This was a key takeaway from a “Fireside Chat” with David Broadbent, CEO of SES Space & Defense, at this year’s Defense in Space 2025 Conference, held in late October in London.

Collaboration, not confrontation
When asked how, in his extensive experience working closely with the DoD as part of the Defense Industrial Base (DIB), the relationship between the military and its industry partners has changed and evolved, Broadbent shared a reality that is increasingly collaborative and far less combative than in previous years.

“Both in the UK and the United States, [the relationship] has definitely evolved,” Broadbent explained. “We’ve gone through periods of combative relationships with government on the acquisition side, and now through a period of collaboration and partnership.”

This new collaborative approach has coincided with changes in how the DoD evaluates requirements and conducts its acquisition and procurement processes.

“It was taking two years to define requirements, and an additional five to seven years to get something into orbit. A lot of that was driven by the ossified layer of bureaucracy in the U.S.,” Broadbent said. “What the Space Development Agency has done over the past few years is quite remarkable. They eliminated bureaucracy and built small, empowered teams centered primarily on output-based objectives. Those teams were incentivized not to just comply, not to just work endlessly with the traditional contractors to come up with exquisite requirements, but by outcomes, and they were given much more flexibility in how to achieve those outcomes.”

Nowhere is this new approach to acquisition more visible than in the Golden Dome project – a multi-layer missile defense system being championed by the Trump Administration. This aspirational anti-ballistic missile concept would leverage modern sensors and effectors to deny practically any attack on the United States.

However, the Golden Dome is both complex and innovative in nature, requiring the development and deployment of numerous sophisticated and futuristic technologies, including space-based interceptor systems. To meet the challenge, the DoD has effectively abandoned its traditional acquisition model in favor of something truly unprecedented.

“Effectively, the DoD has told industry that we don’t care whether you’re one of the big aerospace and defense primes, or whether you’re one of the new space startups. We want you to fund your own prototypes,” explained Broadbent. “We’ll go through a lab process, and we’ll evaluate your prototypes. Then, on the basis of those evaluations, we’re going to provide cash prizes at certain points in the competition before conducting the down select. It’s a totally different mindset.”

The new, more collaborative relationship with the commercial space industry, along with this new approach to acquisition that eliminates years of embedded bureaucracy in favor of an outcomes-driven approach, has helped open the door for new, innovative entrants in the commercial space industry to work with the military.

“There is incredible new investment in space that is powering new entrants [that] are coming in with very aggressive investment plans,” said Broadbent. “[These entrants] offer tremendous innovation and the ability to implement and deploy at incredible speed, meeting our desire to move at the speed of the threat.”

But innovation in space isn’t just being driven by these changes in the DoD. Increased commercial interest in satellite services is also driving investment in new space capabilities that satellite companies may have been reluctant to develop in the past.

More customers, more opportunities for innovation
Historically, satellites and satellite services were developed and designed by large prime contractors on behalf of the military to meet its exquisite requirements. But that’s starting to change.

“There’s a broader customer base for the types of capabilities that were previously used by governments, and therefore the risk to investment on the commercial side is lower,” said Broadbent. “If the government doesn’t buy it, somebody else will. The whole investment equation has changed.”

This increased commercial interest in space capabilities is making the satellite industry far more attractive to non-traditional players. But this is only possible because the government and military are more open to using satellites and satellite services that also service commercial customers.

“Traditionally, you had large aerospace and defense primes that were driving the pace of innovation. They were typically on sole-source contracts that were consistently over budget and behind schedule, and it was impossible to dislodge them. There wasn’t a lot of competition in the market,” said Broadbent. “We’ve moved from that to [having] many new entrants in the space that bring their own investment. The reason why they’re able to bring their investment is [the military’s] acceptance of hybrid space architectures – the U.S. government being far more comfortable with using commercial dual-use technologies to address certain space missions.”

With the military increasingly open to using satellites and satellite services that commercial customers also use, there is a larger addressable market to which new satellite companies can sell their offerings. This decreases the risk for investors, making it easier for innovative small startups to get funding.

But this trend isn’t just benefiting startup companies and their investors. The ability to develop new space capabilities and sell them to a broader audience of both public and private sector customers is also incentivizing investment and innovation at traditional satellite operators.

The post David Broadbent Lays Out a New Era of Public Private Partnership in Space at 2025 Defense in Space Conference appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Recent high-profile LEO satellite outages have highlighted the dangers and vulnerabilities military customers face when depending on a single satellite network for mission-critical connectivity and communications services. Speaking from experience as a retired Colonel of the U.S. Army, the loss of satellite communications (SATCOM) systems can be catastrophic for a mission, and these outages prove that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) should never put all its SATCOM eggs in one basket.

When access to a primary communications system is denied, degraded, or lost during a mission, it is imperative that warfighters are equipped with a pre-determined Primary, Alternate, Contingency, and Emergency (PACE) plan that ensures an operation maintains the connectivity and communications capabilities it requires. If access to a primary radio, terminal, or satellite system is lost and the mission does not have alternate, contingency, or emergency communications options to fall back on, the operation has essentially failed, and warfighters’ lives could be at risk.

Through advancements in multi-orbit, multi-band satellite technologies, the DoD is now implementing PACE plans encompassing satellite systems across all orbits, leading to successful mission outcomes that are supported by a redundant and assured commercial satellite communications (COMSATCOM) backbone.

