force – an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract that allows SES Space and Defense to compete for individual task orders that together have a ceiling value of $950 million.

According to Jon Bennett, the VP of Government Affairs, Marketing and Corporate Communications at SES Space and Defense, the IDIQ contract that was awarded to SES Space and Defense for the acquisition of MEO and GEO satellite services is not only something completely new in the world of military satellite acquisition, it could also indicate an ongoing and radical shift in the military’s relationship with satellite providers.

We recently caught up with Jon to record a new episode of the Government Satellite Report Podcast. During our discussion, we asked about why this IDIQ contract is so special, what it means for the future of satellite acquisition in the military and why it’s an encouraging sign for satellite providers.

Click the PLAY button below to listen to the podcast:

For additional information on SES’s work toward supporting ABMS CLICK HERE!

The post PODCAST: The revolutionary ABMS IDIQ and what it means for military satellite acquisition appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

As the military increasingly relies on data and network-enabled platforms and systems for deployed warfighters, having communication systems that are flexible and assured is essential. And, as the number and quality of sensors increases in the field, greater bandwidth becomes incredibly important.

To learn more about how a new generation of high-throughput satellite can help to meet the bandwidth and connectivity requirements of the military – and the ABMS program – we sat down with Jim Hooper, SES Space and Defense’ Chief Commercial Officer and a Corporate Vice President. During our conversation, we asked Jim why ABMS is so critical to our future forces, why low-latency, high-throughput connectivity from satellites in MEO orbit are an important part of meeting military connectivity requirements, and the innovation that this new relationship between the Air Force and SES will bring to bear for the warfighter.

Here is what he had to say:

Government Satellite Report (GSR):  What is the ABMS? Is this something completely new, or is it replacing an existing system or systems within the Air Force and DoD?

Jim Hooper:  ABMS is a new program, but it is designed to address a long-standing and enduring requirement – delivering advanced and interoperable battle management and C2 capabilities to the U.S. military.

One of the things that is exciting about ABMS is that it reflects a mindset of accelerating the adoption of new technologies and capabilities into the Air Force, which includes exploiting advanced commercial systems and technologies, and extend that across the Department of Defense (DoD) at large.

Oftentimes, DoD procurements take many years. ABMS is all about collapsing acquisition timelines with rapid testing of technologies for rapid adoption and fielding. This is particularly important given that commercial technologies are evolving very quickly in areas like satellite communications and cloud capabilities.

GSR:  Why is the ABMS important today? What has changed in how we conduct operations and fight battles that makes this necessary?

Jim Hooper:  The concept of rapid testing and fielding of new capabilities has always existed within DoD. But for the past two decades, there has been a focus on counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, and stability operations missions.

As the U.S. defense strategy has evolved to address the challenge of near-peer threats, programs like ABMS are helping posture the U.S. military and our allies for the demands of the future.

ABMS is enabled by the US Space Force’s Fighting SATCOM Concept and Enterprise SATCOM Architecture.  In turn, ABMS enable the Joint Warfighting Concept (JWC) for all-domain operations, improving interoperability and enabling capabilities from all the services to operate simultaneously, effectively, and with the unity of effort in air, land, sea, space, cyber, and the electromagnetic spectrum.

GSR:  Why is satellite an essential part of the ABMS? What role will satellite play in making this system function and operate optimally?

Jim Hooper:  A core tenant of ABMS is that every platform is potentially a sensor and can be tied to each other to help provide a greater picture of the battlespace. Drawn to its logical conclusion, that extends to every aircraft, every ship, ground vehicles, dismounted soldiers, unattended sites, etc.  There are several short-range communications links that will help tie all these platforms together, but in aggregate they will be deployed over such large distances where satellite communications (SATCOM) are necessary.

SATCOM solutions will connect the remote platforms to provide critical data to centralized processing and cloud processing centers, as well as back out to field headquarters and areas of engagement to act on that information. SATCOM will distribute vital C2 and targeting information to remote sites, at the same time as headquarters sites, allowing parallel and simultaneous process.

GSR:  As part of the recent announcement that SES has been chosen to provide satellite services for the ABMS, the company’s multidomain satellite constellations were touted. Why is having satellites in multiple domains important for this system? What resiliency and mission assurance benefits does this deliver?

Jim Hooper:  For military requirements, a multi-domain solution is always preferred over a single solution, particularly given that a military network is only as strong as its weakest link. Of course, potential adversaries continue to adapt and field their own new capabilities, so the situation also changes over time. If all the communications links are reliant on one satellite – or one satellite network – that may suffice for a large part of the time. But if that link or that constellation becomes unavailable or overloaded for whatever reason, backups or alternates are immediately required.

