As we discussed in previous posts, this conference came at a very exciting time for the satellite industry. The promise of New Space, the introduction of startups and innovative technology firms looking to do new and exciting things in space, and the decreasing cost of doing business in space has the industry buzzing about what the future holds for the industry. However, the discussions at the conference also illustrated the negative side of this rapid satellite and space expansion, as the need to secure assets in space in what is increasingly becoming a contested environment dominated much of the discussion.

One of those trends – the need to protect satellite assets – was discussed at length during the keynote address by Lt. Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, Commander of the 14th Air Force (Air Forces Strategic) Air Force Space Command, and the Commander of the Joint Functional Component Command for Space at U.S. Strategic Command.

But before delving into why satellites are at risk, the General discussed the role that SATCOM and COMSATCOM are playing in today’s military and why it’s so important to protect them. As the General, himself, stated, “The United States military is going to spend $10 Billion this year on space alone.” And that investment is being made for a very good reason. In the General’s words, “There’s nothing that goes on today in theater that isn’t enabled or enhanced by the space capabilities that we provide.”

With SATCOM services and capabilities so essential for the military today, protecting them is a priority. But what, exactly, are we protecting them from?

There are three disparate threats that can drastically impact the military’s SATCOM infrastructure and ability to deliver essential SATCOM services to the warfighter – congestion, direct attack and natural phenomenon. When the United States first began launching military satellites, only one of these was an issue – natural threats from phenomenon such as solar weather. These were the only threats, because space was a relatively benign environment, free of adversaries and with little commercial satellite traffic.

Today, that environment is drastically different. Congestion from commercial satellites, debris and satellites from other nations all pose a collision risk for America’s military satellites. The scope of this issue was well illustrated by the General, when he said, “On average, once every three days, a satellite maneuvers to avoid hitting another satellite. Last year alone, the International Space Station was moved three times.”

Then there are overt acts of aggression from our adversaries in space. The U.S. and its allies aren’t the only nations with satellites any more. Our adversaries are now utilizing satellites in the same ways and for the same benefits as the United States. As General Raymond put it, “Adversaries have had a front-row seat, watching our success and figuring out the operational, strategical, and tactical advantages that we gain from [SATCOM].”

Seeing the benefits and capabilities that SATCOM is enabling for the warfighter, our adversaries are now identifying ways to neutralize satellites so that they can gain a tactical advantage on the battlefield. One example the General provided involved the kinetic ASAT satellite that China tested in 2007, which destroyed a satellite – creating concern and even more potentially-harmful space debris as a result.

To help combat these threats and keep satellites safe, the military needs up-to-date, accurate information about the location of debris and satellites in space. And to get the most data possible, they’re partnering with COMSATCOM providers, according to General Raymond:

“In the past, we haven’t had to have partnerships. We could do it by ourselves. The domain was a benign place. We didn’t have to have partnerships as much with [COMSATCOM providers]. That’s not the case today…The US Strategic Command has signed space situational awareness data sharing agreements with 50 different companies around the globe, a lot of different governments and their agencies and this allows for the two-way sharing of space situational awareness.”

The Air Force also integrated COMSATCOM providers into the Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC), a command and control system that executes Strategic Command’s space mission. By having COMSATCOM providers together with military personnel, information sharing and decision making can be done more effectively and efficiently.

General Raymond also referenced how COMSATCOM services can help to protect government SATCOM from other threats – including direct attack by adversaries. Spreading military data, sensors and communications across commercial satellites and via hosted payloads can increase resiliency through deception and disaggregation, while also providing redundancy if government satellites go offline or are otherwise compromised.

General Raymond described the role that COMSATCOM can play in the protection of military SATCOM capabilities when he said, “Disaggregation is one of the options that we’re looking at for resiliency in space. Sensors previously contained on a single satellite are dispersed across several, smaller, less complex and more affordable satellites. We can spread these capabilities across a number of different platforms, including hosted payloads, free-flying payloads, smaller satellites, government, commercial and others. This will make adversary’s tactical and targeting problems much more difficult.”

Despite the benefits of COMSATCOM, which carries approximately 60 percent of the military’s communication, there are still some challenges to increased, seamless integration of COMSATCOM into the military’s SATCOM networks and systems. The way the military currently purchases COMSATCOM services has led to an environment where COMSATCOM and government-owned satellite assets are not looked at as one, integrated platform. This eliminates the military’s ability to rapidly reallocate data to COMSATCOM satellites, reduces agility and creates other inefficiencies.

This sentiment was echoed by Retired Major General Jay Santee, who currently serves as the Director of Resilient, Affordable Space at The MITRE Corporation, during a panel discussion featuring General Raymond and multiple members of the COMSATCOM industry. In his introductory remarks during the panel discussion, General Santee called for an end to the traditional one year contracts that the government currently uses for purchasing COMSATCOM services and, instead, challenged the military to more robustly integrate and partner with industry – working to bring COMSATCOM bandwidth into the enterprise and build it into the network.

