D2D 101: An introduction to direct-to-device
D2D connectivity commonly refers to the use of standards-based handheld devices, such as smartphones, to operate directly with satellites. This contrasts with traditional satellite services, which require terminals and terrestrial networks to deliver connectivity to the end user.

While many feel that D2D is a replacement for traditional satellite, it is more of a complementary service. D2D connectivity cannot offer the same throughput and bandwidth as a traditional satellite service. However, it can deliver connectivity and access to remote locations and areas of the globe even when the necessary terrestrial hardware is unavailable. All the end user would require is a compatible smartphone or other mobile device.

The D2D service being built by Lynk will accomplish this using a constellation of satellites located in low Earth orbit (LEO), where strong signals generated very close to Earth will deliver connectivity directly to end-user devices. The O3b mPOWER, operated by SES, will enable necessary space data relay capabilities that effectively backhaul data from the Lynk LEO satellites at very high speeds with very low latency, allowing them to significantly reduce the ground segment required to support their D2D services.

Together, the Lynk and SES constellations will enable government users and military personnel to have end-user devices that simply work, even without a satellite terminal. That is a powerful capability with nearly limitless use cases for the government and military.

Immediate comms when and where they’re needed
In the aftermath of major natural disasters, those tasked with search and rescue missions and responding to emergencies often find themselves without cell service or any terrestrial forms of connectivity. That’s because the same natural disaster that impacted their region invariably destroyed the network infrastructure that powers cellular and terrestrial networks.

Communication and situational awareness capabilities are essential for an effective and collaborative response. They’re necessary to ensure those conducting search and rescue operations don’t wind up needing to be found and rescued, themselves. They’re essential to get alerts about danger, requests for assistance, and other mission-critical communications. But without cellular and terrestrial networks, these essential capabilities are often unavailable.

Historically, satellite providers have deployed Cell on Wheels (COWs) or Cell on Light Trucks (COLTs) to affected areas. These solutions effectively deliver the terrestrial equipment necessary to establish a satellite-enabled Wi-Fi or 5G network that first responders can use for basic communications and situational awareness. However, these solutions aren’t always in place when disaster strikes.

With D2D capabilities, first responders – from law enforcement personnel to wildland firefighters – could have immediate access to essential connectivity, even before COLTs and COWs are deployed to a region. This would immediately make mission-critical communications and situational awareness capabilities available following a natural disaster, putting first responders in a far better position to locate, rescue, and assist those in need.

This same ability to immediately access mission-critical communications, even without satellite terminals or ground infrastructure, can be leveraged for a variety of civilian government use cases. Government employees dispatched to remote locations could benefit from the ubiquitous communications delivered by D2D.

Military operations are often conducted in remote, off-grid locations where terrestrial infrastructure is unavailable. However, concerns about data and signal security could limit the use of commercial D2D solutions for combat applications. However, there is an opportunity to leverage D2D connectivity for non-combat missions and operations.

The post SES and Lynk Global Partner to Enable Game-Changing D2D Capabilities for the Government appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

What makes O3b mPOWER capability unique?
The launch of SES’s second-generation satellite network, O3b mPOWER, marks the company’s next step toward delivering the highest throughput, most efficient, and most flexible enterprise-grade satellite connectivity services to customers yet.  O3b mPOWER combines many key attributes typically found with geostationary satellite solutions like geographic reach per on-orbit asset, flexible ground infrastructure, and the accommodation of customer-defined User Terminals (UTs) and waveforms, along with “uncontended” capacity, which means that you get what you pay for… it’s not being statistically multiplexed and simultaneously sold to others in an orbit similar in overall latency performance to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) solutions.

The Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) is unique for its orbital resilience while also remaining in the optimal realm for real-time or cloud-originating user applications.  O3b mPOWER is particularly unique in its ability to serve enterprise-class customers… that is,  many users connected from a single point like a ship, airplane, office, or base, with high throughput, low latency throughput needs, and consistent or guaranteed performance.

Perhaps even more significant for potential users is that the O3b mPOWER constellation features an “open architecture” that allows customers to employ it for a wide variety of operational scenarios beyond basic Internet connectivity, including Command & Control uses, Protected Communications, and emerging or evolving operational use cases like LEO Relay Services, Multi-Orbit Routing, Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance, Gateway-Free UT-to-UT connectivity, and other unique mission-critical applications.

On the point of security, O3b mPOWER is a constellation of High Throughput, Software Enabled Satellites placed into a non-geostationary orbit (NGSO), protected with security enhancements outlined in Committee on National Security Systems Policy 12 (CNSSP-12).  O3b mPOWER can support user-derived protected waveforms along with existing and emerging holistic network cybersecurity capabilities.   Further, since the O3b mPOWER satellites are constantly moving relative to a geographic point on Earth, and small channelized user beams are equally adapting to ever-changing user location and demand, unintentional interference is unlikely and adversarial instigation of intentional interference becomes extremely challenging.