Most communications links already have built-in backup and redundancy links so this is nothing new. What is unique about the SES’ capabilities is that we have global SATCOM solutions in multiple frequency bands (Ku-, Ka-, C, and X-band) and multiple orbits with our geostationary (GEO) and medium earth orbit (MEO) constellations.

Our networks are open architecture and multi-domain by design. This provides resiliency and redundancy for vital communications links. It also provides much higher data rate surge and expanded geographic coverage capabilities that might not exist with other systems.

Also of critical importance, SES is at the forefront of deploying new satellite technologies and systems. Building upon the existing GEO and MEO capabilities currently supporting DoD missions today, SES will next launch an advanced MEO constellation in 2021 called O3b mPOWER with advanced capabilities that are directly relevant to U.S. Air Force, DoD, and coalition/allied requirements.

The ABMS program provides a tailor-made mechanism to experiment with both current and future SATCOM capabilities and identifying the most promising capabilities for rapid integration into the DoD.

GSR:  What about the ability to utilize MEO satellite services? Is low-latency, high-bandwidth connectivity necessary for this system? Why or why not?

Jim Hooper:  MEO (Medium Earth Orbit) satellites are very unique and SES operates the world’s only broadband MEO satellite constellation. MEO essentially has the best of both worlds when talking about LEO (Low Earth Orbit) and traditional GEO satellite networks. MEO satellites have much less latency than GEO satellites, which is critical to real-time cloud computing, Artificial Intelligence (AI) analyses, and targeting information.

“One of the things that is exciting about ABMS is that it reflects a mindset of accelerating the adoption of new technologies and capabilities into the Air Force, which includes exploiting advanced commercial systems and technologies…” – Jim Hooper

The use of many steerable spot beams on the MEO satellites also provides very focused coverage areas for increased anti-jam resiliency, and the MEO satellites are moving which also increases the jamming sophistication needed vs. GEO. MEO beams also typically have much higher performance.

MEO performance allows much higher data rates for rapidly evolving modern ISR sensors and platforms with multiple sensors. It also enables more users in a beam area, or higher capacity-density, than would be typically available on a GEO satellite. This capacity density is critical to warfighters and their C2.

GSR:  Once the ABMS is launched, what will the battlefield of the future look like? How will sensors, warfighters, and satellites converge to make our soldiers more effective?

Jim Hooper:  Satellite communications are evolving rapidly and the capabilities for the end-user are evolving just as rapidly. A good analogy is provided by cellular phones, and how that technology has evolved over the last 10-20 years.

Cellular started where we all just made a telephone call. Then capabilities improved a little bit to add texting, which was widely adopted by users. Then we could use our cell phones to send emails and attachments and people changed their behavior to depend on cell systems for work and personal information sharing. Then technology jumped to passing video over cellular devices and now it’s all about apps. There are more people using apps on phones than talking on phones, which is where it all started.

In a similar manner, the satellite industry is rapidly creating technologies that will deliver “apps” in much the same ways. It’s not just about broadcast or point-to-point connectivity in remote areas. It’s about ubiquitous coverage and “apps” capabilities to millions of users. The convergence of these technologies will enable new military CONOPS, tactics, techniques, and procedures in the future, many of which can’t be fully envisioned today.

SES Space and Defense is a leader in delivering advanced C2 capabilities to the U.S. military today, and with programs like ABMS, we can continue bringing the latest technologies and systems to U.S. military end-users.

For additional information on how SES is supporting the Air Force ABMS program CLICK HERE.

Featured image courtesy of U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Daniel Garcia.

The post The role of next-gen satellite in powering the Air Force’s ABMS Program appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The answer may not be as cut and dry as some would think. Military decision makers are increasingly relying on data-centric operations and capabilities that require high bandwidth connections in theater. They’re demanding ISR comprised of high definition, real time video instead of static, low quality images. They want geospatial intelligence available to soldiers to ensure that have knowledge of the terrain around them and the movements of alliance forces.

Satellite connectivity is necessary for filling these connectivity and bandwidth requirements abroad. In places where terrestrial networks have never been built, or can’t be trusted, satellite can deliver bandwidth for mission-critical capabilities. This is especially the case in places like the AFRICOM Area of Responsibility (AOR), where, as Brigadier General Christopher Eubank, the Commandant of the U.S. Army Signal School claimed, “We relied heavily on SATCOM in the AFRICOM AOR. That is a place in the world where they skipped generations of IT. They went from copper to 4G LTE. There is not a lot of CAT5 and CAT6 cable in that country.”

The Army remains one of the largest consumers of satellite services for a very good reason – they’re extremely large and really spread out geographically. To get IT capabilities to the warfighter at the tip of the spear – sometimes in the world’s most isolated and remote locations – satellite is essential. So, with satellite playing such a vital role in a modern military, why is it so hard for the Army to get the bandwidth they need at a faster rate?

