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.

“We were playing in an uncontested environment for so long, and we quite frankly, got comfortable operating that way,” said USEUCOM J63 SATCOM NC3’s Eric Kimery at this year’s GOVSATCOM Conference. “We’re paying the price a little bit for that now.”

During the GOVSATCOM session, “Protecting Space Communications – From a Solution’s Perspective,” Kimery joined representatives from Integrasys, SES Space & Defense, and the Luxembourg Directorate of Defense, to delve into what it will take to meet the resiliency, domain awareness, and capability requirements that will ensure the protection and security of MILSATCOM assets in space.

The MILSATCOM Security Groundwork
According to Geoffroy Beaudot, Head of Space for the Luxembourg Directorate of Defense, before global militaries begin identifying solutions for protecting MILSATCOM, there are a few initial considerations that must be made about the space domain.

First, U.S. and allied governments must have a complete understanding of the assets that are operating in the environment. “We need to know what is in space,” said Beaudot. “Space domain awareness is, from my point of view, the starting point.”

But identifying every single satellite is just the tip of the iceberg of space domain awareness, according to Beaudot. Global militaries must go a step further by categorizing these space assets and coming to a complete understanding of each satellite’s vulnerabilities.

After that preliminary work is completed and all risks have been identified, governments can then pivot to adopting systems that can bolster an asset’s security and ensure that vulnerabilities are unable to be exploited by adversarial interference.

The next step to secure MILSATCOM involves being able to identify where interference is coming from and being prepared to react, should it occur. “If you are interfered by something, you need to know where the interference is,” Beaudot pointed out. “A good geolocation system is important in order to know where interference is coming from.”

For Beaudot, the best defense against adversarial satellite interference is having a space architecture that has resiliency baked in via multi-orbit capabilities. “Resiliency is definitely key,” said Beaudot. “What we do in Luxembourg is leveraging O3b mPOWER. Using the MEO constellation with the MEO Global Services (MGS) project provides resilience and access to multi-orbits and protects our satellite communications system.”

Alvaro Sanchez, CEO of Integrasys, echoed Beaudot’s points about domain awareness, identification of asset vulnerabilities, as well as leveraging multi-orbit solutions to thwart adversarial actions in space. He also added that deploying automation security tools throughout MILSATCOM networks could provide increased levels of asset protection.

“As the complexity of networks grows exponentially with new orbits, [mitigating threats] needs to be completely automated,” said Sanchez. “It needs to be driven by an AI machine that helps to mitigate all those threats, while also interconnecting with each other. [Full automation] by having design interconnected with anti-jamming, geolocation interconnected with threat mitigation, while also having observational tools to understand when interference is happening…[will allow us] to react very well.”

Leveraging Government-Industry Partnerships
One of the hats that Kimery wears at the combatant command level within the J-6 is primarily focused on influencing capabilities that are coming into the theater, and the commercial industry is playing a pivotal role in providing those capabilities to the military. “We very recently have had some funding for COMSATCOM,” said Kimery. “What we’ve been trying to do is partner with industry…[to enable] the theater with COMSATCOM…in hopes that the U.S. Space Force can then come in later and leverage that technology or capability and build upon it.”

He explained that the U.S. military is at the point where there is not a single satellite communication system solution that is going to provide the level of persistency to capability on the battlefield when it is needed. A truly resilient space architecture is going to rely on proliferated systems and capabilities that enable PACE plans and multi-orbit solutions to fall back on in the event of adversarial interference.

On the industry side of the partnership equation, SES Space & Defense’s Senior Vice President of Engineering, Nitin Bhat, laid out the commercial industry’s answer to heeding the call for secure and resilient MILSATCOM capabilities.

For Bhat, implementing hardened security standards and guidelines across systems and networks is key to ensuring a resilient and protected space architecture. He pointed to FedRAMP, STIGs (Security Technical Implementation Guides), and RMF (Risk Management Framework) NIST controls as the first lines of defense when trying to balance between cost and risk, quantifying the impact levels of asset vulnerabilities, as well as maintaining a strong security posture.

