During a recent Mitchell Institute Schriever Spacepower Forum, Gen. Kevin P. Chilton (Ret.) pointed out to Gen. David D. Thompson, Vice Chief of Space Operations at the Space Force, that space has shifted away from being a benign domain to an extremely competitive operating environment. In response to how the force is maturing as an organization and responding to the level of activity in the domain, Gen. Thompson said, “We are very much clearly in the next chapter of the Space Force…[Now] the mission of the Space Force is to deliver on the capabilities and the promises that we’ve made as part of the establishment.”

Gen. Thompson explained that the Space Force is indeed responding to the changes in the space domain by having a combat-ready force with advanced testing, training, and the ability to deliver warfighting capabilities. Gen. Thompson attributes a lot of this forward momentum to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, Frank Calvelli, who was appointed to his position last year.

“He has brought us perspective and insight, and [has driven] a real change to how we look at space acquisition,” said Gen. Thompson. “[Calvelli is] focusing on simplifying, delivering, and meeting our promises in terms of the capabilities we deliver on time and on cost.”

Part of delivering those capabilities is the continuous development and deployment of a resilient space architecture, a key priority that Space Force leadership has been focusing on since the branch’s founding. Gen. Chilton asked Gen. Thompson about how the Space Force has been approaching the development of its architecture in a way that can withstand a possible “first-mover” strike by an adversary. Gen. Thompson explained that a proliferated architecture is where the answer resides.

“I would say distribution and proliferation in all of its elements,” said Gen. Thompson. “We certainly think about proliferated architectures in a very narrow sense, like having a large number of satellites in one orbital regime. [We must] distribute those capabilities across multiple regimes, which means that an adversary – if they’re going to attack you in space – has to have a very sophisticated and synchronized means of attack.”

Another approach that Gen. Thompson believes can eliminate strategic surprises from adversaries is to adopt a “new understanding” of space domain awareness. “[We must be] truly thinking more carefully about what it means to fully understand what’s happening in the domain, especially a direct-focused perspective on space domain awareness,” said Gen. Thompson. “As the human race continues to expand out into the solar system, the moon, and beyond, we believe our responsibility is to understand what’s happening in the domain.”

A critical component of being one step ahead of an adversary in the space domain, according to Gen. Thompson, is having a level of resiliency that will ensure that warfighters – across all services – can continue their operations in cases of degradation or denial in the space environment. “I’m not one who believes that degradation or denial of use of space will occur broadly and over a long period of time,” said Gen. Thompson. “But understanding where the reliance is, and how [the military services] might operate in that environment, is the first piece of it.”

This rapidly changing threat environment that Gen. Thompson describes is something that the industry has taken notice of and has been testing services and solutions specifically designed to promote military resiliency in the space domain.

As Gen. Thompson pointed out, there is currently a need among all military branches to have continued and uninterrupted delivery of space-based services, especially during adversarial attempts to degrade or deny space capabilities. For example, if an adversary were to successfully jam or degrade a satellite’s ability to provide connectivity to warfighters on the ground, it is imperative that the military be able to roll connectivity and services over to another satellite, in order to have uninterrupted and unaffected operations.

In March of this year, SES, Hughes, and ThinKom, came together to test space capabilities that could transform how the military strategically leverages SATCOM services. The three companies held a demonstration that effectively illustrated the ability of an end satellite user to seamlessly roam between satellite services originating in different orbits and leveraging different frequency bands. This verified capability speaks directly to the DoD’s need for the distribution of services across “multiple orbital regimes,” as Gen. Thompson described.

According to Ben Pigsley, SVP of Defense Networks at SES Space & Defense, “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.”

When asked about SES Space & Defense’s successful multi-orbit testing and how the DoD could leverage those capabilities, he said, “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…The military’s industry partners are ready to support both multi-band and multi-orbit operations.”

Click the video below to watch the Spacepower Forum in its entirety.

The post Gen. Thompson: Space Force transitioning to combat-ready phase appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

And these advancements do not stop at the air domain. According to Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, Dr. John Plumb, China is gearing up and developing a wartime space architecture and is tirelessly working towards having the capability to deny U.S. offensive and defensive actions in orbit.

Dr. Plumb recently sat down with Gen. Kevin P. Chilton (Ret.) during a special Mitchell Institute Schreiver Spacepower Forum, where he discussed China’s pacing threat in the space domain, our nation’s expanding awareness of the threats adversaries pose in space, and how commercial satellite solutions are advancing the military’s mission of deploying a resilient space architecture.

China as a pacing threat
Dr. Plumb made it crystal clear from the start that one of the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) primary concerns is keeping pace with the threat China poses in the space domain. And though this adversarial threat is a top concern for the DoD, Dr. Plumb explained it has actually catalyzed a synergy within the Department which is allowing all agencies to push in the same direction as it pertains to protecting U.S. interests in space.

“Where we are now is that the entire government understands the value of space,” said Dr. Plumb. “And the Department and the [Intelligence Community] are really focused together on the threat, which kind of pulls people along.”

Dr. Plumb also pointed out that adversaries like China and Russia have had years to observe how the U.S. military relies heavily on space as a lever arm. And though this type of adversarial reconnaissance and information gathering is not new, Dr. Plumb says that the adversaries’ aggression and pace of technological advancement are new.

“China has really accelerated their space systems…And it’s a wartime architecture…We have to be able to detect and attribute hostile acts in space.” -Dr. John Plumb

“They’ve been working hard on it,” said Dr. Plumb. “We know [China and Russia] have direct-ascent ASAT missiles…and continue to find different ways to try to come after our systems. We have to be ready to defend against that. And I think we’re making some good strides there.”

He explained that to counteract the advances China and Russia are making in the space domain, the DoD must focus on the mission assurance of U.S. space systems. “The warfighter absolutely needs our space systems to be able to fight,” said Dr. Plumb. “So how do we assure those systems? We have two main lines of effort. One is resilience…And the second part is we have to be able to defend our systems against these counter-space threats.”

He then stated that China is currently developing a “wartime architecture.” “And they’re doing it in a much different way,” said Dr. Plumb.

Decades ago when the U.S. began construction on its space architecture, space was primarily viewed as a benign, neutral domain. According to Dr. Plumb, that is no longer the case in today’s environment.

“China has really accelerated their space systems with a massive number of satellites going up every year,” explained Dr. Plumb. “And it’s a wartime architecture…So when we talk about how we’re going to defend U.S. national security interests against both space and counter-space threats… we have to be able to detect and attribute hostile acts in space…You have to know what’s happening in your domain.”