The post Lt. Gen. John “Jay” Raymond discusses military’s need for COMSATCOM at SATCON 2015 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Based on the panel discussions and side sessions at this year’s conference, it was clear that a new energy and spark has been ignited within the satellite community – one being ignited by a new wave of innovation from startup companies that are entering the space industry. The drivers for these new startup companies – whose emergence is being tabbed New Space – are reduced barriers to entry thanks in large part to decreased launch and satellite construction costs.

Although the emergence of New Space and the increased attention and excitement around the satellite industry, it comes at a price. The decreased cost to build satellites, the emergence of veritable “commercially available, off the shelf” satellites and the increased access to space thanks to cheaper, more convenient launch could create as many challenges as opportunities.

With satellites easier and less expensive to launch, a veritable army of new satellites are poised to enter – and in some cases, already entering – Earth’s orbit. This is especially the case in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), where access is the easiest and most inexpensive. This influx of new satellites is creating traffic in Earth’s orbit, and generally increasing the chances for collisions and other issues in space.

With New Space receiving so much attention at this year’s event, it’s no surprise that the dangers threatening satellites were also a popular discussion point – they go hand-in-hand. As the density of satellites increases, so does the threat that these satellites will collide.

But the threat to space and satellites isn’t restricted to accidental collision. There are other threats in space – including more malicious threats – that can significantly impact a satellite’s lifespan and ability to function. This aggregated threat landscape was the topic of an entire panel discussion moderated by Tim Deaver, the Corporate Vice President of Development at SES Space and Defense, and an occasional contributor to the GovSat Report, entitled, “The Growing Threat to Space.”

One of the first topics discussed during this panel was the fact that spacecraft – especially those in close contact – could be used for purposes other than what they appear designed to do. For example, satellites in close proximity to others could be used to monitor the signal of those other satellites, steal information or even force them to change their orbit.

This sentiment was echoed by Pat Rayermann of Airbus, who stated, “As we think about all of the capabilities we’re thinking of putting in space today – rapid, affordable launch, potential satellite servicing, robotic assembly of spacecraft – every one of those capabilities could also be used for malicious purposes.”

This creates concerns as more countries – including some of our largest adversaries – pursue increased, more aggressive space and satellite programs. This also creates a need for nations to come together and identify the “rules of the road” for operating in space. And when looking to identify these rules, Pat encouraged regulators to work together with industry and move slowly to ensure they keep space investments safe while not impacting innovation. According to Pat:

“…I think it’s very important to allow these discussions and rules to develop over time. If we try to adopt a rules set in advance and preclude certain activities, we may find out that we precluded an activity that could be key to some future innovations. It is appropriate for our regulatory and legal regime to adapt slowly over time, but it is an important piece, figuring out how do we manage what can be perceived as threats.”

Another common threat that was discussed during this panel – and across many discussions during the show – was the concern around hacking satellites and satellite communications. These threats could be malicious threats from outsiders, or – as one panelist noted – they could be insider threats – the result of disgruntled insiders or mistakes by trusted insiders.

When dealing with the potential hacking and cyber security threats affecting satellites, Andrew D’Uva of Providence Access Company discussed how there needs to be a shift in how we think about and prepare for these threats. Ultimately, the focus needs to change from prevention, to response.

“The old mentality was, build a wall around our systems and as long as we build it high enough and strong enough, we’re safe,” Andrew said. “We have to come to the realization that these threats are real, they’re continuous and it’s not about risk elimination, it’s about risk management. If someone gets through the first wall…we have to build the skillset up to deal with that.”

However, there could be a simple solution to securing satellites from hackers – use more COMSATCOM services. According to Andrew, “…a lot of time, money and effort is being spent by COMSATCOM operators [on security] because nobody wants to be the first COMSATCOM company that was compromised.”

In fact, utilizing COMSATCOM services can be a solution for securing communications via satellite for multiple reasons. First, the satellite providers have been in business for decades and are very familiar with the threats present in space. But, less discussed is the role that COMSATCOM can play in resiliency by enabling an organization, military branch or government agency to diversify, distribute and proliferate their satellite communications while also deploying deception by hiding signals among commercial satellite signals. Ultimately, spreading communications capabilities and signals across government owned and commercial satellites decreases the chances that a single threat can directly impact mission readiness while ensuring that communications are only slightly diminished – and easily recovered – should an attack on a single satellite occur.

The excitement surrounding New Space is warranted. This new era of innovation and interest in space and satellites is stimulating and promising – full of potential for new capabilities and services in space. However, New Space isn’t without its challenges and negatives. The proliferation of satellites is adding to an already crowded threat landscape facing satellites. However, through regulation, cooperation and use of COMSATCOM, organizations, military branches and government agencies can ensure they always have access to mission-critical satellite communications.

For more information on threats to space, be sure to read our previous post from Space Symposium 2015. For more information on commercial SATCOM, visit our Resource Center.