Our O3b mPOWER High Throughput, Software Enabled Satellites allow SES to place many Gbps of low latency capacity into a single ~250km diameter geographic area if required or to spread that capacity across numerous beams in a large region and adapt it to the changing needs of our customers.  Satellites in the O3b mPOWER constellation have an estimated lifespan in excess of ten years, and the constellation itself only requires six satellites for a global equatorial to 50^o latitude coverage making our offering enduring and affordable for users.  Overall, O3b mPOWER provides superior capability to reliably address high throughput, low latency user connectivity requirements while being less susceptible to exceeding Equivalent Power Flux Density (EPFD) regulations.

How are O3b mPOWER services delivered? What does the customer need to know?
SES, or via its U.S. proxy subsidiary SES Space & Defense for U.S. government customers, offers O3b mPOWER services in two primary operational constructs, “Commercial Managed Services” and “Sovereign Services,” sometimes referred to as “Transparent Mode.”

Commercial Managed Services are full stack integrated, operated, monitored, and managed end-to-end network services using SES defined and developed User Terminals. These enable users to experience low latency enterprise-grade connectivity with the highest possible uncontended throughput and maximum overall system efficiency.  This vertically integrated hardware and software stack enables SES to adapt capacity to ever-changing user demand moment-by-moment, creating operational savings that SES passes along to its customers.

Sovereign Services provides a technological advantage for customers who desire to define their own User Terminals, employ waveforms of their choosing, operate services from any location desired, add security solutions to meet operational requirements, or incorporate a host of other important mission-specific needs into their connectivity offering.  Sovereign Services provide users maximum flexibility while delivering low latency enterprise-grade connectivity with the highest possible uncontended throughput.  SES, offers two categories of Sovereign Services to global markets:

• Sovereign Capacity Services
• Sovereign Managed Services

Sovereign Capacity Services are low latency, high throughput satellite capacity offerings.  Customers define and employ their own ground infrastructure and User Terminals, and then interface with the SES backend network architecture to realize connectivity outcomes that meet their operational goals.  As a primer for deployment of customer owned Sovereign Gateway infrastructure, we also offer the possibility for customers to utilize a part of SES’s Commercial Gateways, referred to as Hybrid Sovereign Gateways, to securely host their Sovereign Capacity Services.

Sovereign Managed Services are network services exclusively tailored to address our customers’ mission needs. They are integrated and operated by SES, specifically SES Space & Defense for U.S. government customers.  Sovereign Managed Service users benefit from the scalability of in-place common ground infrastructure that can independently support many customers, minimizing time to operation, training, and sustainment while providing significant infrastructure and operational savings to users.

What’s in it for equipment vendors? How can they take part?
Within the realm of Sovereign Services, SES is working with reliable, high-quality equipment vendor-partners to ensure maximum operational flexibility for our customers. Each partner brings a differentiated value proposition to the O3b mPOWER solution, whether it’s a Program of Record waveform like the Enhanced Digital IF Modem (EDIM) or the Protected Tactical Waveform (PTW), by providing interoperability with existing infrastructure, or through delivering new capabilities for overall service enhancements.  Some vendors have capability certifications such as DO-160 or MIL-STD 810 for unique operational environments, while others offer operational enhancements like Communication Signal Interference Removal (CSIR) or state-of-the-art simultaneous multi-beam, or even multi-frequency / multi-beam connectivity.  Sovereign Services maximize a user’s choices to enable the desired outcome.

To be a part of the O3b mPOWER vendor partner ecosystem, solution providers engage SES to receive O3b mPOWER specific Government Technology Certification (GTC) Interface Control Documents (ICDs) through which they will enhance their solutions for use with the O3b mPOWER constellation. Once completed, vendor partners receive O3b mPOWER Government Technology Certification.  SES offers O3b mPOWER as a completely open-architecture solution enabling faster adoption of NGSO services – either as a stand-alone capability or a resilient and, if needed, simultaneous augmentation to other connectivity orbit options.

The post O3b mPOWER – A First of its Kind NGSO Capability appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

It makes sense. That information is critically important for the government and military decision-makers looking to lease space on satellites or looking to purchase managed satellite services. Also, space is exciting! These spacecraft of marvels of modern technology, developed in state-of-the-art facilities and then launched into space on literal rocket ships.

But what often gets ignored or swept under the rug in discussions between COMSATCOM providers and their government customers is the other part of the satellite equation – the satellite gateways. These unsung heroes of satellite communications are essential components of a functioning satellite network, but they’re infrequently discussed in the marketing materials and sales slicks of COMSATCOM providers.

But that needs to change.

Recent satellite technology advancements and some exciting new satellite services that are about to come online are poised to give government and military users more gateway options than ever. The result will be government and military users having choices in how they want to transmit their data, and how they want to secure it.

But before we take a deeper dive into the future of the satellite gateway, we have to better understand their essential role in the larger satellite network.