Satellite’s Evolving Role in PACE Plans
There was a time when the U.S. military was the leader in developing cutting-edge satellite technologies and capabilities. Twenty years ago, the DoD avoided COMSATCOM and tended to leverage military or government-built satellites for missions. But over time commercial satellite’s pace of innovation and the increased requirement for bandwidth overtook that of the military’s, and the DoD could not match industry’s speed in meeting and fulfilling the SATCOM requirements of warfighting missions.

Today, the military has undergone a sea change regarding its attitude towards COMSATCOM. Since legacy military satellite communications (MILSATCOM) satellites no longer have the capacity that most DoD missions require – combined with the fact that the commercial industry has become far superior in providing the enhanced security, greater bandwidth, higher throughputs, and lower latency military customers are seeking – COMSATCOM has become a critical component of modern warfighting.

The continued evolution of multi-orbit, multi-band COMSATCOM solutions has also reshaped the role satellite systems have played in military PACE plans. Not too long ago, SATCOM was simply a primary form of communication without a role further down the PACE plan.

Today, through the significant advancements in commercial multi-orbit and multi-band technologies, SATCOM’s role in modern warfighting has evolved to the point where the military now crafts PACE plans with multiple different forms of SATCOM connectivity acting as primary and alternative communication options.

This is due to the ability of multi-orbit and multi-band technologies to enable the DoD to seamlessly roll over a mission’s comms from one satellite, orbit, or band to another – providing redundant and uninterrupted access to mission-critical connectivity and capabilities.

Agnostic Integrators and Technological Advancement
This new reality, where COMSATCOM services and capabilities are more redundant and assured, is due to the evolution of multi-band and multi-orbit capabilities. But it’s also a result of technological advancements that make it easier to switch between satellites and satellite networks, and the emergence of agnostic integrators that help build resilient satellite networks for their DoD partners.

Satellite operators that also serve as agnostic integrators provide key advantages to military customers who want multi-orbit, multi-band COMSATCOM built into their PACE plans. Through partnerships with other satellite vendors, agnostic integrators deliver COMSATCOM services that combine satellite capabilities, spanning across orbits and bands.

This is extremely valuable in ensuring that warfighters are supplied with the redundant and assured connectivity their missions require. It is critical to note that agnostic integrators’ access to industry partners’ satellite systems allows them to not only create PACE plan redundancies across orbits, but within a single orbit as well.

Several technological advancements have played a role in enabling military PACE plans to leverage multi-orbit SATCOM capabilities. First is the proliferation of easy-to-deploy LEO satellite products. In the past, deploying satellite terminals at the tactical edge to support a battalion would require three Humvees, nine people, and three generators. Today, warfighters can deploy turn-key terminal devices that can fit in a carry-on bag and be up and running with the press of a button.

Another reason why the use of multi-orbit SATCOM in military PACE plans has exploded in the last few years is due to the technological breakthroughs of auto-PACE solutions like SES Space & Defense’s Secure Integrated Multi-Orbit Networking (SIMON™) capability. Solutions like SIMON can automatically select the best-suited satellite orbit for communications and data to traverse from point A to point B with the least interference. This ensures that any military mission will be supported with built-in redundancy and assured SATCOM.

To learn more about how SES Space & Defense’s SIMON solution is delivering auto-PACE capabilities to the warfighter, click HERE.

The post The Evolving PACE Plan: Multi-Orbit SATCOM Brings Sea Change to Military Comms appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has long been pursuing a hybrid space architecture in order to achieve the resiliency and security that interconnected commercial and government networks can deliver to the warfighter.

As part of the DIU initiative, SES Space & Defense will demonstrate how its Secure Integrated Multi-Orbit Networking (SIMON) platform can provide the DoD with resilient multi-path communications across orbits, bands, and networks.

To learn more about SIMON, its role within a hybrid space architecture, and how it will be employed by the DIU, the Government Satellite Report sat down with Michael Geist, SES Space & Defense’s Vice President of Product Management.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): The DoD is currently working to build what it calls a “hybrid space architecture.” What does this mean, and why is it essential for our modern military?

Michael Geist: The aim of the DoD’s hybrid space architecture is to enable space path diversity for end-to-end networking. For warfighters, this could mean using a tactical radio to communicate with a satellite, and then transferring the data across satellite constellations to be sent back to an end recipient on the ground anywhere in the world.

A hybrid space architecture creates new layers of security by overcoming the single-threaded nature of heritage communication systems, which an adversary could compromise through a single attack vector. Key to this enhanced security is the path diversity that comes from leveraging multi-orbit, multi-band capabilities. A hybrid architecture could employ narrow band, broadband, or any frequency band, as well as any orbit. Terrestrial systems could be a component of it as well.

“SIMON stands for secure, integrated, multi-orbit networking. It’s an alternative approach to the traditional PACE construct.” -Michael Geist

This network diversity provides resilience between different systems – ultimately making it a system of systems architecture. This makes it much more challenging for adversaries to attack.

GSR: What is SIMON, and what role will it play in enabling this hybrid space architecture?

Michael Geist: SIMON stands for secure, integrated, multi-orbit networking. It’s an alternative approach to the traditional PACE construct. Unlike SD-WAN switched architectures, SIMON allows you to take advantage of multiple connectivity mediums simultaneously.

As a satellite operator or a network service provider, there are additional levers that we can turn to enable what we refer to as “affordable resilience”. That’s really where the magic resides in SIMON.