Harnessing industry to produce resiliency
Dr. Plumb told a brief story about how 10 years ago the DoD briefed then-Vice President Biden on how the Department was working towards achieving a resilient architecture. Fast forward a decade later, when the DoD tells now-President Biden that they are working to create a resilient architecture, the President replies that he was told that 10 years ago and that the government “needs to get going.”

One viable solution to advance the mission of deploying a resilient space architecture, according to Dr. Plumb, is the commercial industry. “The explosion of available commercial services for space clearly increases resilience for some mission sets,” explained Dr. Plumb. “SATCOM is a perfect example. There’s a tremendous amount of SATCOM bandwidth available. We can buy that kind of bandwidth…Our resilience plan should include the ability to access different commercially available pieces when needed.”

What Dr. Plumb says is true. The latest next-generation SATCOM technologies emerging out of the commercial satellite industry have proven they can fulfill the DoD’s mission set of achieving resiliency in space. However, if COMSATCOM and MILSATCOM solutions are going to be leveraged in tandem as part of a joint satellite architecture, the military needs a way to see its entire network on a single pane of glass. It also needs the ability to easily and seamlessly move communications and workloads across a multi-band and multi-orbit satellite ecosystem.

“The ICT Portal will be a window that will enable visibility into the network’s capabilities, how it is built, and how it is operating. This will deliver complete resiliency to military networks, and support the DoD’s JADC2 initiative.” -Ram Rao, SES Space & Defense

Solutions like the SES Space & Defense (SESSD) ICT Portal, a recently-released capability that can enable military users to see their entire network – including both space and ground assets – on a single pane of glass, have demonstrated they can support the DoD’s mission of staying ahead of the adversary advances, while also denying their capabilities in the domain. And recent testing with satellite antenna and terminal providers have illustrated the ability to roam seamlessly across a multi-band, multi-orbit satellite architecture.

According to SESSD’s Director of Business Development Engineering, Ram Rao, “The ICT Portal will be a window that will enable visibility into the network’s capabilities, how it is built, and how it is operating,” said Rao. “This will deliver complete resiliency to military networks, and support the DoD’s JADC2 initiative.”

To watch Dr. John Plumb’s interview in full, click the video below:

The post Asst. Secretary of Defense Dr. John Plumb on keeping pace in space with China appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

During the event, Gen. Dickinson discussed what is required in order for the U.S. to gain and maintain space superiority, the distinction between space situational awareness and space domain awareness, and how the future transition of space traffic management to the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) will enhance the Department of Defense’s (DoD) deterrence and defense capabilities in the arena.

What is space power?
Gen. Dickinson kicked off the forum by outlining the definition of space power. He explained, “Military space power exists to preserve freedom of, access to, and freedom of action in space.” According to Gen. Dickinson, these are the priorities of all joint and combined space forces in the U.S. military. And this freedom in the domain is only gained and maintained through space superiority, which is the primary objective of space warfare.

When space superiority is achieved, it means that freedom of action exists in the domain, while simultaneously denying dynamic freedom of action to the adversary. “It is designed to give us a strategic, operational, and tactical advantage” said Gen. Dickinson. “Space superiority requires coordinated offensive and defensive operations…Importantly, offensive and defensive operations are conducted across all three segments of the space architecture: ground, link, and space.”

Gen. Dickinson then touched upon the fact that achieving and maintaining space superiority requires the presence and support from SPACECOM’s joint allies and partners in the domain. “Our coalition approach affords us redundant capability and creates dilemmas for our adversaries,” said Gen. Dickinson. “In this way, space superiority is a critical component of integrated deterrence. Threats to U.S. and allied interests in space are substantial and – I think we can all agree – growing.”

He explained that U.S. adversaries are prepared and ready to contest the space domain. Gen. Dickinson pointed to China and Russia as prime examples of near-peer competitors that are rapidly developing and demonstrating space and counterspace capabilities that can deny the U.S. and its’ allies the advantages derived from space.

“In response to the rapidly changing strategic environment, U.S. Space Command is leveraging today’s space power in new ways to achieve greater effects,” said Gen. Dickinson. “Because of the speed of competition with China and Russia, I cannot wait for new capabilities over the next five years. I’m looking for what is good enough today, that I can use right now.”

Situational awareness vs. domain awareness
Gen. Dickinson then pivoted to the recent memorandum of agreement (MoA) between the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Defense on space traffic management. This MoA is the first step in transitioning space situational awareness and traffic management missions from the DoD to the DoC. As a result, SPACECOM will be able to focus its resources on enhanced space domain awareness for space superiority.

But what exactly is the difference between space situational awareness and space domain awareness? According to Gen. Dickinson, situational awareness in space is the high-level proliferation tracking of in-orbit satellites and other space assets. Domain awareness in space involves a more granular, strategic scrutiny of assets that are of interest to SPACECOM and the DoD.

“If I had to use an analogy, space situational awareness is a little bit like doing air traffic control,” said Gen. Dickinson. “Compare that to space domain awareness, that’s a couple of steps beyond that, in terms of being able to identify characteristics more closely, more accurately…and understanding the characterization of what’s happening on orbit.”

Gen. Dickinson explained that in 2019 the DoD tracked nearly 25,000 pieces of debris objects in orbit. These included old and defunct satellites, rocket bodies, etc. Today, there are about 48,000. “You can deduce very easily how complicated [space traffic] has become, how congested it has become. So we are open arms, welcoming, working hand-in-hand with Department of Commerce…on space traffic management.”

Commercial partnerships within SPACECOM
As Commander of SPACECOM, Gen. Dickinson is responsible for meeting capacity and capability challenges in order to deter and defeat any adversaries that pose the U.S. and its allies harm. “And we don’t have the luxury to wait for capabilities…I think we all agree our strategic competitors are not waiting for that,” said Gen. Dickinson.

He then explained how critical commercial mission partners are to the DoD’s mission of deterring and defending space assets in the domain, hence why the DoD has two commercial integration cells: one at Vandenberg Space Force Base and one at Schriever Space Force Base.

At Vandenberg SFB, commercial entities have operations consoles that are side-by-side with military operators, exchanging information in near real-time. At Schriever SFB, there is a commercial operations cell that supports the Joint Task Force-Space Defense (JTF-SD), enabling it with real-time synergy and information exchange between owner-operators and tactical users.