Gateways 101
The gateway has a function that its rather descriptive name implies – it is the gateway for the satellite signal. The data that is in that satellite signal needs an entry point in which to enter the ground terrestrial infrastructure, which will then deliver that data to the various end users that need it. The gateway serves as that essential entry point.

Whether the data that is being transmitted via that signal is an email, a voice call, or vital satellite or ISR imagery that’s imperative to the mission, it needs to be fed back into a terrestrial network somewhere. The gateway is the connection between the users on Earth and the satellites, helping move the data around the globe.

Historically, when a government or military user has leased satellite capacity from a COMSATCOM provider or leveraged a managed satellite service, they’ve only had one viable gateway option. In that scenario, they’ve been limited to using the gateways owned and operated by that COMSATCOM provider. But this is where things are starting to change and where the government and military are starting to have more options.

One size does not fit all
There are a number of reasons why using a COMSATCOM provider’s gateway and terrestrial network infrastructure is a perfectly acceptable option for government and military users. This infrastructure has already been purchased and deployed. It can be leveraged immediately with no additional upfront cost to the customer, and there are often service level agreements (SLAs) that ensure a certain level of uptime and resiliency.

This makes using the COMSATCOM provider’s gateways and networks more rapid, economical, and hassle-free. That could be incredibly enticing to individuals who don’t really care about the network that they use, the equipment that is in the gateway, or the security of the data – they just want to get up and working quickly and at a more reasonable cost.

However, there are also valid reasons why a government or military customer might not want to use their COMSATCOM provider’s equipment and infrastructure.

For a large global military with a large amount of resources, building out a gateway might not seem that expensive or difficult. And that added cost and effort could be considered well worth it for added flexibility, mobility, control, and security. In some cases, that need for control of the equipment and the security of the data could be a roadblock that keeps some military customers from adopting COMSATCOM services altogether.

Thankfully, the advanced technologies inherent in a new generation of satellite services – including the O3b mPOWER satellite service – give military and government users incredible flexibility in their gateway options. Upon launch of O3b mPOWER, four different gateway types or configurations will be available to users. These include:

• Commercial managed service gateways: These gateways are the previously discussed gateways owned and operated by the COMSATCOM service provider. In this arrangement, the user simply purchases the satellite service and the provider – in this case, SES – provides all of the requisite satellite capacity, gateway services, and even the terminal if the customer requires. In this scenario, the gateway, equipment, and network belong to the satellite provider – the end users simply get the service.
• Sovereign gateways: These gateways are at the opposite end of the spectrum from managed service gateways. In this arrangement, the customer is the owner and operator of the network – including the gateway, equipment, and terminals. They’re responsible for the purchase, installation, management, maintenance, and security of that hardware. The COMSATCOM provider owns and operates the satellites, transmitting the signal and providing the customer with bandwidth.

• Hybrid sovereign gateways: As the name implies these gateways are a hybrid of both commercial and sovereign methodologies. In this arrangement, the customer places their hub equipment within a commercial gateway, leveraging the use of the COMSATCOM fleet owners commercial terminal to link with the satellite, but using their own equipment to connect to their network.  The COMSATCOM provider provides space within their gateway for customers to put their equipment so they don’t have to build their own gateway.

• Transportable government gateways: These gateways, often abbreviated TGG, are smaller, more mobile versions of the large 5.5-meter permanent gateways, and are designed to be transported to where they’re needed. They can be used as a temporary gateway in cases where a customer may not need a permanent version, or as a back up to a permanent gateway.  They can also be used when a customer wants to be able to move their gateway to a variety of locations for mission reasons.  The TGG is transportable on both military and commercial aircraft, and comes with its own power source and a climate controlled unit to hold hub and other rack equipment.  The TGG is a essentially a sovereign gateway, smaller in size for transportability, but capable of performing full gateway functions on a customers network.

With the emergence of advanced satellite services like O3b mPOWER, government, and military customers are no longer stuck with a single gateway option. So, when choosing a satellite provider, they need to look at more than just the constellations in orbit – they need to look at and evaluate the gateways and terrestrial network options back on Earth to ensure they meet their requirements.

A commercial managed service would be the best choice if a government customer wants to get up and running with their satellite service quickly and at a lower upfront cost.. However, if security and control are essential, sacrificing that control for ease of deployment is simply not an option, a sovereign gateway or hybrid sovereign gateway would be the best choice.

To learn more about the gateway choices available to O3b mPOWER users, click HERE to watch my lightbox video.

The post Something New for Military COMSATCOM Users – Gateway Options appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

But as military and government SATCOM requirements become more complex, satellite providers are beginning to fine-tune the capabilities they provide to their customers by leveraging the best facets of all orbits to deliver blended and resilient, multi-orbit SATCOM services optimized to meet their customers’ needs.

To learn more about each orbit’s connectivity strengths and weaknesses, how SATCOM providers leverage an all-orbit strategy to fill orbital coverage and latency gaps, and how government and military applications can benefit from an “all-orbit strategy”, the Government Satellite Report sat down with SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Product Management, Michael Geist.