What are the warfighters concerns?
If something was essential for your survival and wellbeing, you’d want it close by or relatively easy to find. People that need to take medicine to survive don’t usually let their prescriptions run out. So, why is satellite connectivity so difficult for the Army to access? Especially with the military owning and operating their own satellite constellation – the Wideband Global Satellite (WGS) system?

Part of the challenge lies with WGS, itself. There are simply too many stakeholders and internal customers within the military for the bandwidth that’s available via WGS.

If military satellite communications (MILSATCOM) isn’t going to be available to Army users, then commercial satellite communications (COMSATCOM) needs to be there to fill those holes. Unfortunately, getting COMSATCOM services has never been fast or easy for the branches of the military.

According to Mike Nichols, the Chief of the Commercial SATCOM Technical Support Branch at the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), “This is a very transactional business…each requirement that comes in is an individual acquisition. Generally, we have plus or minus 100 contracts…for SATCOM services. Each one of these is an individual acquisition, and acquisitions can take some time…If I hear one thing from my customer it’s that the acquisition takes too long.”

The reason for the delay comes down to how satellite service procurement is conducted, and they’re often conducted just like acquisitions for everything else – from rations to tanks.

As Mr. Nichols explained, historically, COMSATCOM services have been acquired in singular transactions to fill individual needs on the spot market. This is effectively the most expensive way to purchase satellite bandwidth. It also puts military users in a situation where they’re purchasing whatever satellite bandwidth is left available, since most of the capacity has already been sold to commercial customers.

As the CEO of SES Space and Defense, Pete Hoene, explained, “Only 10-20 percent of revenue for COMSATCOM owner/operators comes from the U.S. government. The majority is from commercial customers that strike long term contracts and business relationships with owner/operators to ensure they get exactly what they need at an affordable price. This is very different from the U.S. Government buying capacity on the spot market using LPTA contracts that sub optimize on performance, cause a race to the bottom on pricing, and provide little incentive for industry to invest in capabilities the U.S. Government needs.”

However, there has been some positive movement away from purchasing, LPTA (“lowest price, technically acceptable,”) satellite connectivity on the spot market. One of these positive steps was the recent blanket purchase agreement (BPA) that the Department of Defense (DoD) awarded to SES for their O3b MEO satellite services.

This BPA allows military users to purchase SES O3b MEO managed services up to $516.7 million over five-years. By putting the BPA in place, the DoD has been able to drastically cut the amount of time needed to acquire satellite services.

The BPA, and its ability to cut acquisition time, was touted by Mr. Nichols, who said, “We’re initiating a number of Blanket Purchase Agreements. This cuts the acquisition time down to a remarkable level, really, when you think about it…Most BPA task orders can be awarded within 17 business days.”

But that could be 17 days too many when mission-critical satellite solutions are needed. When a problem arises, the Combatant Commands (COCOMS) face massive pressure to have connectivity available immediately, like it would be in a commercial environment.

Brig. Gen. Christopher Eubank did an excellent job of describing this pressure when he said, “As a COCOM J6 with an AOR of 53 countries – massive continent – your boss walks in and says, ‘I have a problem in Country X. I need this. I need it now.’ The last thing he wants to hear is that it takes me 17 days to get that bandwidth. Let me explain what he’s expecting. He’s expecting that [it’s similar to when] he walks into Verizon and buys a phone. It’s provisioned and he walks out with a service.”

So, how can the military create a situation where SATCOM services are always available to the warfighter when and where they’re needed?

Partnering for a SATCOM pool
Although the BPA is a step in the right direction, it still takes time between identifying the need for SATCOM solutions and effectively acquiring them through the BPA. In addition, the bulk of satellite purchases outside of the BPA are still done on the spot market. A system that, according to Mr. Hoene, treats COMSATCOM services as a “commodity” and COMSATCOM providers, “just like any old vendor,” when they should be treated, “like a strategic partner,” and the capacity treated as vital infrastructure (similar to the way the U.S. Government buys fiber).

That’s because, by more closely aligning with the satellite industry, the military could find some reasonable alternatives that will make satellite bandwidth more readily accessible at the speed of war.

One concept floated by the panelists involved the creation of a “bandwidth on demand” pool of satellite resources that could be tapped into by military organizations when and where they needed them.

In this instance, satellite resources would be acquired in advance. With tight, restricted budgets, it was difficult for military organizations to spend dollars on something that they wouldn’t benefit from or use immediately. However, the appetite for that could be changing.

According to Mr. Nichols, “One of the areas that we are exploring is establishing a core network…As customers have a demand for service, we would already have a core network in place in various bands for various services that would essentially lead to a very rapid ability to acquire that bandwidth because that bandwidth would already be in place.”