“This information exchange ensures that our industry partners and our operators can rapidly and accurately respond to anomalies on-orbit, share valuable lessons, and improve our overall readiness,” said Gen. Dickinson.

To watch the Mitchell Institute’s entire discussion with Gen. Dickinson, click HERE.

The post SPACECOM’s Gen. Dickinson examines the path to U.S. space superiority appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

From being able to transmit decision-making intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) data, to providing connectivity to warfighters in off-grid environments, the U.S. has countless, highly critical capabilities and solutions that solely depend on a well-defended and uninterrupted space architecture.

This sentiment was recently shared by Dr. Christopher Scolese, the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), at a Schriever Spacepower Forum.

“The world is changing,” said Dr. Scolese. “We need information faster, and we need to deliver it quicker.” He explained that space is no longer the uncontested domain that it once was. From cyber threats to adversarial anti-satellite mission tests (ASMT), space is quickly becoming the next, modern battlefield.

“We have even more denied areas,” said Dr. Scolese. “We previously have been operating in a more permissive environment. And that has now gone away.” Nevertheless, Dr. Scolese made it clear that his agency is committed to supplying rapid and timely ISR when it is needed, especially to the U.S. Space Force and the U.S. Space Command. “We’re going to find ways so that we can be efficient. We can make that happen very effectively.”

“Buy what we can”

One resource that Dr. Scolese views as a possible solution to NRO needs is the commercial space industry. “Buy what we can, build what we must,” he said. Dr. Scolese explained that the NRO is seeking to expand on its use of capabilities provided by industry. “We are looking for more commercial services,” he said. “What it comes down to is that the commercial market has really grown, and we’re seeing a lot of capability out there that commercial companies are providing.”

According to Dr. Scolese, one major benefit from his, “Buy what we can,” motto is the affordability factor. He explained that emerging commercial solutions are providing agencies like the NRO with an opportunity to acquire critical data “at a lower cost.”

He went on to say that the data the commercial industry provides gives the NRO the ability and advantage to share more information faster. “The warfighter may not need the exquisite imagery,” explained Dr. Scolese. “But they need to know what’s there. And commercial gives us that opportunity.”

Dr. Scolese isn’t the only high-ranking government official who sees the value in leveraging commercial space assets, solutions, and capabilities. Top leadership within U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) have recently been echoing a similar sentiment.

Last June, former NRO Deputy Director and current Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, Frank Calvelli, also explained how the, “Buy what we can,” mentality can benefit the U.S. military. “I also think that if commercial has a capability…you’re not going to get any faster than taking advantage of what you could just buy off the shelf as opposed to develop,” he said.

At another Spacepower Forum this past January, the U.S. Space Force’s Lt Gen B. Chance Saltzman also agreed that deploying off-the-shelf commercial capabilities would benefit the DoD.

“With the technology that’s being employed, I think we’re going to be able to leverage commercial capabilities to accomplish a subset of our missions,” explained Lt Gen Saltzman. “And as we distribute those up, not only does it free up resources for us, but it creates a more resilient architecture because of the number of different places and pathways where we can get the information we need.”

But the commercial satellite industry can do more than offer ISR data and imaging at a discount. Commercial satellite providers can also deliver communications and connectivity that can protect military networks from near-peer adversaries.

Creating resiliency

Having a resilient space architecture was another topic that Dr. Scolese touched upon at the forum. He explained the critical role a resilient space architecture would play for the defense of U.S. assets and capabilities in the domain.

“A resilient proliferated, architecture gives us faster revisit times and a more responsive system,” he explained. “So, it gives us greater capability. It gives us more options to deliver what is needed to whoever is needed…We’ll have more capability to deliver more flexibility among our systems to get the information that’s needed.”

The development and deployment of a resilient space architecture is another theme top military leadership have been discussing throughout the past year. Last February, Space Force’s Chief of Space Operations, Gen John W. “Jay” Raymond explained, “We have got to shift the space architecture from a handful of exquisite capabilities that are very hard to defend to a more robust, more resilient architecture by design.”

Much like the resources industry provides for ISR and warfighting capabilities, the commercial sector can also provide the required assets and solutions that would build out a hardened and resilient space architecture.

In a recent interview with the Government Satellite Report, SES Space and Defense’s Jon Bennett, Vice President, Government Affairs, Marketing and Corporate Communications discussed the important role commercial capabilities play in military space architectures.

“A benefit of leveraging commercial…is the security, resiliency, and redundancy it provides,” said Mr. Bennett. “When you’re able to complicate an enemy’s targeting calculus, that ensures that the built-in security features of your assets can mitigate threats at the highest level.” He went on to explain that if the U.S. doesn’t take advantage and leverage commercial solutions and capabilities, “we are certainly putting ourselves at an extreme disadvantage to our adversaries.”

Click the video below to watch Dr. Scolese’s interview in full:

The post NRO Director on the benefits of leveraging commercial space assets appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Before joining the Air Force, Mr. Calvelli’s three-decade career includes experience in national security, space acquisitions and operations, and leadership at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), where he served for eight years as the Principal Deputy Director. During the forum, Mr. Calvelli sat down with Gen. Kevin P. Chilton (Ret.) to discuss his top priorities for space acquisition and the role the commercial sector will play in the military’s space operations moving forward.

Calvelli’s Five Priorities

To Mr. Calvelli, there is no higher priority than space. “Space is just an amazing enabler for the country,” he said. “It supports the nation’s economy. It supports our military. It supports all the services in the department.” With great enthusiasm, he said that being appointed assistant secretary is “an amazing opportunity,” and that he looks forward to fulfilling his commitment to help set the direction for space acquisitions.

As he begins his journey at the Air Force, expect Mr. Calvelli to draw upon his time at the NRO for inspiration in his new role. “My hope is to bring my experience from the NRO to the department, and to really help them out where I can in terms of space acquisition,” he said.

One part of Mr. Calvelli’s past experience that he will carry over to SAF/SQ includes five priorities that he devised during his time at NRO: speed, resiliency, architecture integration with other domains, project management discipline, and space and ground systems integration.

“It’s really important that space is always available to the nation, no matter what the environment is.” -Assistant Secretary Frank Calvelli

First, Mr. Calvelli emphasized the importance of advancing speed in space acquisitions. “And why is that important?” he asked rhetorically. “It’s going to allow us to modernize our service and allow us to stay technologically ahead of our adversaries. And if necessary, it’s going to allow us to deter, defend, or defeat any adversary.” According to Mr. Calvelli, in order to maintain that technological advantage, there has to be a real sense of urgency to get new capabilities into the hands of warfighters faster.