Here is what he had to say:

Government Satellite Report (GSR): For our readers who may not be familiar, can you break down the differences between LEO, MEO, and GEO?

Michael Geist: The most basic difference between these three different orbits pertains to the altitude plane in which each satellite constellation resides. LEO is situated between about 300 kilometers to about 2,000 kilometers above Earth, with MEO sitting at around 8,000 kilometers and GEO about 36,000 kilometers.

GSR: And why do those altitudes matter?

Michael Geist: They matter for a variety of reasons pertaining to application and user experience, and two critical aspects of that involve latency – the time that it takes for information to travel from Earth up to space and back down again – and coverage in terms of how many satellites are required to enable a worldwide presence.

For example, when we consider global or worldwide coverage with a LEO constellation, it takes hundreds or thousands of satellites to provide constellation objective presence. Whereas MEO only takes six satellites to provide a worldwide presence, and GEO only takes three satellites for the same.

Another difference between LEO, MEO, and GEO is the typical satellite lifespan in each of the orbits. LEO satellites typically have about a three to five-year lifespan. MEO satellite constellations have about a 10 to 12-year lifespan. And GEO has a 15 plus year lifespan.

“As SATCOM service providers, we have to take into consideration how many customers there may be for a given application – and the market acceptable Average Price per Unit and Average Revenue per User  – are required to close a business case.” – Michael Geist

Those average lifespans are important to consider from a business case perspective because we can then think about how much the asset costs. And how often do I have to replace it? How much money does it cost and how long does it take to put that constellation into space? How often do my customers have to refresh their user equipment, and other things of that nature?

When developing a business case for providing SATCOM services, you have to consider the cost of putting a constellation into space and the associated terrestrial networks on the ground to serve customers, as well as the amount of capacity those constellations may provide to support the ability to service a number of customers. As SATCOM service providers, we have to take into consideration how many customers there may be for a given application – and the market acceptable Average Price per Unit and Average Revenue per User  – are required to close a business case.

Then we should consider what we can do with that capacity, and what we can’t, while also keeping in mind how much capacity there is per on-orbit asset. And does the orbit match the different applications that we may be trying to serve?

For non-geostationary orbits, service providers also have to think about the availability of a constellation in regard to the dwell time of the individual satellites over specific geographic latitudes. And by that, I mean that for inclined plane constellations, satellite dwell time at high latitudes far exceeds dwell time around the equator. If we look at a typical large LEO constellation, there may be thousands of satellites spending a majority of them dwelling at the highest latitudes, spending their least amount of time around the equator. That has an implication on the amount of availability that customers would have in areas that have the largest populations. In order to have more capacity near the equatorial region, you’d need more satellites in your constellation.

And then when you combine that with factors like equivalent power flux density limits around the equator for non-interference operation with GEO satellites, that has another impact on how much throughput at a given frequency that providers can push through a satellite and constellation. And how many satellites they’ll need to deliver the service they’re promising.

All of these different nuanced considerations come into play and have an effect on both the service provider and the user.

GSR: How do they differ regarding the SATCOM coverage, availability, and latency they provide? And which orbits are best suited for internet traffic, enterprise traffic, and broadcast connectivity?

Michael Geist: LEO typically has an end-to-end latency of under 100 milliseconds, which includes physical layer and network latency with perhaps some congestion depending upon where and how you measure it. There’s another metric that one of our aviation partners refers to called “stick-to-glass” latency. To understand stick-to-glass latency, think in terms of flying an unmanned aerial vehicle. There’s what you see on the screen, there’s you maneuvering a stick in your hand, and then the time it takes for the UAV to react to the stick maneuver. That’s typically referred to as stick-to-glass latency. There are other metrics as well like “User Experience Latency” which is quite similar to stick-to-glass latency but can be different for different user applications, for example machine-to-machine applications or human-to-machine applications.

“SES’s O3b mPOWER constellation is specifically designed for enterprise class services, whether they’re fixed, on-the-move, on land, at sea, in the air or even in space.” – Michael Geist

If we get back to stick-to-glass latency though, you’ll find that it’s typically around 250 milliseconds for LEO. MEO has a network layer latency of about 150 milliseconds but with a stick-to-glass latency of 250 to 350 milliseconds. GEO has a network layer latency of 650 to 850 milliseconds, but a stick-to-glass latency of a little over a second. Latency ranges quite a bit between the different constellations. But that doesn’t mean that latency is the only factor of importance when determining the quality of an orbit for a given application.

When you think about coverage, LEO has a very small coverage area. MEO has a medium coverage area, and GEO has a very large coverage area. From an application standpoint, GEO makes a lot of sense for broadcast applications, because you can transmit something once and reach a lot of users simultaneously. Quite the opposite is true for LEO. In LEO, to broadcast something, you have to broadcast many hundreds or many thousands of times to hit every user within a geographic coverage area, because of the small coverage area per satellite.