“When you have a wave form or data that you need to transport, independent of whether it’s virtualized or not, you want to make sure the appliance is locked down from a cyber perspective,” explained Bhat. “A STIG helps you do that. From a security standpoint, it’s important that we have things that are FedRAMP certified and that it’s in the cloud with the right impact levels, so you can maintain the security posture.”

Bhat also pointed to leveraging open architectures to enhance space system security. “[Open architecture] allows you to implement transit FIPS (Federal Information Processing Standards) encryption and also hide in the noise with LPX.”

He also believes that working towards a more hybrid space architecture can better support capabilities that will provide bolstered security and protection to military space systems. “[A hybrid architecture] will help with the PACE plan,” said Bhat. “[Users] can move from one frequency band to the other, or one orbit to the other, or one constellation to the other.”

Moving between frequency bands or orbital planes has become a critical component of secure resilient SATCOM that the commercial space industry has been working hard toward. In a recent interview with the Government Satellite Report, SES Space and Defense’s Vice President of Product Management, Michael Geist, also touched upon the consequential role multi-orbit capabilities are playing in securing military space assets.

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

To watch the full GOVSATCOM session, “Protecting Space Communications – From a Solution’s Perspective,” click the video below:

The post GOVSATCOM Puts Global MILSATCOM Security In the Spotlight 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.

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.

Earlier this month at the SATELLITE 2023 conference, artificial intelligence and satellite experts across commercial industry convened during a special panel, “How AI and Space Technologies Combine to Benefit the Critical Mission,” to explore the different applications, benefits and some threats AI can deliver to the U.S. military’s space initiatives.

Space, the military, and AI
One fact that all the panelists agreed on was that artificial intelligence, in general, is a technology meant to extract humans out of routine operational functions. According to SpiderOak & York Space Systems’ Charles Beames, “What it does is it replaces people.”

“Everything we do in space, we do it for the data,” explained Beames. “And a big part of creating data is doing the analytics to make [data] useful. Rather than having thousands of people looking at each piece of data, they can deploy these great algorithms…that can actually be a huge force multiplier.”

Lockheed Martin’s Johnathon Caldwell brought up the point that the relevance of data has a short lifespan, as speed is a dominant factor in the space domain. “With the sensors we have on orbit and with people in the loop, we have a hard time today keeping up with analyzing the data,” explained Caldwell. “The human factor is the limiting factor.”

He explained that as commercial industry and the military build satellite sensors to proliferation, humans on the ground are going to be unable to keep pace with the sheer volume of incoming data. “It’s not data that policymakers and military leaders need, but rather knowledge and information to be able to make decisions,” said Caldwell. “To process the volume of data that’s going to be coming off of the sensors, networks, and systems is going to require us to move into a new era of how we think about looking at that data.”

When reframing how data is regarded, it is critical to remember that data is not always relevant, and that it will not stay relevant forever. While it’s been established that the military and federal government has a problem keeping up with data volumes, they also have a greater issue of sifting through that data – at the speed of conflict – and decide which information is relevant to decision-making.

“We have to clean the table…and get on to the relevant data,” said Caldwell. “It all happens at such an amazing tempo. The speed of space is already high, and the speed of conflict will amp up the timetable in which decisions need to be made. And it’s going to be much quicker than any of us anticipate.”

AI can simplify data complexities
By leveraging AI within their space architectures, the federal government and military can have the ability to analyze information faster and automate some of the more routine – yet extremely complex – processes.

According to SES Space & Defense’s Ram Rao, at the heart of AI are the complexities involved in network systems. “Every system is huge,” said Rao. “For example, SES Space & Defense’s O3b mPOWER satellites are going to be operational by the end of this year, and each of those satellites will have 5,000 beams. With 11 satellites in tow, the O3b mPOWER constellation will, in total, have 55,000 beams. There has to be resource management systems which can really control all those beams and complexities that come with it.”

Rao explained that the amount of incoming and outgoing data that these satellites will be processing cannot be managed by humans alone. Factors like power, bandwidth, and interference management, along with beam switching, hopping, shaping, and formatting, will require more than just traditional conventional algorithms, machine learning to handle vast amount of data as well as deep learning algorithms with neural networks adapting and learning from the data.