He also highlighted that the U.S. needs to bolster its space architectures by making them more resilient, a similar sentiment shared by Gen. John Raymond, Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, and Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) at recent Spacepower Forums.

Mr. Calvelli explained that a resilient space architecture is critical, because the military depends on space in both times of peace and conflict. “It’s really important that space is always available to the nation, no matter what the environment is,” he said.

Integrating space architectures into other warfighting domains is another priority that Mr. Calvelli plans to focus on in his new position. He explained that since space is a critical enabler of other domain capabilities, it is vital that the military has the ability to integrate space with land, air and sea, which will give all warfighters an advantage over adversarial threats.

“I also think that if commercial has a capability…you’re not going to get any faster than taking advantage of what you could just buy off the shelf as opposed to develop.” -Assistant Secretary Frank Calvelli

According to Mr. Calvelli, one piece of experience from the NRO that he plans on implementing at SAF/SQ is fostering a department culture that runs on project management discipline. “I think there’s no better way to actually get some speed than actually delivering on your commitments and actually execute your programs on cost and schedule,” he explained. “My fourth priority is to really drive project management discipline across the service.”

Mr. Calvelli went on to say that the department seems “to have a disconnect with space and ground systems.” For his fifth priority as assistant secretary, he wants to ensure that space and ground systems come together as an integrated system, “so that when we launch the systems, we can take full advantage of them.”

Executing Priorities by Leveraging Industry

When asked how Mr. Calvelli viewed the commercial sector’s role in delivering space capabilities to the U.S. Department of Defense, he responded by saying that industry can play a pivotal role in advancing the speed of acquisition.

“I think it’s an exciting time for the country, an exciting opportunity for anybody who’s involved with space programs, whether you’re in the Intelligence Community, the DoD, at NASA, or commercial,” said Mr. Calvelli. “I also think that if commercial has a capability…you’re not going to get any faster than taking advantage of what you could just buy off the shelf as opposed to develop.”

And indeed, the commercial space industry is currently booming with new technologies, capabilities, and solutions that could execute the promise of Mr. Calvelli’s SAF/SQ speed of acquisition priority, but it can also meet his other priorities, such as space architecture resiliency and ground/space system integration.

This is evident with SES’ newest geostationary (GEO) Ka-band satellite, SES-17, which recently became fully operational with readied capabilities to support multi-orbit resiliency for military space architectures. The technologies inherent in SES-17 can enable the military to seamlessly roll communications between MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM resources at GEO and Medium Earth orbit (MEO). This groundbreaking capability will provide resilient and hardened SATCOM defense against adversaries that try to deny or degrade mission-critical comms. It also allows flexibility if mission requirements were to change.

According to SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Mobility and Integrated Solutions, Rashid Neighbors, “Ultimately, our intent is to provide the U.S. Government with highly resilient, multi-orbit hybrid satellite solutions. While the spacecraft technology in SES-17…is fundamentally different, the ground system will be integrated through…ARC. This allows our government customers to focus on their mission and applications and let SES Space and Defense worry about how the transport works.”

To learn more about SES-17, click HERE.

Click the video below to watch the Spacepower Forum in its entirety.

The post U.S. Air Force Assistant Secretary Calvelli shares his top 5 space acquisition priorities appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

SES-17’s coverage area makes it an important satellite for delivering mission-critical connectivity for the military. According to Amit Katti, Director of Systems Engineering at SES Space and Defense, “The satellite will…provide coverage…over the Americas, the Caribbean and the Atlantic Ocean…[as well as] an area that is of incredible importance to the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), delivering services to parts of the Arctic Circle.”

But there is more to SES-17 than its important coverage area.

The SES-17 satellite is a significant development in satellite technology, featuring a fully digital payload powered by the most powerful digital transponder processor in orbit, and nearly 200 user beams capable of delivering incredible throughputs and bandwidth to users. But the launch of SES-17 also illustrates how the commercial satellite industry has evolved its solutions to meet the unique challenges facing our modern military.

More resiliency and assuredness through multi-orbit communications
Today’s military no longer has the massive technological advantage that it used to hold in space. Our near-peer adversaries have made significant headways into the space domain and turned what was once a benign domain into an austere, warfighting domain. Some of our adversaries have even actively demonstrated the ability to leverage kinetic attacks against satellites in orbit in an effort to deny or degrade the satellite networks that have long given America’s warfighters an edge on the battlefield.

“Having a diversity of satellites allows for optimizing the best solution set while making the network more robust.” – Rick Lober, Hughes Defense

“Our ability to integrate space assets and our force capabilities at speed is a distinct advantage we have today. China and Russia recognize this and have designed means to deny us these capabilities,” explained General Curtis Michael “Mike” Scaparrotti, a retired United States Army four-star general who last served as the Commander of United States European Command, in a recent interview with the Government Satellite Report. “…we know they have developed abilities to deny operations for periods of time by electronic jamming or cyber-attacks, and that they have tested both terrestrial and space systems to destroy satellites.”

In this new environment, it’s increasingly essential that the military has the means and ability to rapidly and seamlessly transition mission-critical data from a satellite that is being denied to another that is capable of delivering essential communications.

Being able to seamlessly roll communications from a satellite in one orbit to another satellite in a different orbit can help to further complicate an adversary’s targeting calculus and make it even harder to deny or degrade our military’s communications. This is also essential should missions requirements change, and should the military need either the higher throughputs and lower latency of satellites in medium Earth orbit (MEO), or the larger coverage area of satellites in GEO.

As Hughes Defense’s Rick Lober recently told the Government Satellite Report, “Having a diversity of satellites allows for optimizing the best solution set while making the network more robust.”

And this isn’t just an idea being pushed by the commercial satellite industry. It’s the current goal of the DoD. As U.S. Space Force Chief of Space Operations, Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond, explained to attendees at a recent Mitchell Spacepower Forum, “We have got to shift the space architecture from a handful of exquisite capabilities that are very hard to defend to a more robust, more resilient architecture by design.”

But what does this need for a multi-orbit, resilient, and robust satellite network architecture have to do with SES-17?