To help make a system like this possible, industry and the military could work together to shape requirements and identify an acquisition model that would work for both parties. This sentiment was shared by Mr. Hoene when he said, “When we talk about bandwidth on demand, we understand that there’s an affordability aspect. There has to be a creative and innovative way to make this happen from a contracts perspective…“

As the discussions at this year’s AUSA SATCOM panel illustrated, today’s military relies too heavily on IT services and capabilities to not have immediate, on-demand access to the secure satellite communications they need to keep the warfighter connected. COMSATCOM providers can no longer be, “just another old vendor.” They are key strategic partners providing a necessary warfighting tool. By working together, the military and satellite industry can identify innovative acquisition models and methods to ensure that satellite connectivity is always there when it’s needed.

The post Army demands consumer-like access to satellite at AUSA appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

This year’s upcoming AUSA Conference comes at a very interesting time for the service. Last year, the Army made the decision to effectively “pull the plug” on the next iteration of its WIN-T IT infrastructure and network for a myriad of reasons. The Army also announced a new, innovative approach to acquisition, which involved the creation of “Cross Functional Teams.”

Simultaneously, the Army is facing many of the same challenges that we heard discussed by the Air Force at the recent AFA Air, Space and Cyber Conference. The adversaries that the military needs to prepare for today are different than what we were focused on for the previous two decades – with near-peer adversaries once more a concern.

With so much change and so many large problems to tackle, this year’s conference is practically guaranteed to generate some interesting discussion and shed some light on the future direction and strategy of the Army. To get a preview of what could be the main points of discussion when it comes to Army networks and satellite requirements, we sat down with Army veteran, military satellite expert and the current Vice President of Government Programs at SES Government Solution, Bill Reiner.

Here is what Bill had to say:

Government Satellite Report (GSR): The annual AUSA meeting and expo is coming up in early October. What do you expect out of this year’s meeting? What do you think will be some of the most consequential topics and issues discussed?

Bill Reiner: One of the things I’m most anticipating and expecting is a report out from the CFTs (Cross Functional Teams). These CFTs were created in early October – right around AUSA 2017 – of last year, and each team is responsible for something different. There are six total teams, one each for:

• Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF)
• Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV)
• Future Vertical Lift (FVL)
• Network
• Precision Navigation & Timing (PNT)
• Air & Missile Defense (AMD)
• Soldier Lethality (SL)

Each of these CFTs rolls up into Army Futures Command, which is dedicated to helping modernize the Army, and is aimed at helping the Command identify products and solutions more quickly. The end goal is to enable the Army, as a whole, to acquire solutions in response to adversaries and requirements more quickly.

We’ve already heard some reports out of the Soldier Lethality group focused on longer range missiles. However, we haven’t heard much out of the other CFTs. With AUSA being held at around the one-year anniversary of their creation, I’d expect to hear more about the findings from the CFTs, and some feedback regarding their overall results and effectiveness.

GSR: Often when we talk about the military’s use of satellite, we think about the Air Force, since the space domain currently falls into their area of responsibility. How does the Army utilize satellites? What different capabilities and use cases are powered by satellite for the Army?

Bill Reiner: When it comes to the Army’s use of satellites, you really only have to think about their mission and their structure. If you look at the warfighting functions of the Army – every one of them requires communications. Also, the Army’s personnel are extremely distributed and spread out, which means that communications relies on satellite across all warfighting functions.

Satellite is essential for Command and Control (C&C) within the Army. Intelligence data needs to be transmitted and received at the edge. That requires the ability to pass large files to the edge, and that’s best done via satellite. This is essential if Army commanders are going to know what’s happening on the battlefield and reinforce soldierss as needed. This is also essential for the transmission of large GEOINT files, which are necessary for coordinating and planning troop movements.

Then there are other use cases for satellite within the Army that don’t often get mentioned or thought of. Take sustainment as an example – every logistics and maintenance unit needs a satellite system to access maintenance data, order spare parts, research vehicle maintenance issues, report issues to superiors and otherwise stay connected. If a maintenance team needs tires for a truck, or needs to schedule a refueling stop, the order will be placed and stops will be coordinated via satellite.

Satellite is essential for the Army now, and its importance will only increase in time. Future wars will have intense electronic warfare environments. Satellite allows the Army to operate in those environments globally. That’s especially true with the new generations of satellite that are inherently capable of overcoming jamming and are harder to deny or compromise.

GSR: Last year, the Army announced they were scuttling their investment in the beleaguered WIN-T Increment 2 network and evaluating other options. Why was this decision made?

Bill Reiner: The decision [to terminate WIN-T Increment 2] was made because the Army looked at their mission and what was happening in the world. We are now facing a threat from near-peer adversaries again in the form of Russia and China. These powerful adversaries are threatening our national security and building their military capabilities. With this more sophisticated threat, the Army realized that their networks simply couldn’t hold up.