“Approaching conventional management methods makes it very difficult to really address the requirements,” explained Rao. “Especially when it comes to the speed of implementing.” He went on to explain that if the military were to execute a mission and needed to switch from one satellite beam to another beam, data computing must occur extremely fast to ensure seamless mission communications.

Especially in times of crisis or conflict, if adversaries were to target U.S. military or government satellites, AI technology could detect attacks before they occur, and switch services over to other satellites in the same orbit, or in a different orbit altogether. By being able to sense and elude an enemy’s jamming, interference or degradation of U.S. space assets, the military would have created a resilient space architecture that is capable of denying any attempts adversaries were to make to interrupt critical missions.

“SES Space & Defense’s specialization is end-to-end connectivity, which includes space, satellites, and ground systems,” said Rao. “If there is a degradation or jamming trend that is occurring on-orbit, AI could alert human operators to the trend and ensure that those kinds of critical issues are addressed. Managing those things and making sure that the satellites and systems are healthy is very important. That can be done, but not just through manual, higher-level monitoring. It has to be at a very low – and very intelligent – level. That is an example of when AI becomes critically important.”

To learn about how artificial intelligence is becoming the key to protecting the U.S. Army’s space assets, click HERE.

The post Satellite experts discuss how artificial intelligence can accelerate military decision-making in space appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

But successes are usually accompanied by setbacks and challenges. Even after witnessing these incredible use-case wins for COMSATCOM integration and adoption, the federal government has still been slow and hesitant to fully implement and deploy these satellite technologies that can support the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) mission of providing its military with a resilient space architecture.

Though officials frequently point to this space architecture as a top priority for the department, the government acquisition process of commercial space assets – which could truly propel the U.S. ahead of its foreign adversaries and near-peer competitors – was still sluggish and arduous in 2022.

To learn more about the trends, progress, and challenges the commercial satellite industry faced within the federal acquisition space in 2022, and to get an outlook on how COMSATCOM can support the federal government and the DoD’s mission requirements in 2023, the Government Satellite Report was able to catch up with SES Space & Defense’s Senior Vice President of Strategic Development, Jay Icard.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): Over the past year, what overarching trends is the commercial satellite industry seeing and experiencing as it pertains to government acquisition? What successes has the industry experienced? What new challenges have come up?

Jay Icard: We’ve seen the government shift away from the lowest price technically acceptable procurements to using best value, which is good! The number of networks has remained flat, meaning the commercial industry repeatedly competes for the same contracts.

Having said that, the U. S. Space Force awarded some significant COMSATCOM contracts last year, such as the CSSC II contract for the U.S. Navy, which is over $900M ceiling – not a small effort. They also released some new solicitations, such as the Global X-band Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), which should prove to be an enabling contract for MILSATCOM-COMSATCOM integration in the near future.

One concerning challenge that has been popping up these last few years pertains to the current talent pool. If you look at the needs for talent on the government acquisition side, they need personnel to develop the requirements with their customers. They need personnel to evaluate the proposals, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find experienced personnel that wants to work on COMSATCOM acquisitions.

“Along with assuming full acquisition and procurement authorities for COMSATCOM, Space Command should work with Space Force to create Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budgets for select procurements of COMSATCOM.” – Jay Icard

It’s not common for people to go to college and major in COMSATCOM engineering. The government and industry compete from the same resource talent pool. Our industry is not something you learn in a couple of months.

The 2016 “Analysis of Alternatives” study, mandated by Congress, required the Department to look at how military and commercial systems could collectively provide a resilient enterprise architecture. The study found that leveraging both military and commercial systems into an integrated hybrid architecture would save taxpayer dollars. That said, we need government professionals that understand the SATCOM acquisition business.

U.S. Space Force and U.S. Space Command are working to integrate COMSATCOM, and they choose from that same talent pool, because there’s still a finite number of professionals with the required skillsets. It’s an industry-wide dilemma. I’ve had a number of discussions with Space Force, Space Command, and industry leaders about this topic.

GSR: What are the possible solutions for those skill gaps in the workforce?

Jay Icard: We’ve spoken with Space Force about immersion. For example, in the past, there have been immersion programs where civilian or military personnel would spend time at a vendor’s facility within an operations or engineering team to learn about how the vendor works and operates.