“With a managed service model for satellite services, the government would always have the latest commercial technologies and solutions available to them. With systems like ARC in place, they’ll also have the added resiliency and capability of being able to leverage a multi-orbit constellation.” – Rashid Neighbors, SES Space and Defense

SES-17 is the first step in the integration of SES’s multi-orbit network. The spacecraft’s digital payload is supported by the Adaptive Resource Control (ARC) software, making it interoperable with SES’s second-generation O3b mPOWER satellite communications system in MEO, which is set to launch in the coming months.

The ARC software opens the door to more seamlessly transitioning satellite communications from the SES constellation of HTS satellites at GEO – including SES-17 – to the next-generation MEO satellite communications system, O3b mPOWER. This means that – should the bandwidth and latency requirements of the mission change, or in the unlikely event that a satellite service is denied by an adversary – SES could quickly and seamlessly switch between satellite services from GEO and MEO to meet the military’s requirement.

“Ultimately, our intent is to provide the U.S. Government with highly resilient, multi-orbit hybrid satellite solutions,” explained Rashid Neighbors, Vice President, Mobility and Integrated Solutions at SES Space and Defense. “While the spacecraft technology in SES-17 and the O3b mPOWER satellites is fundamentally different, the ground system will be integrated through…ARC. This allows our government customers to focus on their mission and applications and let SES Space and Defense worry about how the transport works.”

SES-17, and its support of the ARC system, make the dream of an integrated, multi-orbit satellite network architecture a reality. But it also enables another important shift – allowing the military to evolve away from the archaic and inefficient way that it has traditionally acquired satellite commercial satellite capacity.

A satellite “built for managed services”
In this new satellite reality, where multi-orbit commercial satellite services join military satellite communications (MILSATCOM) resources to build an integrated architecture, the traditional method of leasing satellite capacity on the spot market is no longer effective.

In this new reality – where military communications may need to be moved from a MILSATCOM satellite in GEO to commercial satellite service from MEO or LEO at a moment’s notice to meet mission requirements or provide mission assurance – the traditional methods of leasing satellite capacity are simply too slow.

The ARC system, and other technologies that make SES-17 more “software-enabled,” have ushered in a new generation of satellite that is, as Katti coined, “Built for managed services.” Meaning that the military and government can acquire satellite communications as a service from commercial providers, who, in turn, deliver an end-to-end solution when and where the military requires it.

“Our ability to integrate space assets and our force capabilities at speed is a distinct advantage we have today. China and Russia recognize this and have designed means to deny us these capabilities.” – General Scaparrotti, U.S. Army

Acquiring commercial satellite as a managed service ensures that the government and military are always leveraging the latest satellite technologies, and always have the requisite hardware and terrestrial infrastructure necessary to utilize it.

“With a managed service model for satellite services, the government would always have the latest commercial technologies and solutions available to them,” explained Neighbors. “With systems like ARC in place, they’ll also have the added resiliency and capability of being able to leverage a multi-orbit constellation.”

While the news of SES-17 becoming fully operational is certainly exciting, it’s not nearly as exciting as what SES-17 and other future satellites signify for our government and military. SES-17, the O3b mPOWER service, and other next-generation satellite solutions illustrate a clear solution to the challenge of a more austere space domain. They also signify a path forward towards a more integrated MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM satellite architecture that will be more assured, robust, and resilient to meet the needs of our future force.

To learn more about SES-17, click HERE.

Featured image courtesy of Thales Alenia Space.

The post SES-17 Fully Operational – Offering Glimpse into the Future of Military Satellite Networks appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Last month at a special Schriever Spacepower Forum, Congressman Jim Cooper, U.S. Representative for Tennessee’s 5^th congressional district, sat down with Gen. Kevin P. Chilton (Ret.) to discuss the growing adversarial threat in space, how the U.S. needs to reestablish its deterrence capability in the domain, as well as the role commercial industry should play in the process.

U.S. Space Force as a deterrent force

To open the forum, Gen. Chilton asked Rep. Cooper about his thoughts on the Biden administration’s release of its U.S. space priorities framework and if he agreed with its positioning of the U.S. Space Force as a “support force” rather than a “deterrence and warfighting force.”

According to Rep. Cooper, he is on the side of deterrence. He stated that the U.S. should be able to have warfighting capabilities to defend its assets in space, while simultaneously projecting a strong deterrent presence that would prevent U.S. adversaries from making aggressive moves in the domain.

“Just few years ago, we’d let our deterrence capability in space go almost to zero,” said Rep. Cooper. “Which is pretty sad.” In his eyes, the space domain is the ultimate “infrastructure of infrastructure,” which the U.S. must be prepared to secure and defend.

He went on to explain that the country’s near-peer rivals have not delayed their technological innovations in the space arena. In areas where the U.S. military has been languishing, U.S. adversaries have made strides in their advancements. “We largely squandered that advantage,” said Rep. Cooper. “We’ve got a lot of catch-up work to do to reestablish deterrence.”

Reestablishing space dominance and deterrence

Rep. Cooper pointed to the ever-shrinking number of American STEM graduates as one of the main contributing factors to the country’s authoritative decline in space. “We gave up on much of big science,” he said. “Without a technological lead, our nation is doomed.”

He did acknowledge that there are signs that STEM is making a comeback in the workforce, and has hope that will give the nation a boost in reestablishing its technological lead. “We’re still head-and-shoulders above other militaries,” said Rep. Cooper. “But we’ve got to make sure that we’re always challenging ourselves to be the best. And sometimes I worry that we get distracted, or we rest on our laurels.”

As for the actual domain itself, one area that he believes could be a starting point to projecting a deterrent dominance in space is by rethinking the assets and satellites that the U.S. puts in in-orbit, explaining that they have to be more survivable and durable, and must have extremely robust capabilities.

“We got to do whatever it takes to have a severe capability,” said Rep. Cooper. “And that includes not only extraordinary defense, but also an offensive capability.”

Commercial sector can bridge the technological gap

Rep. Cooper noted that because threats in space are becoming more ubiquitous, the U.S. needs to prioritize the protection and security of its in-orbit critical systems. “We got to have a resilient, survivable architecture that can meet all our needs,” he explained.

He expressed concern around the speed of acquisition within the government and military, as well as emphasizing his concerns on the “quality” of acquisition. “We need to think about what really works, and what really can give us that 10-to-20-year leap…that our Pentagon needs to really meet and beat any other threat and establish deterrence.”

Rep. Cooper applauded the innovative technologies that are coming out of the commercial sector and expressed how he wishes that the U.S. government would match that level of innovation. “The first step is for the military to catch up with the private sector, because so much of the innovation has come from innovative small companies.”