MEO is in the middle of that. MEO isn’t typically thought of for wide-area broadcasts however, because it’s highly efficient and very fast for enterprise-related applications. SES’s O3b mPOWER constellation is specifically designed for enterprise class services, whether they’re fixed, on-the-move, on land, at sea, in the air or even in space. GEO is clearly the best solution for broadcast traffic. I would argue that before the emergence of LEO, GEO was also a fantastic choice for Direct-To-Home Internet traffic in areas lacking other means of broadband connectivity. Companies like ViaSat and Hughes have been the predominant GEO space-based Direct-To-Home satellite internet companies. Then with the emergence of LEO – just from a fundamental technical and not necessarily a business case financial standpoint – LEO is probably the best technical solution for home internet connectivity.

For enterprise traffic, that’s where MEO finds its strength. It’s extremely fast, ranging from many tens or hundreds of Megabits per second to Gigabits per second in speed. It’s extremely efficient in terms of the waveforms that it uses. And it has a system latency that matches well with cloud-native applications. So, I would put enterprise traffic squarely in the area of MEO and what we do with O3b mPOWER.

GSR: Since some orbits are better suited than others in terms of coverage, connectivity, and low-latency requirements, is it possible for SATCOM providers to leverage all three to fill in each other’s gaps?

Michael Geist: Yes, I would say I think that we’re soon going to find a time when simultaneous multi-orbit connectivity is more commonplace or completely commonplace. I say that because frequency is a finite resource, and as demand per user terminal exceeds the availability of the finite resource from a single orbit or a single satellite to a single use or user terminal, then this will become more than normal.

“O3b mPOWER is certainly a relevant, high-value component of a multi-orbit strategy.” – Michael Geist

We’re already seeing this in the cruise market. SES provides half of a service offering with one of our cruise partners where we – as a prime contractor – have been contracted to deliver a blended MEO/LEO service capability because neither LEO nor MEO can solely deliver the types of throughputs that are required on their own. By combining them, the cruise industry gets the best of MEO for guaranteed enterprise traffic for business operations, crew traffic, and things of that nature – combined with the best of LEO for large amounts of best-effort internet traffic. Together, they meet the total aggregate throughput capacity requirements of our cruise industry partners.

I project that perhaps in the next 10 years, we will see that pattern find its way into the aviation market as passenger capacity demand continues to increase, and perhaps in other markets as well.

GSR: How does the O3b mPOWER constellation fit into the all-orbit concept? Is it capable of leveraging all three orbits in conjunction with one another to provide maximum scalability and availability performance to government and military customers?

Michael Geist: O3b mPOWER is certainly a relevant, high-value component of a multi-orbit strategy. In particular, O3b mPOWER is best utilized as an enterprise solution – with its low latency, extremely high throughput, fantastic frequency and network efficiency, and maximum flexibility in terms of waveforms and antennas – providing an interoperable solution with other orbital solutions that exist in the marketplace today.

In other words, the best multi-orbit capabilities will be the ones that do not require the user to have to install a different antenna for every service solution that they want to use. The best multi-orbit solutions will involve the ability for a user to integrate a single-user terminal solution that allows them to operate over multiple different orbits, either independently or – at some point in the future – simultaneously.

“Any application where SATCOM is the primary tether to a remote user’s network is going to benefit from multi-orbit solutions.” – Michael Geist

GSR: What are some government and military applications and use cases that successfully leverage all three orbits? What role does multi-band resiliency play when facing threats from near-peer adversaries?

Michael Geist: Any application where SATCOM is the primary tether to a remote user’s network is going to benefit from multi-orbit solutions. Our near-peer adversaries are going to attempt to eliminate our communications options, so as long as we have resilience relative to networks and orbits, then we’ll be in a better position, especially when our warfighters are on the front line. In some cases, SATCOM is the only option they have as far as reach back goes, so resilience is critical.

Government or military applications currently leveraging multi-orbit capabilities include things like aero command and control, aero ISR, naval applications where our Navy partners desire independent command and control, MWR functionalities, and land common move applications – and the number of examples is growing.

The number of examples 10 years ago was zero, and if it wasn’t zero it might have been one. I just named five or six different applications. If you talk to me in 10 years, I think we’re going to find other sets of applications where it’s becoming more and more required. It’s definitely an exciting time to be an integrated multi-orbit service provider.

Click the video below to watch Michael Geist’s full presentation on the value of all orbits.

The post Leveraging an All-Orbit Strategy for Government and Military Applications 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.

To stay ahead of the threat, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is collaborating with its commercial space partners to ensure that warfighters are provided with satellite services and capabilities designed to outmaneuver and outlast the adversary. Last December, I had the opportunity to attend the DoD Commercial SATCOM Workshop, a special event – hosted by U.S. Space Command – where military and satellite industry leaders came together and tackled some of the DoD’s most pressing satellite communication (SATCOM) challenges, including how to ensure resilient connectivity and assured comms throughout special operations and warfighting missions.