I participate in the U.S. Space Command’s Commercial Integration Cell (CIC), a group of ten industry partners that work with the command to improve the operational effectiveness of space operations. Within the CIC, we have explored several ideas about bridging that skills gap. Immersion of personnel is one of the ideas that are out there. We know it is an effective method, but it requires a deliberate plan that makes sense for all parties to invest the resources to make it successful.

GSR: Has the government and military made any headway with tearing down the bureaucratic challenges that hinder commercial satellite acquisitions? Has there been any progress or new challenges that have come up? How can government and industry work together to make the process faster while meeting military requirements?

Jay Icard: I believe the government is working on it. They have stabilized their organization and where the COMSATCOM purchasing organization is going to sit within Space Systems Command.

Along with assuming full acquisition and procurement authorities for COMSATCOM, Space Command should work with Space Force to create Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budgets for select procurements of COMSATCOM. For example, the government should consider the POM budget for ground infrastructure and network configuration projects to use existing commercial space assets and place into service MILSATCOM-COMSATCOM roaming configurations discussed in the Space Force Vision for SATCOM. But in general, Space Command and Space Force should see where the POM process can be used to ensure a stable and methodical approach to accelerating the availability of COMSATCOM solutions for military requirements.

“First, we must address where we anticipate conflict and where there may be surge needs. That’s first and foremost.” – Jay Icard

We’re not talking about billions and billions of dollars. Small investments could create a lot of capability with COMSATCOM integration in a short amount of time. But first, the organization needs to be set, and the roles and responsibilities tightened up, and I think they have that now.

GSR: Has establishing the U.S. Space Force and having one centralized service for space simplified the commercial satellite acquisition process?

Jay Icard: I believe it will, and I think the measures of success are straightforward. When presented with a mission need from a service or COCOM:  1) Have we reduced the time to acquire a COMSATCOM service? 2) Have we reduced the time to activate a COMSATCOM service? Those are the fundamental measures of success.

So if I have a need for a certain amount of throughput or network availability in a specific area – How long did it take me to acquire? How long did it take you to activate? That’s where the rubber meets the road.

GSR: What are the top SATCOM needs and requirements that the military and government are looking to fulfill in 2023?

Jay Icard: First, we must address where we anticipate conflict and where there may be surge needs. That’s first and foremost. Are we ready to surge? Do we have the capacity in place to fulfill a surge requirement? In any other networking discipline, it’s busy hour traffic management. Are we ready for the busy hour traffic?

Second, do we have plans to fulfill the future capacity needs? As our capacity consumption grows over the next five years, do we have enough MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM to fulfill that need? Where are the gaps? What are the plans to fill those gaps?

And it could be that we have the space assets to fill the gaps. But do we have the ground assets configured to utilize the space assets that are available to us? Do we have the contracting mechanisms to access the space and ground assets in a timely manner?

“Are we using our assets and skills and implementing those capabilities now and in a short timeline with small amounts of money? Or are we studying to do it five years from now?” – Jay Icard

GSR: On December 23, 2022, President Biden signed the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In the 2023 NDAA, there is a portion that directs the DoD to lay out a strategy and requirements for the protection of DoD satellites. How can the satellite industry assist in realizing these strategies and requirements for a more resilient and defendable national security space architecture, as the law states?

Jay Icard: Accelerate the employment of COMSATCOM integration into military missions, making the enemy’s targeting calculus more complicated. It’s a low-cost and near-term solution to protect MILSATCOM and COMSATCOM assets.

Suppose an enemy focuses their resources into a space asset and successfully disables it. In that case, they will only affect a small percent of the traffic if effective COMSATCOM integration has been employed. To me, that’s been the priority for years now, and that’s the purpose of COMSATCOM integration.

I think the other “tests” we ask in an effort to accelerate COMSATCOM integration include: Are we utilizing the contracts that we have? Are we using our assets and skills and implementing those capabilities now and in a short timeline with small amounts of money? Or are we studying to do it five years from now? Are we studying a problem that we could solve with small and timely investment that could have real mission effects in the near term?  I think that is a test that all of us in the industry and in the policymaking side need to ask ourselves.