“It’s incredible innovation that’s currently underway,” he said. “It’s innovation that we could currently be using with our Space Force and Air Force and other branches of the military.”

This sentiment of leveraging the commercial sector in order to advance the capabilities and solutions that are being employed by the U.S. military has lately been echoed by top military officials at the Pentagon.

Last January, the U.S. Space Force’s Chief of Space Operations, Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond, spoke at a Mitchell Spacepower Forum where he emphasized the importance of establishing resiliency throughout critical systems in space and how the commercial sector has to play a role in making it happen.

“We have got to shift the space architecture from a handful of exquisite capabilities that are very hard to defend to a more robust, more resilient architecture by design,” said Gen. Raymond.

“But it’s not just about innovation. Integrating COMSATCOM services into an integrated MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM satellite architecture will have the added bonus of baking resiliency into the military’s networks.”

At another forum held last November, the U.S. Space Force’s Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman also agreed that the satellite architecture currently in space is unprepared for combat capability and capacity, and he pointed to the commercial industry as a major player in not only providing the technologies, but also creating a resilient space architecture for the U.S. military.

“With the technology that’s being employed, I think we’re going to be able to leverage commercial capabilities to accomplish a subset of our missions,” explained Lt. Gen Saltzman. “And as we distribute those up, not only does it free up resources for us, but it creates a more resilient architecture because of the number of different places and pathways where we can get the information we need.”

It’s clear that the U.S. military needs to begin to source these commercial technologies as soon as possible in order to regain dominance in the space domain, as well as play a deterrent role against aggressive near-peer competitors. As Rep. Cooper put it, “We need the capability now. We needed it yesterday. And I’m worried that we’re not there yet.”

Click the video below to watch the Spacepower Forum in its entirety.

The post Rep. Jim Cooper on reestablishing deterrence capabilities in the space domain appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

As Vice Chief of Space Operations, General Thompson is responsible for assisting the Chief of Space Operations, and organizing, training, and equipping space forces in the U.S. and overseas – integrating space policy guidance and coordinating space-related activities. He is a career space officer with assignments in operations, acquisition, research and development, and command.

Thompson opened the forum by expressing his excitement over the recent confirmations of U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall and Under Secretary Gina Ortiz Jones. According to Thompson, both Secretary Kendall and Under Secretary Jones have hit the ground running and are quickly facilitating the next phase of Space Force. “We’re excited they’re here and that civilian leadership is in place,” expressed Thompson.

Thompson then gave an update on where Space Force currently stands. He explained that year one of Space Force was focused on inventing the force, designing it, and getting it in place. Though there will be several more years of fully building out the force, Thompson proudly announced that the design and resourcing phase of establishing Space Force is complete.

Year two’s primary focus has been on the integration of the force. “We’ve taken some pretty aggressive and significant steps thus far,” said Thompson. He explained that “integration” includes integration of the force with the services, the combatant commands, and with partners and allies.

“They’re trailblazing the path for large-scale interservice transfer from those services into the Space Force. They’ve already begun that activity. And even as we speak, we are selecting up to about 350 others from that group, who will follow behind them once they trailblaze the path to that inter-service transfer.” – General David “DT” Thompson

The first step of the force’s integration is interservice transfer. The Space Force began with a large transfer of individuals from the U.S. Air Force, resulting in about 5,800 individuals in uniforms. In addition to bringing in candidates from the Air Force Academy, Space Force is also looking to bring in 50 interservice transfers from the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, and the Navy.

“They’re kind of our beta test,” said Thompson. “They’re trailblazing the path for large-scale interservice transfer from those services into the Space Force. They’ve already begun that activity. And even as we speak, we are selecting up to about 350 others from that group, who will follow behind them once they trailblaze the path to that inter-service transfer.”

In addition to manpower transfers, Thompson stated that Space Force is currently finalizing transfers of satellite communications, missions, and functions from the Army and the Navy.

Another recent and important milestone that Thompson highlighted was U.S. Space Force and U.S. Space Command sending elements to the United States Pacific Command’s (USPACOM) Pacific Sentry exercise. This step was key to understanding how the U.S. Space Force as a service, and U.S. Space Command as a combatant command, integrate, provide capabilities, and contribute to combatant commander operations and objectives. Both Space Force and Space Command sent one-star officers to the exercise to lead teams. According to Thompson, “I think it was incredibly productive, not just for our two organizations, but helping to inform the other combatant commands how we should proceed.”

Thompson also explained that Space Force is already deep into mil-to-mil connections with a host of countries. “They’ve reached out to us to look at how we develop and expand relationships, and how we better do in space, what the nation – and our allies and partners – have known how to do for decades in the air, on land, and at sea,” said Thompson.

Thompson further explained that these countries are not just “our tried-and-true and well-understood partners.” Space Force has had countries from South America and others in the Indo-Pacific who are interested in establishing some sort of a mil-to-mil relationship as it pertains to security in space.

To preface his update on Space Force’s proposed 2022 budget, Thompson explained that the main catalysts that drove the force’s creation were “the threats that we face, the fact that we now have to defend and protect those capabilities we provide, and to look at how we deny those capabilities to others.” He went on to say that Space Force brings “coherence, consistency, and unity to those activities inside of the Department of Defense.”

“In addition to protecting what we have today, we’re going to pivot toward architectures in the future that are designed to be resilient, robust, and deliver capabilities under attack.” – General David “DT” Thompson

Thompson then detailed Space Force’s priorities for the 2022 budget. He explained that the force is still working with Congress on final implementation. “Our priorities for that budget were to ensure that we can continue to provide the capabilities we already have,” said Thompson. “That includes everything from GPS to missile warning to satellite communications to supporting the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and others with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) in space. We’re really focusing on defending and protecting those capabilities so that they can continue to provide what they need under attack.”

He then discussed how Space Force is pivoting toward designs, systems, architectures, and forces that are designed to operate under threat. Thompson explained, “In addition to protecting what we have today, we’re going to pivot toward architectures in the future that are designed to be resilient, robust, and deliver capabilities under attack.”

Thompson said that Space Force must look at a host of ways to deny adverse use of space capabilities. He used the Indo-Pacific region as a prime example. “Left to its own devices, our forces in that part of the world – maritime, air, land, and others – will be under constant surveillance and monitoring by China over its space constellation,” said Thompson. “That poses a great threat to our joint forces and to our potential operations. We have to have a means by which to address them.”