DoD’s SATCOM Goals
One goal that the DoD is looking to achieve is quickly ramping up SATCOM services for special operations within hours of deployment. But with adversaries deploying space capabilities designed to degrade and deny connectivity and comms to the warfighter, the DoD wants to ensure that special operations SATCOM services are backed up with spectrum agility. When warfighting missions become more agile spectrum-wise, it becomes increasingly difficult for an adversary to narrow down its attack calculus.

Another goal that the DoD is getting after is to provide warfighters with SATCOM services that support multi-path communications in remote locations or extreme environments that lack terrestrial networks. Leveraging multi-path comms when executing operations in austere environments helps to ensure redundant, uninterrupted communications in the event an adversary was to breach, degrade, or deny any level of a mission’s PACE Plan.

Industry Answers the Call
A solution that the commercial industry is ready to put forward to support the DoD’s spectrum agility and multi-path comms goals is multi-orbit SATCOM. Providing the DoD with access to multi-orbit services that can switch spectrums mid-mission would ensure that warfighters are supported with resilient connectivity options and redundant communications pathways. Multi-orbit satellite capabilities would also give the military a competitive advantage in the space domain by making it increasingly difficult for adversaries to target and degrade an operation’s connectivity and comms services.

Last March, SES Space & Defense, Hughes, and ThinKom, successfully demonstrated these multi-orbit SATCOM capabilities. Together, the three companies proved their ability to effectively roam between SES’s satellite networks in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) and Geostationary Orbit (GEO).

When executing warfighting operations, if it becomes clear that an adversary is attempting to jam or attack a mission-critical satellite, having the flexibility to transfer mission services and capabilities over to another satellite in a different orbit guarantees connectivity resiliency and comms redundancy.

DoD Adopts Multi-Orbit Services
The DoD has taken notice of these multi-orbit solutions and plans to integrate them into its communications architecture. Last September, it was announced that the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory awarded SES Space & Defense with a multi-year contract to conduct tests to integrate space broadband services across a multi-orbit satellite network that would support the Defense Experimentation Using Commercial Space Internet (DEUCSI) program. The DEUCSI program intends to leverage commercial space internet (CSI) constellations with the ability to alternate between Geostationary (GEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites.

“An integrated multi-orbit, multi-band satellite architecture is a requirement in today’s contested and congested environment,” said Jim Hooper, SES Space & Defense’s Senior Vice President of Space Initiatives. “The DEUCSI program is a great example to showcase…multi-orbit, multi-band holistic approaches to deliver seamless interoperability to the U.S. Air Force to achieve unparalleled situation awareness and strategic advances for mission success.”

Last September, the DoD made another step towards adopting and integrating multi-orbit services when the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) awarded indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts to satellite operators and integrators – including SES Space & Defense – for Proliferated Low Earth Orbit (PLEO) satellite services. Embracing PLEO services will deliver resiliency and assuredness benefits to DISA by having satellite capabilities that are both multi-band and multi-orbit.

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

Events like the DoD Commercial SATCOM Workshop provide the private sector with opportunities to learn about the military’s top satellite and space challenges directly from DoD leadership. As the military and industry continue to foster this open dialogue, the private sector will be better equipped to redirect its attention and efforts toward developing and producing SATCOM solutions and services to support the DoD in reaching its goals.

The post DoD, Industry Tackle Connectivity and Comms Challenges at SATCOM Workshop 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.

This announcement by AFRL is the third award under the DEUCSI CALL 003 Program seeking experimentation for use cases in the Artic region and airborne communications.

The DEUCSI program is intended to establish communications with military platforms via multiple commercial space internet (CSI) constellations in Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) utilizing a common user terminal with the ability to alternate between space broadband providers.

“An integrated multi-orbit, multi-band satellite architecture is a requirement in today’s contested and congested environment for a network-centric military,” said SES Space & Defense Senior Vice President of Space Initiatives, Jim Hooper. “The DEUCSI program is a great example to showcase SES Space & Defense’s multi-orbit, multi-band holistic approach to deliver seamless interoperability to the U.S. Air Force to achieve unparalleled situation awareness and strategic advances for mission success.”

As the industry’s leading COMSATCOM integrator, SES Space & Defense, a wholly-owned subsidiary of SES focused on delivering satellite network solutions for the U.S. Government, will demonstrate multi-orbit, multi-band solutions that seamlessly switch among commercial space broadband services in different frequency bands to access favorable spectrum or failover between constellations.

In doing so, SES Space & Defense will leverage common hardware elements to communicate with commercial space broadband constellations and military communications systems to provide greater flexibility in communication paths while minimizing the deployment of constellation-specific hardware.

The post SES Space & Defense to Demonstrate Multi-Orbit, Multi-Band Satellite for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

One topic of discussion that received a considerable amount of buzz throughout the conference was the federal government and military’s need for connectivity at the North and South Poles.