Also – speaking anecdotally – I have seen through my own personal experience, and through the experience of my son in the Army National Guard, that communications via the existing network were hard to do.

The problem has always come down to the fact that it takes too long for the Army to field new solutions. If it takes a decade to pull together networks, the technology is now archaic. They need to more quickly identify the need, identify the solution and get that solution into the field. In the past, it has taken the Army three years to identify a requirement and then an additional seven years to field the solution – and then it’s no longer state of the art.

The CFTs were put in place to help overcome this. They’re designed to accomplish this by bringing together all of the stakeholders and decision makers under one command. This gets everyone responsible for making acquisition decisions in one place and keeps them engaged with the warfighter to develop what they need more quickly.

With the CFTs, the resourcing, costing and acquisition authority is all there in one spot. This concept was implemented with the intention of bringing the acquisition cycle time down. This enables the CFT to more quickly do technical demonstrations and pilot programs, and more rapidly make decisions to move the Army forward.

GSR: What role do you anticipate satellite – particularly commercial satellite – playing in the next generation Army network? What would make commercial satellite an invaluable part of Army networks moving forward?

Bill Reiner: Ultimately, commercial satellites are critical to supporting Army missions because they provide surge capabilities and fill that essential satellite role when military satellite solutions aren’t available or are depleted. But there are other reasons why commercial SATCOM will be in the Army’s future plans.

The commercial SATCOM industry has proven its ability to enable the military to bring new satellite technology to the user much more quickly. Speed of acquisition and deployment has always been an issue for the Army, commercial satcom helps to overcome that.

Commercial SATCOM providers are constantly innovating and integrating new satellite and new terminal technology that’s easier to use, smaller, lighter and offers more capability. By partnering with industry providers for their satcom requirements, the Army effectively reaps the rewards and benefits from this new technology immediately, instead of having to build and launch these new technologies themselves.

Also, with the move towards managed services across the satellite industry, the Army can get access to  this new technology as part of a managed service. In this format, everything necessary to connect disparate parties within the Army is provided – including ground terminals and antennas – as a recurring fee. With satellite managed services, the Army and other military branches could get access to advanced satellite technologies – including new waveforms that are more jam resistant – much more quickly and at lower cost.

Regardless of what the next generation of Army networks look like, commercial satellite providers are the key to unlocking advanced satellite capabilities and technologies, and bringing their benefits to soldiers more quickly and efficiently.

The post Exploring Army SATCOM requirements post WIN-T in advance of AUSA appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The C4ISR Conference brought private industry together with the military decision makers responsible for the DoD’s Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR). It featured a number of panel discussions and keynote speeches that featured a mix of representatives from both the private and public sector, and that focused on the IT, cybersecurity and communications challenges facing today’s military.

Two of the main challenges that attendees heard repeated during the course of the activities were:

• A need for a mobile communications solution that could deliver high throughput connectivity to a location quickly and without military personnel having to plug into existing transoceanic fiber.
• A need to ensure secure communications in theater, at a time when adversaries are actively working to take away one of the U.S. military’s largest advantages – its communications and real time intelligence capabilities.

The first of these needs was expressed by Lieutenant General Alan R. Lynn, the Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and Commander of the Joint Force Headquarters- Department of Defense Information Networks (DODIN) out of Fort Meade, Md. Prior to beginning the Q&A portion of his presentation, the General discussed what the military need from its industry partners.

“We need more throughput. The requirement just keeps growing. Every day we have more throughput requirements,” The General told industry partners in attendance. “But there are not bigger pipes being rolled out. So what’s next? What comes after fiber?”

What comes next could very well be satellites. Long perceived as a slower alternative to terrestrial networks and fiber, satellite communications have come a long way thanks to new satellite technologies and innovative new satellite constellations.

The Solution to More Throughput

Today, Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) and Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite constellations are being launched that drastically reduce latency thanks to their closer proximity to the Earth. These constellations offer fiber-like connectivity and throughputs from space, meaning that they can deliver bandwidth similar to a terrestrial network anywhere within their constellation’s coverage area – and these constellations cover a large portion of the Earth. Furthermore, these satellites can deliver that bandwidth to any location with the requisite satellite terminal and antennas, meaning that a bubble of connectivity can be created, even without connections back to existing fiber networks.

But MEO and LEO constellations aren’t the only solutions that can offer high bandwidth anymore. The next generation of satellites – known in the industry as high throughput satellites (HTS) – is capable of delivering just what its name promises – high bandwidth from geostationary (GEO) orbit. These satellites – which utilize concentrated spot beams to deliver high bandwidth connectivity – are being launched across many satellite providers today, with some already in orbit, and a large number slated to launch in the very near future.