SIMON is complementary to hybrid space architectures’ connectivity pathway diversity, in that it enables variability at the networking endpoints.

GSR: What challenges does the military currently face when switching between different satellite networks and orbits? How does this impact operations?

Michael Geist: Today, satellite orbits and networks are largely heterogeneous in nature. They operate at different altitudes, along with various physical performance characteristics. They employ diverse frequency bands and waveforms and have different security postures. To have resilience in that sort of environment, military users have traditionally deployed with multiple systems and connected each system to its appropriate satellite architecture.

Today, the market is bringing these once disparate systems together through more tightly integrated solutions. We are starting to see things like multi-beam antennas, and, eventually, we’ll see multi-band, multi-beam antennas.

“SES Space & Defense and other satellite operators have been working on shifting the DoD’s mindset from a supply-side model to a demand-side model. Instead of defining inputs, customers will define outputs within a SIMON construct.” -Michael Geist

In the future, as we move even beyond that, these physically integrated solutions will become more logically integrated solutions through things like virtualization and the emergence of that multi-band, multi-beam antenna capability. As those technologies emerge, they will simplify the kit that first responders and warfighters deploy, while increasing their resilience and security and reducing their total operating cost.

GSR: What will that process be like with SIMON implemented? Why is this a better alternative?

Michael Geist: If you take a look at antennas, like the ALL.SPACE Hydra antenna, it inherently has multi-beam capabilities. It also features a multi-network architecture capability, incorporating GEO, MEO, and LEO connectivity. From there, we can add our secret sauce by layering SIMON resiliency on top. That’s a hardware-integrated solution.

SIMON can even operate on non-integrated solutions. For example, pick your favorite variety of different antennas: parabolic antennas, flat panel antennas, etc. You can put them together in a non-integrated fashion and still place SIMON behind it.

Additionally, SES Space & Defense and other satellite operators have been working on shifting the DoD’s mindset from a supply-side model to a demand-side model. Instead of defining inputs, customers will define outputs within a SIMON construct.

“The DIU contract is an experimentation contract. We’ll build on our work with SIMON to take it to the next level, demonstrating enhancements to warfighter security and affordability in a resilient environment.” -Michael Geist

All services will be provided in accordance with a customer’s actual requirements, as opposed to potential needs. Therefore, they, and we, will gain new measures of efficiency and capability that ultimately come at a better price point for users. We anticipate this will provide a massive improvement in outcome and capability for users.

GSR: Can you tell us a bit more about the contract with the DIU? Is this contract to continue to develop and test SIMON, or is SIMON already available and being licensed/acquired by the DIU? What is the timeframe for SIMON to be operational and working on DoD networks?

Michael Geist: The contract is an experimentation contract. We’ll build on our work with SIMON to take it to the next level, demonstrating enhancements to warfighter security and affordability in a resilient environment. Ultimately, through the contract vehicle, we will aim to hand the user that selection spectrum between maximum affordability and maximum resilience, which will allow them to dial in what they desire from an operational service perspective.

The contract is set to move through a crawl, walk, and run set of enhancements. We’re conducting our first experiments this fall and hope to employ it operationally in 2026.

The post DoD Turns to SIMON to Deliver Multi-Path Resiliency for Hybrid Space Architecture appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the second part of our conversation, Nitin discusses how the ICT Portal is powered by a multitude of DoD data sources, and dissects exactly where that data comes from, how it’s delivered to the portal, and what innovative capabilities and features can be performed leveraging that data.

Here is what he had to say:

GSR: Where does the data that powers the ICT Portal come from? Can you talk a bit about the data sources, as well as how the data is delivered to the ICT Portal?

Nitin Bhat: When we look at a customer’s needs, they’re typically global in nature. Their needs do not stem from a geographic standpoint and are not constrained to a specific location. A lot of the customers we serve have locations all across the globe. They will usually need to have something up and running in a certain amount of time.

From a satellite standpoint, we would start with user terminals. User terminal is a very broad definition, as it could encompass laptops, phones, video devices, satellite modems, antennas, etc. User terminals could include a whole host of devices that could be typically found at the tactical edge. Those user terminals are all sources of data for us to gather. Then we can analyze problems and map everything out for customers.

The user terminals then typically talk to satellites. And the satellites – no matter if they are in GEO, MEO, or LEO orbits – all become sources of data for us to ensure that they are healthy and functioning properly. From there the data, voice, or video comes down to teleports. And this teleport becomes another data source. There could be power devices or huge antennas there. There could also be customer infrastructure there that carries the traffic from the satellite standpoint. All of that – again –  becomes another set of data sources.

From there, typically the data travels to the public Internet, government gateways, or to a data center where it then goes to the cloud. But for us, everything is viewed as a point for collecting data. If it touches the customer’s network in some fashion, we collect all that data.

“Capacity management is another feature. Satellites do not have unlimited resources or capacity to provide data. We need to manage the capacity in the right way.” -Nitin Bhat

Data might also travel through a terrestrial network as it goes from point A to point B. SES Space & Defense has its own global terrestrial network, the Global Communications Network (GCN). The GCN meets certain security standards from a government standpoint. That also becomes a data source.

GSR: Once data is fed into the ICT Portal, what are some of the features and capabilities the portal can perform with that data?

Nitin Bhat: Broadly, the ICT Portal can be viewed as something really useful for our own operation center and for our customers. And the uses don’t necessarily need to be different. Some could overlap for both.