At first glance, it may seem that having SATCOM capabilities at the Poles is unnecessary. But my conversations with government and military leaders at Space Symposium showed that there is – indeed – an undeniable need for COMSATCOM solutions and capabilities at the Poles.

Research and national defense
Even though there are very few people who live and work at the North and South Poles, the mission sets that present U.S. government and military personnel are carrying out in these areas are absolutely critical to not only national security, but to scientific research and development as well.

If we were to take a trip down to the remote South Pole, we would find scientists and researchers from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) making groundbreaking discoveries in the areas of astronomy, astrophysics, seismology, climate change, among many others.

Without reliable connectivity and communications capabilities, government researchers are unable to uplink the critical data back to those that will analyze and learn from it in the continental U.S. As a result, major scientific progress could be halted and left unsupported during a time when rising sea levels and record-breaking natural disasters are threatening American lives every day. It is critical that the federal government be able to provide scientists with the SATCOM capabilities they require to continue producing world-saving research.

And much like in the South Pole, the remote North Pole also supports scientific, government research that requires SATCOM solutions that can power the massive data exchanges coming to and from the area. But, unlike the South Pole, there are additional military requirements for SATCOM services at the North Pole.

Two of our largest, near-peer adversaries are located in the INDOPACOM area of responsibility (AOR). As global climate change continues to open passages on additional travel routes through the North Pole region, the need to protect newly-formed commercial trade routes from those adversaries increases. There is also an increased need to defend the U.S. and its northern allies from threats that leverage these new northern passages.

The threats U.S. adversaries pose to national security is always evolving. To secure U.S. borders from potential, incoming threats the government and military must leverage digital transformation at the North Pole, through the proliferation of military, marine, and aerospace sensors that can detect security threats that may pose risks to the homeland.

With traditional, terrestrial networks unavailable, SATCOM is necessary to get sensor data from these remote locations back to military and civilian support organizations and their decision-makers. By leveraging SATCOM to connect a new generation of advanced Internet of Things (IoT) sensors and devices, our military and civilian organizations can gain better situational awareness at the Poles, understand changing weather patterns, and be better prepared to defend our nation from pacing threats.

But what commercial satellite capabilities are available in the Poles?

Why the Poles are HOT for satellite providers
There are many rural, remote, and geographically isolated places in our country that are without access to terrestrial networks because there simply isn’t a business case for telecoms or other internet service providers (ISP) to invest in the infrastructure. And it’s easy to understand why. Since the number of residents that would pay for the service is limited, these companies simply wouldn’t make their investment back, let alone make a meaningful return on that investment.

Something similar has long hampered the launch of satellite constellations that provide service to the North and South Poles. In places where penguins and polar bears outnumber people, there is very little need for satellite services, and very little revenue to be generated from launching multiple satellites to deliver coverage to these areas.

But that is beginning to change rapidly. Increased demand from government and military users in these remote areas is driving a growing need for satellite services. In partnerships with global governments, there could now be a reasonable business case for commercial satellite service providers to expand coverage to the poles. And this is one of the reasons why so many conversations at Space Symposium focused on this topic – renewed and increased interest in the Poles from both the government and its industry partners.

For example, as a satellite operator with the only HTS satellite constellation in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), SES Space and Defense, strategically designed second generation MEO constellation, O3b mPOWER with capabilities to operate in inclined planes and in the future extend MEO to the poles. As scientific expeditions and military operations continue to expand at the Poles, the future capabilities that MEO will provide will be paramount to mission success.

This was a sentiment shared by Steve Collar, the CEO of SES, during his recent keynote address at the SATELLITE 2023 Conference. “From an SES standpoint, we designed O3b mPOWER to be capable to also operate in inclined planes. That would be the next step for us…That means polar capability and polar coverage that allows us to add more capabilities,” Collar said. “We won’t be limited in the future to just communications. We can add more services and more missions to this incredibly strategic orbit.”

Learn how SES Space and Defense is providing satellite services to Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, HERE.

Listen to SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Government Relations, Jon Bennett, discuss why commercial connectivity is critical for communications at the Arctic Circle, HERE.

The post Space Symposium 2023—Why COMSATCOM capabilities are needed at the North and South Poles appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Put plainly, the demonstration conducted by ThinKom, SES, and Hughes effectively illustrated the ability for an end satellite user to seamlessly roam between satellite services originating in different orbits and leveraging different frequency bands.

To learn more about why this multi-orbit and multi-band capability is becoming increasingly essential for U.S. military users, we reached out to Ben Pigsley, the Senior Vice President of Defense Networks at SES Space & Defense.

During our discussion with Ben, we asked about the trends driving the U.S. military to embrace commercial satellite communications (COMSATCOM) from multiple orbits, the maturity and availability of multi-orbit and multi-band satellite services, and what both the government and satellite industry need to do to make this capability readily available for the warfighter.

Government Satellite Report: Can you define multi-band satellite for our readers? How is it different from multi-orbit satellite?