According to Thompson, up until now, Space Force’s test and evaluation enterprise was focused on ensuring that its satellites operated effectively in the space domain. He explained that there now must be a shift to create a test and evaluation enterprise that tests and confirms that these capabilities operate under attack – similar to combat aircraft, combat action groups at sea, etc.

“We now have to build the enterprise that does that,” said Thompson. “We have to have more effective and detailed management of an entire suite of space professionals…we need all those enablers that need to support what is truly a military service, and more importantly, military forces in the domain.”

Featured image: Air Force Staff Sgt. Jamie Franco recites the oath of enlistment during a change of service ceremony at Osan Air Base, South Korea. Jamie and her husband, Frank, both made the jump from the Air Force to the Space Force. (Photo courtesy of Air Force Staff Sgt. Betty Chevalier.)

The post General Thompson Provides a Status Report for the U.S. Space Force appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Penney began the forum by explaining that today’s Air Force warfighters employ a fixed set of capabilities and software that were decided upon “at least five years ago, if not longer.” But to outpace U.S. adversaries, Penney argues that “warfighters must have the ability to tailor their systems and networks to optimize their force package for any given objective.”

One of the key findings of Penney’s study is that there is a need for rapid adaptation of “blue forces” in order to accelerate change. Through her research, she was able to identify three principles that would facilitate this adaptive change.

The first is speed. Adaptation must be faster than “old blue,” and outpace U.S. adversaries’ levels of speed and adaptation.

The second principle is that adaptive changes must provide real operational benefit. Penney stated, “It doesn’t have to be perfect. Just better.” She also explained that operational benefits must be relevant to the competitive context.

The final principle Penney’s research identified was that adaptive change must “impose confounding effects upon the adversary and confer resilient complexity to friendly forces.” Adaptive changes must block effective targeting of blue forces by U.S. adversaries.

Penney pointed out that future operational concepts like multi-domain or all domain operations and Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) seek to harness these principles. According to Penney, the key to harnessing these principles can be found in how the Air Force uses weapon systems and aircraft in “new and creative ways.”

Additionally, operational architectures, how the Air Force fights, what they have in the battle space, and their interdependencies will be the main points of adaptive advantage. Battle networks and data links are the base of how the Air Force fights. And, according to Penney, “This will only increase in the future.”

The Air Force will also need to be able to adapt its architectures faster than U.S. adversaries can attack them. And at the heart of this adaptation are mission integration tools.

Unfortunately, there is one major barrier standing in the way of fully realizing this adaptation and mission integration. Penney explained that the primary roadblock to being able to field these software tools is bureaucratic policy.

According to Penney the “color of money,” is the first bureaucratic policy barrier. She explained, “The funding categories are fundamentally ill suited for the pace of software development. The rate at which we obligate money for different activities, and the limitations we have on who can spend what for what prevents us from fielding software tools.”

We must address these bureaucratic barriers to fielding mission integration software tools that can provide our forces an adaptive advantage.” – Heather Penney

The second barrier is a lack of a dedicated system program office. Data links are typically managed as part of the overall capability package of the major weapon system. Penney explained, “They’re subjugated to those developmental and monetization timelines and program priorities. Too often, mission integration falls below the cut line.”

The final barrier to adaptive change is the need for data link architecture to reflect operational concepts. Because different kinds of data links are incompatible, there is a need to translate and optimize heterogenous connectivity. And due to network terminals being static, change is difficult.

To accelerate change, Penney argued, “We must address these bureaucratic barriers to fielding mission integration software tools that can provide our forces an adaptive advantage.”

Currently, the Air Force builds its network through systems engineering, which figures out how to best fit these fixed systems together. Instead, the Air Force should focus on moving towards a mission integration approach. According to Penney, there must be a shift from a “What can we do?” mindset, to a “What do we want to do?” approach. And the software tools that enable this adaptive approach already exist.

The first tool is DARPA’s System-of-systems Technology Integration Tool Chain for Heterogenous Electronic Systems (STITCHES) program. STITCHES enables message translation across different systems without changing message formatting or losing data, and it does not require a common standard.

Second, is DARPA’s Adapting Cross-domain Kill-webs (ACK) vision integration tool. ACK is a decision software that can analyze thousands of potential cross-domain kill webs to recommend the best mission-specific kill chain.

The last tool that Penney cited was DARPA’s Dynamic Network Adaptation for Mission Optimization (DyNAMO) program. DyNAMO is a program that automatically routes data to the user who needs it in real-time, and manages the flow and prioritization of data so that lower priority does not create a traffic jam for higher priority data.

Penney explained that the Air Force could start fielding these tools immediately, but bureaucratic policy roadblocks still stand in the way.

One bureaucratic policy barrier that Penney discussed was Congress’ creation of the Budget Activity 8 (BA 8) funding category, which is intended to capture the full lifecycle of software in one category. But, unfortunately, BA 8 cannot be applied to broad area announcements, which are critical contractual means for research agencies.

Another layer of complication is that research agencies are prevented from using any budget activity beyond BA 4. Essentially, research agencies like DARPA and the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) are constrained in how they can fund the development of software programs.

Mission integration tools also have challenges of their own pertaining to their transition to an operational community. Penney explained that the adaptive nature of these programs has been defined by General Counsel as research and development (R&D) or as Penney put it “3600 money.” She explained, “…3600 money cannot be programmed or obligated by an operational command like the Air Combat Command.”

In essence, the “color of money” is hindering speedy software development and is blocking these tools from reaching the warfighter. As a result, Air Force networks remain static and predictable, enabling the adversary’s strategy for victory.

No war was ever won by spreadsheet. It’s time we make the bureaucratic changes that will accelerate our operational change.” – Heather Penney

To remedy these challenges, Penney argued that research agencies need access to this funding, and they must have the option to do so using a broad area announcement.

Research agencies must also be able to streamline these software programs to the operational community “without necessarily requiring a full and open competition that extends the timeline to field and may not deliver the same code.”

Lastly, Penney called for operational commands to have a similar budget activity – like BA 8 – that enables them to “employ, sustain and evolve mission integration tools at the speed of software.”

“We need mission integration tools because they can connect and be the bridge between our legacy force, our current force, and our future force,” said Penney. “These mission integration tools can enable these kinds of operations today.”