A basic feature of the ICT Portal could be as simple as a ticketing system, where you let the customer open their own tickets by logging into the portal, avoiding the need to call a 1-800 number to alert people to a problem. We may want to create tickets on our own because we are proactively monitoring a customer network. When we see something that doesn’t seem right on the single pane of glass, we can auto-generate a ticket and start looking into it.

Another example would be troubleshooting aids. When we see something go red, we might say, “Hey, what happened? Did we get any alarms? Did we get any up-down status from these devices that we were monitoring?” It helps someone who’s troubleshooting. Customers now have these aids to examine and decipher where the problem could have stemmed from.

The third feature is reporting. Reporting is where you’re relaying to the customer, “The network has been up this month for 30 days. It has been up for 99.9 percent of the time.” This enables us to show the customer that we are meeting the obligations from an SLA standpoint. The network is indeed performing the way that it has been designed and is behaving correctly.

It’s also useful for the customer to know how their devices are configured and what parameters are set. From a management perspective, if a device isn’t operating properly, a customer can pinpoint that device, open a return merchandise authorization (RMA), and return that hardware. The ICT Portal will be able to relay the hardware’s serial number, and how it malfunctioned, and assist the customer with the logistics piece of it.

Capacity management is another feature. Satellites do not have unlimited resources or capacity to provide data. We need to manage the capacity in the right way. That becomes another feature where we can tell the customer how much capacity they’re using today – at this moment in time – to accomplish what they’re trying to do from either voice, video, or data.

“Decision makers can also leverage the ICT Portal to predict future trends and proactively plan and allocate resources, budgets, and time to whatever capabilities they are planning for.” -Nitin Bhat

Spectrum monitoring is another feature. Blue-on-blue or red-on-blue interactions can cause spectrum interference. Customers need to know whether that’s impacting their communications or data transfer on their satellites. We need to monitor the spectrum on the satellites, and the ICT Portal allows you to do that.

GSR: In terms of the military, what benefits does the ICT Portal deliver to key decision-makers during warfighting or other critical missions?

Nitin Bhat: It depends on the audience because each government stakeholder might want a different view of what’s going on. Some may be interested to see whether there have been any adversarial attempts to jam communications, and they might want that piece of data. However, a person who is running the program may simply want to know if the delivery of services is occurring on time and at the right level of uptime that they wanted.

Someone who oversees running the network might want to be able to access troubleshooting tickets to improve certain network functions in the future. Someone at a very high level may want to know how AI applications and processes could be integrated into the network, to enable automated and smart functionalities.

Decision makers can also leverage the ICT Portal to predict future trends and proactively plan and allocate resources, budgets, and time to whatever capabilities they are planning for. The ICT Portal pairs perfectly with the DoD’s mission to construct a resilient space architecture, due to its ability to determine whether multi-orbit or multi-constellation solutions would be better utilized for specific missions.

To learn more about the ICT Portal, click HERE.

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

The post The Data Sources that Power the ICT Portal appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to Gossett, U.S. SATCOM networks are used to provide command and control, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) backhaul, beyond line-of-sight communications, and the projection of military forces on the ground. But those SATCOM capabilities are currently under threat and have become the prime target of adversarial action.

At last month’s SATELLITE 2024 conference, Gossett moderated a panel discussion with representatives from the U.S. Space Force, the U.S. Navy, Lockheed Martin, and Intelsat, examining the role multi-layer networks can and will play in establishing resilient and reliable SATCOM services that can withstand adversarial attacks.

Gossett explained that the MILSATCOM community and the commercial industry are currently working together to develop multi-orbit and multi-demand solutions that will enable resiliency. “We’ve got the demand side, with the military needing a resilient set of solutions to ensure SATCOM survives deep into the fight,” said Gossett. “On the supply side, we’ve had GEO high-throughput for quite a while. And in the last decade we’ve had MEO high-throughput with SES’ O3b mPOWER, and now we have the rise of LEO.”

Though the demand and supply sides are clearly defined, according to Gossett the challenge now lies in how to stitch these solutions and capabilities together.

Lockheed Martin’s Portfolio Director of Transport Layer Programs, Adrián Cuadra, agreed that integration solutions, capabilities, and networks are key to achieving the resiliency that multi-layer networks can provide to the military. “We cannot rely on having a single network, single capability, or a single layer that performs the mission for us,” said Cuadra. “The multi-layer network and the multi-layer transport…is an interwoven set of network elements that work together.”

Cuadra went on to say that reaching resilient SATCOM will rely on orbital and path diversity that can synthesize data across the tapestry of networks to provide a common operating picture to decision-makers. “Ultimately, [the goal is] to deliver that assured information to the warfighter, wherever and whenever they need it,” he said.

If the commercial industry’s role is to provide the tapestry of networks and systems, what role does the government and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) play in making these SATCOM resiliency capabilities a reality? According to Clare Hopper, Chief of the Space Force’s Commercial Satellite Communications Office (CSCO), the answer lies in the way the DoD is now facilitating its COMSATCOM contracts to match the pace of industrial innovation.

“[CSCO] is the hub for all things commercial SATCOM,” said Hopper. “As the industry is evolving, we are staying pace by setting up contracts that have the flexibility and scope to facilitate readiness and responsiveness across the globe.”