Ben Pigsley: Simply put, when two or more satellites are operating in different earth orbits – such as Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) or Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) – and are operating in the same frequency band, it is considered multi-orbit. When two or more satellites are operating in the same orbit – such as GEO, MEO, or Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) – but are operating in different frequency bands – such as Ku, Ka, C, or X – it is considered multi-band.

Both scenarios offer an added level of resiliency to a satellite network if you have the ground equipment to take advantage of the capability.

GSR: Why is multi-band satellite capacity crucial for the U.S. military? Why is multi-orbit crucial? Why does the military need its satellite architecture to include both?

Ben Pigsley: Today, the military is facing near-peer adversaries that have demonstrated their ability to disrupt, deny, and degrade our communications networks. In today’s environment, government networks are both congested and contested with deliberate and directed jamming, cyberattacks, and kinetic attacks.

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 U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).

GSR: What trends are we seeing – and what capabilities are we seeing from our adversaries – that make the creation of a multi-orbit, multi-band satellite architecture essential?

Ben Pigsley: I’ll go back to the fact that networks today are both congested and contested. Network congestion can cause unwanted disruptions due to what we refer to as “blue-on-blue” interference. This occurs when satellite transponders and networks are heavily loaded and one “friendly” network causes problems for another “friendly network” due to equipment malfunctions, improper equipment settings, and other unintentional actions.

“…increased resiliency in network design allows operations to continue either on another satellite in a different orbit, or on another satellite in a different band in the same orbit.” – Ben Pigsley

Contested commercial networks arise from adversaries with sophisticated, aggressive jamming techniques. In both cases, increased resiliency in network design allows operations to continue either on another satellite in a different orbit, or on another satellite in a different band in the same orbit.

GSR: What different elements or segments comprise the end-to-end network or infrastructure needed for effective multi-band and multi-orbit operation?

Ben Pigsley: Other than having the right space segment design, the most critical part of a highly resilient network is state-of-the-art ground terminals that can rapidly switch bands and orbits with minimal or no interaction from the operator.

Additionally, a sophisticated ground network infrastructure that incorporates a Software Defined – Wide Area Network (SD-WAN) is crucial. The addition of machine learning and artificial intelligence in the network are also key to the effective use of multi-band and multi-orbit networks.

GSR: Is the COMSATCOM industry ready to support multi-band and multi-orbit operation? What new technologies or equipment is necessary to enable this? When will that become available?

Ben Pigsley: Yes, the military’s industry partners are ready to support both multi-band and multi-orbit operations. In fact, leading operators like SES Space & Defense already provide these services using SD-WAN architectures delivering high-availability networks.

This is happening within all constellations — GEO, MEO, and LEO — supporting all types of government and military operations.

“Using the ICT Portal, military users can see the impact of network events and gain general situational awareness that can help key decision-makers make more data-driven, informed decisions.” – Ben Pigsley

It should be noted that ground terminal development has lagged the space segment development in this area. However, we see new terminal designs coming into the market every day that can take advantage of multi-band and multi-orbit operations.

GSR: Have there been any exciting advancements or tests done recently that show multi-band, multi-orbit capability may soon be on the horizon?

Ben Pigsley: We began testing and demonstrating multi-band and multi-orbit network designs in 2021. We implemented our designs with key customers at the end of 2022 and we continue to gather availability and performance statistics to help us make informed decisions on improvements to our networks.

Additionally, we’ve developed a customer portal – the ICT Portal – that is capable of tracking network performance in real time.  This capability enables our customers to see their networks in real time and make informed decisions on network loading. Using the ICT Portal, military users can see the impact of network events and gain general situational awareness that can help key decision-makers make more data-driven, informed decisions.

GSR: What can the government do to speed up the development of multi-band and multi-orbit capability from the COMSATCOM industry?

Ben Pigsley: I think the government is headed in the right direction with new requirements like SATCOM as a Managed Service (SaaMS), which does not specify specific orbits or frequency bands.  This allows industry to come up with creative solutions, which will likely include multi-orbit and multi-band offerings.

“In today’s environment, government networks are both congested and contested with deliberate and directed jamming, cyberattacks, and kinetic attacks. Both multi-orbit and multi-band network solutions offer an elevated level of resiliency and increase availability to government customers.” – Ben Pigsley

My suggestion is to continue and increase government interaction with industry so that future government requirements are clearly understood by industry.

GSR: What role can systems integrators and managed service providers play in delivering multi-band and multi-orbit implementations?

Ben Pigsley: Multi-band and multi-orbit networks require coordination and cooperation within industry. The most effective multi-orbit and multi-band network designs will include integrated solutions from multiple satellite operators, multiple terminal manufacturers, and multiple terrestrial network providers.

Industry can define ways to automate “roaming” from network to network, including orbits and frequencies, and develop system interfaces to orchestrate provisioning, operations, and billing of services. This type of coordination and cooperation can happen with both operators and integrators.

The post The Importance of Multi-Orbit, Multi-Band COMSATCOM for the DoD appeared first on SES Space and Defense.