She explained that the Air Force risks losing its ability to deter and win when in peer conflict due to bureaucratic policy. “We’re letting bean counters and administrative processes guide what we can field and how we can fight, not combat requirements,” said Penney. “No war was ever won by spreadsheet. It’s time we make the bureaucratic changes that will accelerate our operational change.”

To hear more from Heather Penney watch the Mitchell Institute event on-demand here!

The post How bureaucratic policy is enabling U.S. adversaries to outpace the Air Force appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

In her current role as the scientific advisor to the Air Force Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the Air Force, she stands at the intersection of where government and industry meet, and she is ready to get after identifying and analyzing the technical challenges facing the Air Force today.

On May 18, 2021, Dr. Coleman sat down for a one-on-one interview during the Mitchell Institute’s Aerospace Nation to discuss the Air Force’s science and technology landscape, how the current microelectronic shortage is impacting the Air Force, and the importance of protecting the branch’s digital infrastructure in light of recent cyberattacks.

Dr. Coleman opened the forum by discussing the critical challenges her team is facing, as well as her top priorities going into the future. Throughout her entire computer science and technology career, Dr. Coleman has been trying to inch closer to fusing research into practice. When she started out in academia, she would become frustrated that the work that was being done in the lab would never see the light of day.

Because of this, she thinks a lot about the context and the technology environment within which the Air Force pursues its mission, which has changed in subtle ways over the years. Dr. Coleman commented that most of the innovation that the Air Force depended on used to come from the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). But today, the Air Force’s technology landscape operates differently.

Dr. Coleman explained that today’s Air Force is heavily influenced and shaped by retail and consumer technology. As a result, the branch has trouble satisfying its needs with the science and technology that comes from the private sector. And Dr. Coleman believes that it’s twice as difficult if the technology comes from consumer marketplace.

U.S. competitors on the world stage do not have this problem, Dr. Coleman explained. For instance, China has the Military Civil Fusion (MCF) which Chinese President Xi Jinping personally oversees. MCF’s objective is to make sure that every single innovation that happens in the private sector is harnessed to support China’s drive to become the premier military power in the world.

This baked-in partnership between industry and military doesn’t exist in the same form within the United States. This has created a challenge for Dr. Coleman and her department. However, during her remarks, she made it clear that this is a struggle that she anxious to overcome, looking forward to bridging that gap in absorbing technology into her department’s mission.

When speaking about the Air Force’s Science and Technology (S&T) strategy, she proudly boasts that it’s the most well-structured strategy that she’s seen in a long time. To her, the S&T strategy that the department put forward in 2018 is an exemplar of what a strategy should be, and that it goes beyond just simply listing accepted technologies.

Dr. Coleman believes that the strategy does a fantastic job of putting the technology in context of how it is used in the Air Force. And when there isn’t a technology that is available, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) will build out the necessary capabilities. Dr. Coleman explained that the S&T strategy plays a critical role as the Air Force aligns its resources and efforts to make innovation happen and matter.

When asked about the Air Force’s main technological opportunities and hurdles that it needs to overcome, Dr. Coleman said that they are hoping to achieve change in five different domains:

• Global persistence awareness
• Resilient information sharing
• Rapid effective decision-making
• Complexity, unpredictability, and mass
• Speed and reach of disruption and lethality.

She said that she thinks about the “how” behind executing those goals quite often. She believes the answer is that they can achieve it by building out transformational cross-cutting capabilities.

Now that she’s on the inside, Dr. Coleman is encouraged to see how much change has already taken place, and how mindful and deliberate the change has been on behalf of the “how” component. She explained that the Air Force has a massive mission. They have to train, organize, and equip for today and for tomorrow with a massive set of missions. And they must be smart in how they can effectively approach all of the needs that they have.

When asked how the current microelectronic manufacturing crisis is impacting the Air Force, Dr. Coleman responded by saying that microelectronics are the driving force behind the execution of Air Force missions. She explained that the Air Force needs advanced components that are available, performant, trustworthy, and affordable.

“We can’t execute the missions that we need to execute without high-end microelectronics in those systems,” she said. “We really don’t have an option. We can’t operate with antique parts and expect the levels of performance or support the missions that we know we need to fight, without making those components available.”

She said that in order to secure these components for the Air Force, it takes partnerships within the Department of Defense (DoD). The Under Secretary for Research and Engineering (R&E) and his counterparts in Acquisition and Sustainment (A&S) have made microelectronics their number one priority. In the past three or four years, they’ve put together a significant roadmap to produce mission-critical parts in order to secure, grow, and revitalize the domestic fabrication capability.

When asked if the Air Force is ready to begin fielding the technologies to enable human-machine teams, Dr. Coleman responded by saying that—in many ways—the Air Force has been operating human-machine teams for many years. Her personal assessment is that the way to deploy more human-machine teams is through more experimentation.

She said, “When we think about how we form human teams, how do we do that? …We form teams by building trust in each other. And we build trust in each other… by working together. By watching each other in action.”

She believes that human-machine teams will be no different, and that trust will be built in the machines once they see them in execution. And that the team that deploys, experiments, and learns more about each other will be the teams that succeeds. She explained that she has a cast iron belief that in order to produce big, transformational systems, one must “build a little, test a little, and field a little.”

When the conversation turned to the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS), she admitted that she is hardly an expert on the subject. She did say that she doesn’t think that within the Air Force, the ABMS meets the standard requirements of what a program is. She believes that it’s a very advanced concept, but that it’s not a program.

She described ABMS as a very ambitious effort, and though she hopes it will succeed, she doesn’t know if it will. Returning to her motto, she said that having grand visions is important, but they must also deliver capability incrementally.

When asked about the importance of protecting the Air Force’s network infrastructure in light of recent cyberattacks, Dr. Coleman said, “I think that a lot of the infrastructure that we use will eventually need to come out from the commercial sector. From the world out there that has built it, has deployed it, has scaled it, has operated it, and has learned what works and what doesn’t work.”

She explained that if the approach is to custom-build it for themselves and avoid the pitfalls the private sector has encountered, then “we are kidding ourselves.”

According to Dr. Coleman, one of the worst aspects of the inability to field new science and technology in the department is that when they deploy it, it can take years to close vulnerability gaps and loopholes. She said that there are no systems that have zero vulnerabilities, and the longer they have it out there without addressing exposures, the more time the adversary has to find all of those vulnerabilities and exploit them.

To hear more from Dr. Coleman watch the Aerospace Nation forum on-demand here!

The post Slow and steady wins the Air Force’s science and technology race appeared first on SES Space and Defense.