How to Best Operate in a Contested Environment

The second pain point or challenge that we heard mentioned numerous times at the event was the need to ensure communications at the edge, where enemy combatants and adversaries would be looking to deny or degrade them to eliminate our military’s network connectivity and IT capabilities.

There was an overarching sentiment that the military should be prepared to fight in environments where IT solutions and capabilities weren’t available in theater. This was reflected in comments by Rear Adm. Danelle Barrett, Director of the Navy Cyber Security Division in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, during a panel focused on security.

“You’re never going to have an impenetrable network, that is a fool’s errand. You will have the ability to fight through the hurt, and that’s where we focus our effort in the Navy,” Adm. Barrett said. “It’s been clear that we’re not used to operating in a contested environment…so all of our branches are working on this – what does their cyber key terrain look like. Fighting through the hurt, it’s becoming clear that we’re going to have to do that.”

This is another area where satellite could be beneficial. The sheer number of satellites in orbit – between the military’s WGS satellite constellation and commercial communications satellites – delivers the redundancy and resiliency needed to ensure that essential communications aren’t lost in theater. The new generation of high throughput satellites doubles down on the ability to deliver assured communications through the use of harder-to-jam spot beams and other built-in security advancements.

Ultimately, even in a more contested space domain and environment, new technologies could make satellite a more resilient way to deliver fiber-like connectivity to the battlefield. Despite this, satellite seemed like an afterthought for many of the speakers and panelists, many of which were lamenting the same challenges that satellite can help the military overcome.

To understand why the military may be eschewing satellite, we asked Tim Deaver of SES Space and Defense, one of the industry representatives on the conference’s lone satellite-focused panel.

“Satellite has always been essential for the military and an important part of delivering communications to the tip of the spear, but cost and concerns about bandwidth and latency may have some military technology decision makers looking elsewhere,” Deaver explained. “But those concerns really aren’t as viable or relevant today as they have been in the past. High throughput satellites and MEO constellations are offering fiber-like connectivity to practically any location on Earth, and these new technologies are lowering prices and making satellite a much more reasonable, cost-effective solution than ever before.”
Analysis of Alternatives Could Pave the Way Forward

If this past C4ISR Conference was for those in the satellite industry that felt overlooked, there could be some relief on the horizon in the form of the Air Force’s wideband analysis of alternatives – or AoA. As we’ve discussed in the past, the AoA will help the Air Force establish a new path forward for the military when it comes to how it acquires and utilizes satellite services, and the advanced MEO and HTS satellites that are being offered by commercial satellite providers could see their role in military communications increase as a result.

We caught up with Col. George R. Nagy, the Chief of the Space Support to Operations Division within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force for Space, following his participation on the space panel and asked him why he felt these new satellite technologies weren’t being mentioned as solutions for the challenges facing today’s military. According to Col. Nagy:

”Those emerging capabilities are being looked at within the wideband AoA. That was part of that space renaissance that I mentioned (during the panel discussion). Non-GEO systems, something that gets us to a heterogeneous architecture – we have that together today with WGS and commercial transponders – but we have many more options to choose from as a lot of those systems come online. And that’s within the study timeframe of the AoA.”

To learn more about the role that today’s advanced SATCOM solutions and services can play in helping the military overcome its communications challenges, click on the following resources:

• White Paper: Satellite Evolution Sparks a Service Revolution
• High Throughput Satellites for U.S. Government Applications
• White Paper On O3b “Fiber Like” Satellite Communications for U.S. Government Applications

The post Why not satellite? Addressing military C4ISR needs from the sky appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

One of the topics that LTC Babbitt discussed in depth was a shift towards “comms on the move,” and the need to upgrade satellite infrastructure to make this shift possible.

To learn more about “comms on the move,” the disadvantages of older satellite ground systems and the reasons why the military is increasingly turning to COMSATCOM to empower these next generation solutions, we spoke to Tonney Chandler, the program manager for commercial SATCOM at SES Space and Defense. Tonney is well versed in the military’s use of satellite, having previously served as the Chief, Tactical Communications Branch, Architecture, Operations, Networks and Space in the Office of the Chief Information Officer of the Army.

This is what Tonney had to say:

GovSat Report: In a recent Webinar conducted by C4ISR, LTC Joel Babbitt discussed some of the challenges and trends impacting Army satellite decision makers – including a new demand for satellite on the move for delivering advanced capabilities to the edge. What specific use cases is the Army looking to utilize satellite for in theater operations? What capabilities and benefits are they looking to deliver to warfighters over satellite?

Tonney Chandler: First, I can only speak for what we are witnessing on the commercial side as I cannot fully address what LTC Babbitt is witnessing within the Army and Department of Defense. We are still seeing requirements for basic communications. However, that requirement is shifting and evolving from “comms at the halt” to what we refer to as “comms on the move.” This means that they’re looking to be able to utilize communications as they move through the battlefield – much like how you would use your cellphone. This way they would be constantly connected – not losing data and not losing or missing any information.