Hopper explained that the changes the DoD has made with its contracts have opened doors to fully realizing a multi-layer network that fosters resilient and reliable SATCOM. “We’ve made a lot of positive improvement by putting in place more open-ended, flexible contracts that our customers are taking advantage of,” said Hopper. “What comes to mind is our Proliferated Low Earth Orbit (PLEO) contract that was awarded back in July…Our existing PLEO contract enables multi-orbit solutions.”

And indeed, partnerships between the DoD and commercial industry – like the indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) PLEO contract that Hopper cited – have not only strengthened the SATCOM capabilities that are being delivered to the DoD’s disparate commands and services, but they are also opening the door to a more integrated, resilient space architecture for the Joint Forces.

Through the PLEO contract, satellite operators like SES Space & Defense, as well as satellite integrators, are able to usher the DoD into a new age of SATCOM, where DoD decision-makers can leverage new orbits, frequency bands, and waveforms to ensure the redundancy of mission-critical communications and connectivity resources.

As the space domain becomes further contested, with adversaries demonstrating abilities to disrupt, deny, and degrade U.S. comms networks, the DoD must continue to embrace multi-layer and multi-orbit SATCOM through flexible contracts like the IDIQ PLEO award. By doing so, the DoD and its satellite networks will automatically elevate their levels of resiliency and redundancy, and will be able to execute missions and operations uninterrupted by adversarial attack.

The post How Flexible Contracts and Multi-Layer Networks Deliver SATCOM Resiliency appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Recently, SES Space & Defense’s G RamosCarr stopped by the Government Satellite Report to pull back the curtain on how SES Space & Defense will be delivering MEO and GEO services at the edge for DoD missions, as well as explore the various DoD use cases, applications, and workloads that will benefit from infrastructure at the edge.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): What use cases exist for AWS MDC units in the DoD? Why would the DoD want to deploy these units to Denied, Disrupted, Intermittent, and Limited (DDIL) environments?

G RamosCarr: The DoD operates globally, meaning it has to maintain data sovereignty and comply with specific data classification requirements, both when deployed and at home, just to ensure that data is protected.

With the DoD’s transition from on-prem/hybrid solutions to commercial clouds that are approved for the U.S. government, the Department is going to be more reliant on remote edge computing environments in scenarios where comms aren’t as resilient as they are stateside.

Deploying in any environment where an adversary is present and negatively impacting communications – whether denying or disrupting – is a prime example of why a tool like the AWS MDC is imperative. But, even in situations where bad weather is limiting connectivity, having different architectures like MEO with a GEO fallback, a good PACE plan is critical.

“An AWS MDC unit elevates what you can move out to the edge. The compute devices can now become resident in a forward operating base or in some other kind of deployed scenario. That gives users access to the most important data, housed locally at the edge.” -G RamosCarr

In any mission, you must always be able to operate, and that’s why there is a major need for those tools that are running in the cloud. Having the ability to deploy the most important data or tools at the edge is something the AWS MDC will help achieve at scale for a larger deployment, or a unit with a higher amount of data production.

No matter what scenario they end up in, with an AWS MDC, they’re able to continue operating just like they would be stateside when they were doing training.

GSR: Are there any particular applications or workloads that you think might be driving this need for infrastructure at the edge?

G RamosCarr: Imagery analysis is a perfect example. Also, IoT is another application that drives this need, especially when you need to pull a lot of different metrics on a regular basis. It’s fantastic to be able to import a big pool of data into a data lake in the cloud, which will allow users to leverage the computing resources of full data centers across the U.S..

But in a scenario where you might be offline for an hour, or a couple of days, you’re going to want to still have access to a subset of that full data set. You’ll want to be able to take the most important data and do some processing at the edge, and be able to leverage that intel that you just developed immediately.

GSR: If the DoD is deploying these units to the tactical edge, why would they need low-latency, high throughput satellite connectivity? What benefit or advantage would the DoD gain from connecting AWS MDC units?

G RamosCarr: An AWS MDC unit elevates what you can move out to the edge. The compute devices can now become resident in a forward operating base or in some other kind of deployed scenario. That gives users access to the most important data, housed locally at the edge.

“MEO, as far as cloud operations go, can provide a high throughput and low latency connection very similar to a traditional fiber optic connection. This incredibly high bandwidth, high speed connection can enable those services.” -G RamosCarr

However, an AWS MDC on the battlefield can’t compete against the ability of a data center back in the U.S. to be able to compute or consolidate information and process it. It’s not going to be able to do it on the same level.

This is why the military would want to connect AWS MDC units through high throughput, low latency, fiber-like connectivity. MEO satellite connectivity allows these workloads and systems to operate in a much more efficient manner – with some of the work being done at the edge, and other workloads in the cloud.

MEO, as far as cloud operations go, can provide a high throughput and low latency connection very similar to a traditional fiber optic connection. This incredibly high bandwidth, high speed connection can enable those services.

Before, users would have to use some kind of edge compute because of their higher-latency GEO link, or they would have to reduce the amount of throughput and the amount of data that they were sending back, because of the reduced capability of the GEO link and the latency.

A low latency MEO connection enables a whole new world where practically anything can be transmitted quickly and with minimal latency.

GSR: It was recently announced that SES Space & Defense was chosen by AWS to provide connectivity to the AWS MDC units. Why was SES Space & Defense a good fit for this?

G RamosCarr: We’ve had a lot of great engagements and have a great working partnership with AWS, and we’ve supported them on a number of different opportunities. I think we have a differentiated offering – owning both a GEO and a MEO fleet.