The post Protecting satellites a major concern in New Space age appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

Some background – last week I had the opportunity to attend SATCON, one of the year’s largest satellite conferences that takes place as part of the National Association of Broadcasters’ (NAB) Content and Communications World (CCW) event. The conference brought COMSATCOM providers, manufacturers of spacecraft and ground terminals and even government decision makers together to look at the major trends and challenges impacting the satellite industry today.

One of the largest trends – and a reason for so much excitement – was new space, which dominated a large portion of the overall conversation at the conference and also had its own panel discussion entitled, “The Real Potential of New Space.”

What is new space?

As defined by Bob Shuman, the Vice President of Business Development at Kymeta Corporation, “New space is high throughput, it’s LEOs, it’s really the creativity and the expansion of this business towards what’s needed to serve the commercial world.”

The commercial satellite industry has been in existence for over four decades. So why now? How have the stars suddenly aligned to enable this type of rapid innovation and growth in the satellite industry?

Ultimately, a handful of ongoing trends and advancements have given birth to an environment of unparalleled opportunity and innovation in space. Between advancements in technology and easier access to space, a new generation of satellite and space flight startups are being born that have the potential to truly revolutionize the industry.

The largest factor driving this exciting growth and opportunity is the removal of the two largest barriers to space – launch and equipment cost.

The emergence of the commercial space flight industry has ushered in a new world of opportunity for satellite companies and startups. These commercial space flight companies exist to deliver previously unheard of access to space to enterprises by both reducing the cost for launch and increasing the convenience. By reducing the cost of launch and making launch easier and more convenient, access to space – by far one of the largest challenges for emerging satellite companies – improves.

According to Chuck Beams, the President of Vulcan Aerospace, “The barrier to entry to space has been – for a long time – launch and launch costs. That has been the thing that has held back the ability to really commercialize space and move the ball forward. That’s what Vulcan Aerospace is about – revolutionizing space transportation, getting cost to LEO ridiculously cheap and the convenience really high.”

But the cost of launch wasn’t the only expense hindering satellite startups and emerging companies. The other was satellite manufacturing and equipment costs – another area where new technologies are causing monumental shifts and delivering steep cost savings.

In the past, satellites were custom built spacecraft that could take years to design and manufacture at significant cost to the purchaser. When coupled with launch costs, the cost to build satellites made entering the satellite industry almost impossible for organizations without extremely deep pockets. But that’s changing.

The technological advancement in satellites themselves was summed up by Bryan McGuirk, the Chief Operating Officer of ViviSat LLC, when he said, “The first satellite that I was involved in launching was a 386 computer. We’ve come a long way. The miniature computing power, the manufacturing approach – that even legacy manufacturers are looking at – where it’s not a piece of bus that has to be redundant – these are different models of survivability that are driving sustainability. And there are new paths to space. The combination of all of those things has created an economic box that is attractive and good for the overall satellite industry.”

In the past, high launch costs impacted the kinds of satellites that companies purchased. With launch costs declining, the size and complexity of satellites is declining as well. This is opening the door to a new generation of mass-produced satellites that are available practically as “off the shelf” products and not as custom-built spacecraft. The reduced launch costs also makes it feasible for a more “disposable” approach to satellites.

Chuck Beams compared this technological advancement to what was witnessed in the desktop computer market over the previous decades. According to Chuck, “It’s staggering what a satellite is able to do in terms of onboard processing. And – again – unless you absolutely have to have a large aperture, Moore’s Law continues unabated. And – because of that – no longer does it make sense to design satellites to last 15 years. The rate of change and improvement in the capability outpaces. The smart thing is to replace every two years and go single string as much as you can on a satellite design. Especially with the low launch cost that we will provide.”

So what does this all mean?

It means more access to LEO and MEO. It means lower cost and barrier to entry for startups and emerging companies. It means more innovation and a more “Silicon Valley” approach to satellite and space than we’ve ever seen before. This means new and exciting services, such as those offered by ViviSat – a startup company that will be using satellites for extending the mission of existing GEO satellites through docking and flying as a joint stack.

Coupled with the emergence of High Throughput Satellites (HTS) – another hot topic at this year’s SATCON – it means a glut of new, lower cost bandwidth available in space from HTS GEO, LEO and MEO satellites. This overwhelming supply of bandwidth can go a long way towards meeting the world’s exponentially increasing demand for connectivity and usher in an age where satellite connects everyone – even those in developing nations.

This sentiment was echoed by Kymeta Corporation’s Bob Shuman when he said, “Satellite is now usable for moving things at high bandwidth. The Internet of things (IOT) has huge demand outside of cities. Let’s talk about machine-to-machine. There’s a huge market for telemetry. Why not have satellite do this? It can get anywhere. It can get there quickly. It can be setup easily and the services are broadening that the satellite operators and service providers are offering. Why not?”

But new space isn’t all positives. The emergence of this next generation of satellite startup comes with its own set of challenges and concerns. In my next article, I’ll share some of the discussions at SatCon that centered around the challenges and problems that can emerge from new space.

For more information on High Throughput Satellites and other commercial SATCOM services, visit our Recourse Center by clicking HERE.

The post SATCON conversations center on the promise of New Space appeared first on SES Space and Defense.