And, of course, on the battlefield, intelligence is very important. That is still – and will always be – a major requirement for the military. But now the focus is being able to get what you need it, when you need it.

Communications is evolving as well. Across the federal government, we’re seeing that basic communications don’t just include voice anymore. There is an expectation to have access to real time video teleconferencing (VTC) and other communications and messaging functionalities. These are all capabilities that the military could look to embrace in theater, and that requires significant bandwidth. Video continues to grow in importance when it comes to intel. Today, you have eyes in the air thanks to Remote Piloted Aircraft (RPAs) that generate video that has to be transported back to the intelligence analysis personnel that analyze it and determine what needs to be done based on what they’re seeing. Video – especially high quality video – is essential for intelligence today, and it requires a lot of bandwidth. This HD data helps soldiers in many ways, including helping them identify targets with higher accuracy. There is also a large demand for satellite bandwidth for RPA training in CONUS.

GovSat Report: LTC Babbitt discussed challenges the Army is facing with archaic and antiquated terminals and satellite infrastructure. What specific problems does this antiquated infrastructure pose to the Army? What new technologies and capabilities are they unable to utilize as a result of this aging satellite infrastructure?

Tonney Chandler: The older technology tends to be less efficient with bandwidth usage. With the newer technology, you can get higher throughput with less power. The older antennas have less gain and require more power, so you’re essentially trading power for gain of information. You can only go so high with power, and that limits your ability to pass high amounts of information. With newer, more efficient antennas and receivers, you can get better throughput. This makes the connection faster and more powerful without expending more power.

Then there’s the issue of size and weight. As the military is looking to move towards “comms on the move,” which means these systems need to be more transportable. One of the barriers to “comms on the move” has historically been the size of the satellite equipment and terminals. They wouldn’t fit into Humvees, and they certainly wouldn’t fit onto RPAs – they were too big and heavy.

They’ve made significant advancements in this area. These newer technologies don’t require as much of a trade-off between size and power. They deliver throughputs on par with older systems, but are much smaller, lighter, and more flexible.

GovSat Report: LTC Babbitt mentioned cost savings as a reason for using WGS satellites for military communications instead of COMSATCOM. If it’s less expensive, for what reasons would the Army want to utilize COMSATCOM?

Tonney Chandler: There are only so many WGS satellites. There are eight launched right now, and I believe ten to twelve planned in total. There are limits to the amount of bandwidth that is available aboard those satellites. This means that operations in areas with over-taxed and over-utilized WGS satellites could also create a need for COMSATCOM bandwidth.

The satellite industry produces satellites faster than the government. They have faster refresh cycles and constantly launch new satellites into orbit that take advantage of the latest technologies. Aside from providing bandwidth where WGS may be unable to provide it, using COMSATCOM services gives the military access to advanced satellite technologies that could take them years to fund, develop and launch.

There are also multiple vendors with a wide portfolio of satellites. All told, there are numerous COMSATCOM satellites in orbit that are capable of providing bandwidth to the military. If one vendor’s satellite does not have the bandwidth, or doesn’t have coverage where necessary, another vendor will. By working out relationships with the satellite industry, the military will always have satellite bandwidth and capacity when and where it needs it.

GovSat Report: Are there less costly options (inclined satellites, hosted payloads) that could make COMSATCOM services available at lower costs to the Army? How could these options be utilized by the Army? Why aren’t they being utilized more now?

Tonney Chandler: Inclined satellites are certainly something that the Army can utilize to save money, since those satellites are older, in lower demand and – as a result – are less expensive. The reason these satellites are often considered less desirable is due to the fact that they move, and need to be followed with tracking antennas. But that’s fine for today’s “comms on the move” users, because their antennas are tracking antennas capable of tracking the satellite.

Why aren’t inclined satellites being used more? I’d say that there is a perception issue. There is a stigma and some perceived risks regarding the viability and length of life of the satellite. The military may feel that the health and welfare of the satellite may not be conducive to the length of operations for the mission.

Another reason why inclined satellites may not be used more frequently is availability. Because it is the business model of Commercial satellite providers to operate satellites that are station-kept (little to no movement for stationary users), they tend not to keep inclined satellites in the inventory. As a result, there are only so many inclined satellites in orbit and they may not be where capacity is needed.

Hosted payloads are also an option for the military if they’re looking to save money. Hosted payloads would be an alternative to launching a purpose-built satellite for an application. Instead, that payload could be launched on an industry partner’s satellite for a fraction of the cost.