“I think O3b mPOWER really opens the door for scalability on our side. We’ve been able to show a differentiated capability with 10 beams per satellite. There is also great flexibility that O3b mPOWER is going to bring to the table, and inherent security features that come with that constellation.” -G RamosCarr

Obviously, there’s a value to every satellite connection, especially when you have zero connectivity. But us being able to bring a resiliency plan to them, and it being relatively turnkey for them, has probably been the biggest differentiator. We’re able to ensure that the military has connectivity – whether it be MEO or GEO connectivity options.

Going further, what MEO enables – as far as cloud operations – is so much more advanced that what the military is going to get on other constellations. The speed, capacity, and latency are second to none. We also have the ability to provide an SLA and ensure that dedicated connectivity is up and available, when that isn’t always the case with other services.

GSR: SES’s O3b mPOWER next-generation MEO service will soon be available for the DoD. How can this service benefit the DoD? What new functionality or capabilities will it enable for the military?

G RamosCarr: I think O3b mPOWER really opens the door for scalability on our side. We’ve been able to show a differentiated capability with 10 beams per satellite. There is also great flexibility that O3b mPOWER is going to bring to the table, and inherent security features that come with that constellation.

It’s going to open the aperture as far as being able to more successfully deploy our assets to support our warfighters.

To read more about how SES Space & Defense and AWS will assist the U.S. Department of Defense, click HERE.

The post AWS and SES Partner to Enable Edge Compute and Cloud Access on the Battlefield appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

There are a number of things about these IDIQ contracts that are newsworthy and downright revolutionary for the DoD. First, this is the first time that a multiple award contract model has been leveraged to deliver PLEO COMSATCOM services to the government or military, a decision that DISA claims will, “…deliver capabilities to the warfighter faster and at [a] lower cost.”

The contracts are valued at $32,000 with a $2,000 minimum guarantee to each contractor. However, the total cumulative value of the contracts is $900 million over a period of five years. The government then has the option to add an additional five-year period of performance. Effectively, this gives the services and commands within the DoD the ability to acquire up to $900 million in LEO COMSATCOM services over a period of, potentially, up to ten years.

The 16 different satellite operators and integrators chosen for these contracts include:

• SpaceX
• Capella Federal, Inc.
• BlackSky Geospatial Solutions, Inc.
• SES Space & Defense
• Hughes Network Systems, LLC
• Inmarsat Government, Inc.
• Amazon’s Kuiper Government Services (KGS) LLC
• Intelsat General Communications LLC
• OneWeb Technologies, Inc.
• ARINC, Inc.
• Artel, LLC
• PAR Government
• RiteNet Corp.
• Satcom Direct Government, Inc. (SDG)
• Trace Systems Inc.
• UltiSat, Inc.

But the structure of the contract – as a new approach to acquiring COMSATCOM services – is just one aspect or element that makes it stand apart. The awarding of these contracts for what the military is calling “Proliferated Low Earth Orbit (PLEO) Satellite-Based Services” is illustrative of two major trends that we’re seeing as it pertains to the military in the space domain.

Integrating COMSATCOM
For the better part of a decade, the military has been debating whether to continue investing in its own, exquisite, purpose-built communications satellites or pivot to utilizing those developed and operated by commercial partners. While the allure of fully owning, operating, maintaining, and securing their own satellites delayed this shift, COMSATCOM innovations ultimately made it inevitable.

As Gen. Curtis Michael Scaparrotti (Ret.), former Commander of United States European Command, once told the Government Satellite Report, “Commercial satellite providers are the engines of innovation, providing capabilities today and on the horizon that are quite promising.” It’s this innovation that has pushed commercial satellite operators to expand into new orbits – including Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) and LEO – and has led to the development of new capabilities that could effectively integrate with the existing MILSATCOM satellites.

These new PLEO IDIQ contract awards show that the military has truly embraced innovative COMSATCOM solutions and satellite services, making them readily available to the DoD as an essential tool in enabling connectivity and communications at the tactical edge. They’re also evidence that proliferation into new orbits, frequency bands, and waveforms is seen as essential in the new reality that the DoD faces in space.

Embracing multi-orbit satellite
Once seen as a benign environment where nations could operate safely without disruption, space is now universally considered an austere, warfighting domain.

As Gen. Kevin P. Chilton (Ret.) recently explained at a Mitchell Institute Schreiver Spacepower Forum, “…U.S. Space Command now operates in a domain where threats are on the rise. Adversaries like China are increasingly seeking to contest this domain…[and] their capabilities include everything from ground-based direct ascent missiles, to electronic warfare, jamming, and co-orbital rendezvous satellites.”

In this environment, it’s not enough to simply proliferate satellite resources within one orbit. For true assurance and redundancy, today’s military will need satellite communications that are both multi-band and multi-orbit.

As Ben Pigsley, the Senior Vice President of Defense Networks at SES Space & Defense, recently explained, “Today, the military is facing near-peer adversaries that have demonstrated their ability to disrupt, deny, and degrade our communications networks…Both multi-orbit and multi-band network solutions offer an elevated level of resiliency and increase availability to government customers. Higher availability is critical to the command-and-control networks operated by the DoD.”

Aside from the benefits to resiliency and assuredness, the introduction of commercial services at different orbits has the potential to deliver new capabilities to the DoD. LEO and MEO satellite constellations offer lower latency and the ability to deliver fiber-like connectivity to practically anywhere on the planet – making them the perfect solutions for high-bandwidth applications that may not have operated effectively over traditional satellite connectivity from Geostationary Orbit (GEO).

But now that the DoD has a contract vehicle in place to acquire these services from 16 different providers, what should they be looking for?

Integrate not just operate
Not all of the satellite providers and integrators on the list are identical or offer the same services and solutions. In fact, some of the recipients that received PLEO contracts don’t even operate their own LEO satellite constellations.

So, what should the disparate services and commands within the DoD be looking for when looking to purchase PLEO satellite services through this contract? Here are three considerations that they should keep in mind when evaluating PLEO satellite service offerings:

1) A secure, integrated space and terrestrial network
True end-to-end satellite solutions require more than just space assets – they require an integrated terrestrial and space network that is capable of getting data and information to where it’s needed from anywhere on Earth.

Often, to build a true end-to-end solution, an established terrestrial network will need to be integrated  with multiple satellite offerings. Also, without a dedicated terrestrial network, data often needs to be moved through insecure methods to its final destination – including through the Internet.

If the DoD is going to benefit from PLEO service anywhere on the globe, they need to be working with a provider that can integrate multiple satellite constellations and its own established terrestrial networks to offer true, secure global connectivity that does not require sensitive military data being directed through the public Internet.

2) EM&C capabilities
For the military to have seamless command and control of its integrated space and terrestrial architecture, it needs enterprise management and control (EM&C). As Frank Backes, Senior Vice President for Federal Space at Kratos explained, “[EM&C] allows military and commercial satellite communications systems to be tied seamlessly into the terrestrial infrastructure.”

Any provider or integrator that the DoD considers needs to offer EM&C capabilities if COMSATCOM, MILSATCOM, and terrestrial networks are going to be integrated and deliver capabilities seamlessly to warfighters on the battlefield. As Backes further explained, “Among the goals of EM&C are giving more satellite link choices, reducing resource allocation times, improving bandwidth efficiency, and providing situational awareness to SATCOM.”

3) Experience building global solutions
Building a global, integrated MILSATCOM, COMSATCOM, and terrestrial network, and providing a managed service is complicated and requires both experience and expertise.

In some instances, terminals or gateways may need to be installed to make a global solution work where needed. In other instances, frequency clearances, approvals, and landing rights may be required for a satellite service to be used in other nations.

It’s important that the DoD works to identify the providers and integrators with deep experience and knowledge in building and operating global networks. This is the only way to ensure that the personnel with the connections and expertise are available to navigate these challenges and get networks operating seamlessly.

To learn more about the PLEO contract award from DISA and U.S. Space Force, click HERE.

The post 3 Reasons Why the DISA’s PLEO Contract is Revolutionary appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

To learn more about how the DoD will leverage the BPA, how it fits into the movement towards an integrated MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM space architecture, as well as how commercial partnerships played a role in delivering this global solution, the Government Satellite Report sat down with Hugh Keane, Senior BD Manager at SES Space & Defense.

GSR: This BPA – which was awarded through DISA and Space Force – essentially gives military organizations a contract vehicle to procure military X-Band COMSATCOM services. What types of organizations and services within the military do you anticipate utilizing this BPA? Why would these military organizations need access to this capability?

Hugh Keane: We see several types of organizations using this BPA. At the combatant command level, we see various use cases for X-Band as part of PACE (Primary, Alternate, Contingency, and Emergency) communications plans for main operating bases, or as a resource that they can distribute to their component users through something like a Satellite Access Request model – whether that’s for exercises or real-world missions.

For the services, some are already users of X-Band on well-established contract vehicles. We see the X-Band BPA as being able to support those users on proof-of-concept work or for short-term requirements that may lie outside the scope of their usual contracting mechanisms.

This vehicle is creating a simple path for all U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) end-users to get access to X-Band, whether that’s raw megahertz capacity or full end-to-end services. And it is the first time that such a vehicle has existed to give this type of X-Band access to the DoD and its end-users. It’s really going to facilitate rapid time-to-order and time-to-activate for those X-Band services.

Many of the organizations are equipped with hardware that will work on WGS in X-Band. So, depending on the mission of the individual end-user, they might not always have priority on WGS. The X-Band BPA will provide an avenue for them to get service without having to change out expensive equipment sets and move to Ka or Ku, for example.

There are also those missions that do require the capabilities that are either inherent to the frequency range of X-Band itself, or some of the capabilities that are inherent to those X-Band satellites.

GSR:  Why is military X-Band important? What differentiates military X-Band from commercial Ka or Ku-band satellite services? Why would this be important for the DoD?

Hugh Keane: Military X-Band is important in many ways. It’s in wide use today because of the WGS satellites and there are many X-Band terminals out there, whether they are land, maritime, or aero terminals. The nature of WGS – and with a finite set of WGS satellites – means there’s not always sufficient capacity to fulfill all user requirements. As such, X-Band on commercial satellites supplements WGS very well, allowing those lower-priority missions to have non-preemptible capacity.

It also provides a greater battle space in which the DoD can operate with enhanced resiliency, by having access to both the military and the commercial X-Band satellites. In addition to that, one of the great advantages of the X-Band frequency spectrum, itself, is that it provides highly reliable and high link availability communications in regions where Ku band and Ka band might struggle due to the high rain fade. In fact, this makes it possibly the best solution in certain parts of the world.