However, regarding hosted payloads, there is understandable apprehension because the government would be putting its requirements on a commercial vendor’s satellite with limited control on the overall operation of that satellite. The advantage is that the requirements and capabilities are integrated by the vendor on an already existing platform specially tailored at a lower price. The trade-off is less control of the commercial asset.

To learn more about cost-saving inclined satellites, download the whitepaper, “How Inclined Capacity Reduces Costs For The U.S. Government,” by clicking HERE. To learn more about hosted payloads and how they can help the government hitch a ride to space, download the whitepaper, “What is a Hosted Payload?” by clicking HERE.

The post Army looks to modernize satellite infrastructure for comms on the move appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The new TPS – or Tactical Persistent Surveillance – solution takes an inflatable aerostat platform, many of which are in use across the globe for reconnaissance, and adds connectivity via the SES satellite constellation. This connectivity, by way of one of the world’s largest constellations of MEO and GEO satellites, adds significant capability to the aerostat and opens up new range of possibilities in the field.

VIDEO: SES Tactical Persistent Surveillance Solution

Capable of deploying in just minutes, and staying deployed for sixty days on a full provision of helium, the new TPS can do more than deliver video reconnaissance to a screen on the ground. Utilizing satellite connectivity, the TPS can beam real time, high definition video to anywhere on the planet. Working in tandem with other TPS solutions, this can provide situational awareness over a wide area to senior decision makers.

Depending on the payload attached to the aerostat, TPS can also be used to deliver broadband connectivity to those in its immediate vicinity. This is where some of the truly amazing use cases might come into play.

Better connectivity and more coordinated disaster response
When disaster strikes connectivity is necessary for ensuring the safety of individuals on the ground. Communications are required to keep all parties collaborating and sharing information.  That connectivity can truly be the difference between life and death for both citizens and first responders alike.

Leaders must be aware of the dangers that may stand in the way of a successful disaster response or rescue mission. TPS provides senior decision makers with enhanced situational awareness to those charged with providing help. For instance, TPS units acting in concert can provide the real time video intelligence or broadcast a 3G, 4G, WiFi, and/or WiMax signal over 20 miles – each effect creating a dome of connectivity powerful enough to deliver voice, data and video collaboration to those in the field.

This capability is critical in environments where terrestrial networks are knocked out.  TPS offers private, secure, and resilient Command, Control and Communications (C3) even in environments where local infrastructure is degraded, destroyed, or oversubscribed.

Humanitarian and refugee relief
This particular use case is extremely important today with the refugee crisis impacting Syria and other nations as a result of political unrest and war. With the ability to survey and broadcast video intelligence anywhere in the world, the TPS can enable coalition military forces to keep a watchful eye over refugee camps while enabling the delivery of basic services, additional security forces and resources when and where necessary.

With an aerostat in the air above the camp and a strong wireless network signal being broadcast around them, telemedicine and distance learning services can be offered to refugee camps via video teleconferencing (VTC). Additionally, based on the available payload, the TPS could effectively make life safer and better for refugees who are already dealing with difficult circumstances.

Military ISR and comms on the move
TPS is capable of providing a less expensive means to rapidly deploy C3ISR capabilities and means to gather and disseminate intelligence in theater.

Expeditionary forces that simply don’t have the resources to utilize terrestrial networks for voice, data and video connectivity can effectively utilize the TPS to construct a 1,000 foot cellular tower that provides them with all of their collaboration and information sharing needs within minutes. The TPS solution is easily towed as a single trailer.

This means that high-bandwidth IT services and capabilities can be deployed quickly and effectively anywhere coalition forces are stationed or on patrol. When deployed, the TPS can provide reconnaissance for miles at a fraction of the cost of a traditional UAV. The satellite connectivity of TPS ensures that all video intelligence gathered can then be distributed anywhere in the world – even to senior military decision makers back at home.

These are just a few of the almost unlimited use cases of the TPS.

A piece of home anywhere around the globe
We’ve come to expect an incredible amount of connectivity as Americans. When we’re at home, we have high bandwidth connections and WiFi networks to allow us to connect mobile devices and smart devices from anywhere in and around our property. When we’re on the road, we expect to have to get very far off of the beaten path to lose a cellular signal from our provider.

But that’s not what our government employees, military personnel and coalition partners experience in the austere and disaster relief conditions when they find themselves abroad.

The demonstration of the satellite-enabled TPS was truly amazing to me. Seeing the aerostat deployed and the services that it could deliver made something abundantly clear – we’re entering an age where IT is critical and where a network can literally be deployed immediately in any place and at any time.

For additional details and information about the TPS and its use cases, click on the links below: 

• SES launches surveillance and communications system
• Tactical Persistent Surveillance (TPS) overview video

The post New transportable TPS solution offers C3ISR capability and connectivity anywhere appeared first on SES Space and Defense.