“All the geographic combatant commands have access to X-Band capacity within their areas of responsibility (AOR) through the BPA…” -Hugh Keane

Also, given that X-Band is reserved for military and government use, the satellites themselves tend to be equipped with greater security than purely commercial satellites. With features like highly secure TTNC encryption, anti-jamming capabilities, and – in certain cases on some of the satellites – hardening against nuclear attack. All these features combined, contribute to the resiliency and the availability of the communications links, and as such, they become a bit more desirable for ”no-fail” missions.

GSR: SES Space & Defense has called the service that it’s offering the DoD a “global satellite capacity.” Is this solution truly global? Are there any locations or geographies where the solution will not be available?

Hugh Keane: The service offers the DoD global satellite capacity. All the geographic combatant commands have access to X-Band capacity within their areas of responsibility (AOR) through the BPA and there are multiple coverage options in many locations of significant activity; apart from a small gap in coverage in the Pacific. With regard to that, we will continue to explore options and opportunities throughout the life of the BPA to provide even greater coverage and alternative coverage as the customers need.

GSR: To deliver on this contract, SES Space & Defense claims to have, “partnered with several industry-leading players, including integrators, SATCOM, and teleport operators.” What does this mean? Why was a partnership with these other industry partners necessary to deliver a global solution for the military?

Hugh Keane: SES has a great X-Band asset capability in GovSat-1. This is a relatively new satellite launched in 2018 and it provides good, flexible coverage through both fixed and steerable beams for all types of missions,  whether maritime, land, or aero missions in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.

However, those regions demand flexibility, redundancy, and alternative solutions so we look to our trusted industry partners for additional capacity. And in part, the SES acquisition of DRS GES plays a role here, due to GES’ background as an integrator, and also as a long-term provider of end-to-end X-Band services to their customers.

Drawing on those relationships, we created partnerships to have access to all the commercially available X-Band fleets. That includes partnerships with XTAR for access to the XTAR LANT and EUR satellites, Airbus for access to Skynet, and also the future Syracuse satellites – Syracuse 4A and 4B. And with Anuvu for access to other satellites and their Holmdel teleport. On the teleport side, we have access to multiple teleports, with partners at Telespazio, Santander, MBS, and USEI that deliver services in every combatant command AOR.

“One of the great benefits of the BPA is its flexibility of the broad scope it has when it comes to the provision of X-Band and its enabling elements.” -Hugh Keane

The whole globe is covered in terms of teleport requirements. We also have a number of major antenna providers enabling access to a range of terminals, whether commercial grade terminals or a full build spec standard terminal – depending on what the customer requires.

However, not all those capabilities reside in-house, that’s why we  partnered with several industry-leading players in order to offer the government the most comprehensive solution. The BPA also provides capacity throughout the life of the vehicle to update capabilities, so we can add new beams and new teleports as they become available.

GSR: What will the DoD need to utilize this global X-Band service? Will it have to buy specialized equipment and hardware – new antenna and terminal solutions?

Hugh Keane: One of the great benefits of the BPA is its flexibility of the broad scope it has when it comes to the provision of X-Band and its enabling elements. Through the BPA, we can simply provide raw megahertz of X-Band and we can provide end-to-end X-Band services. That is the space segment, the commercial teleport, and the terrestrial transport.

We can also lease or sell X-Band terminals. Because of WGS, if the user has an X-Band terminal that they use on WGS, they can utilize said terminal. The customer doesn’t need to buy any new equipment. And we can provide them with the service through the existing assets that they have, whether that’s simply bandwidth, or perhaps they also want to use that asset and access a commercial teleport and then have terrestrial backhaul to their home enterprise if needed.

Because of the flexibility of the BPA, if the customer doesn’t have the terminal today, or if they need to supplement terminals – we can provide them the full remote equipment set from scratch, both with buy and lease options. It’s very flexible.

In the end, if the customer already has the equipment, that’s great! We can provide them the services as they need it. But if they don’t have the equipment and they need access to it, we can do that as well.

GSR: How does this BPA play a role in the movement towards adopting the integrated MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM architecture that the DoD has been talking about for the past decade?

Hugh Keane: It certainly plays a role. We need to praise the U.S. Space Force for putting this BPA in place. Before we had this BPA, we worked with various DoD partners to provide an architecture that enabled roaming between WGS and COMSATCOM X-Band and that also included the provision of commercial teleports and peripheral backhaul.

“The BPA will have a positive effect – it allows rapid access to commercial X-Band satellite capacity and its enabling elements, not to mention greatly expands the capability sets of the DoD.” -Hugh Keane

I will say, though, in establishing the BPA, Space Force has now created an avenue that never existed before and is allowing all DoD users to access that type of service and capability for the integration of those MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM architectures. This is really enabled in the BPA allowing reduced time-to-order and time-to-activation of services. Space Force has greatly facilitated this integration by putting this vehicle in place.

GSR: What effect will the addition of this commercial global X-Band satellite capacity have on the military’s satellite architecture? Will it make it more secure? More assured? Why or why not?

Hugh Keane: The BPA will have a positive effect – it allows rapid access to commercial X-Band satellite capacity and its enabling elements, not to mention greatly expands the capability sets of the DoD. They now have COMSATCOM assets along with the ground infrastructure available in every AOR that can supplement and indeed work in tandem with WGS. By having that they increase the availability and resiliency of their communications pathways through access to a greater range of satellites, and ground assets.

To learn more about the Global X-Band BPA, read the official press release HERE.

The post How the new X-Band BPA delivers global capabilities for critical DoD operations appeared first on SES Space and Defense.