To learn about how SES Space & Defense’s new O3b mPOWER constellation can support missions across the federal government and military, click HERE.

The post SESSD Senior Vice President on the state of COMSATCOM in 2022 and what’s in store for 2023 appeared first on SES Space and Defense.

While the launch of these first two satellites will not immediately result in the SES O3b mPOWER satellite service becoming available to government users, it’s a massive first step in what will be a revolutionary introduction to the commercial satellite industry. And it’s a long time in the making. The SES O3b mPOWER satellite service was first announced in September 2017 and has been anxiously awaited by military and government satellite customers ever since.

With the launch right around the corner, the Government Satellite Report sat down with the CEO of SES Space and Defense, David Fields, to discuss the SES O3b mPOWER service. During our discussion, we asked why the service is considered revolutionary across the satellite industry, why government and military users are excited about its launch, and the technology trends that are making this new service necessary.

Government Satellite Report (GSR): The first O3b mPOWER satellites are tentatively slated to launch later this week. Why is this such an exciting milestone for SES Government Solutions? What about these new satellites is so revolutionary?

David Fields: It’s important to understand that the O3b mPOWER satellite service represents a truly transformational advancement in commercial satellite capability. The O3b mPOWER service is a massive breakthrough in the delivery of satellite capacity from non-geostationary orbit (NGSO).

Being positioned in MEO enables the O3b mPOWER satellites to deliver incredible capacity at extremely low latency. This higher throughput and lower latency are ideal for many of the advanced IT solutions and capabilities that are being implemented across the U.S. government and military today.

Our government and military customers need lower latency and higher throughput. They need a more simple and more flexible ground infrastructure that is more customizable and easier to secure. They need the ability to leverage sovereign gateways. O3b mPOWER delivers all of these things to our government and military users.

The service is not a closed system. It enables military and government users to leverage their own gateways. It enables them to bring their own waveforms. It’s compliant with all of their most rigid security requirements.

O3b mPOWER delivers all of these things because it was built with the needs of our government and military users in mind. It wasn’t designed to be a consumer solution that is also available to the government. SES built O3b mPOWER from the bottom up to meet government and military requirements.

GSR: If you were a government or military organization, why would O3b mPOWER be important for you? What trends are we seeing in the government that make the launch of O3b mPOWER an important development?

David Fields: That’s a great question, and it really comes down to data. Just look at the military – in particular. The amount of sensor data, the amount of video, and the amount of data – in general – that is being aggregated in theater and that needs to be transmitted back to senior military decision-makers is enormous now.

The amount of data that is being generated is staggering. And for that data to be useful for the military, it needs to be made available, analyzed for actionable insights, and shared in real time. That’s what will enable the military to make better, more data-driven decisions.

“We’re very excited to see these first satellites launched and get into orbit…There will be several additional launches after this initial launch. However, these first satellites that we’re launching will enable us to validate the service and capabilities.” – David Fields

The applications that the government and military leverage at the tactical edge will only continue to expand to fill the amount of bandwidth that these organizations can afford to buy. Our goal with O3b mPOWER is to deliver a cost-effective satellite service that delivers high-throughput, low-latency bandwidth when they need it, and where they need it.

GSR: When we talk to people about O3b mPOWER and the benefits that it will deliver, the capacity and low latency are usually the first things they mention. But there is more to O3b mPOWER than that – the satellites will also offer more flexibility. Why would the government care about that?

David Fields: These satellites are some of the most capable ever built. This enables them to deliver incredible flexibility for government users. O3b mPOWER gives government and military users the ability to define and steer beams. This is immensely important since it enables users to place a beam of satellite capacity where they need it and when they need it.

This means that government users are not locked into paying for an established amount of capacity or coverage that they don’t need. If they need capacity for a small group of naval vessels, or a small squad of warfighters, or even a single ISR aircraft, they can put a beam where they need it to meet that requirement.

Also, O3b mPOWER enables asymmetric capability. This means that the outbound and inbound capacity is not fixed. If more inbound capacity is needed, the inbound satellite capacity can be increased. If an ISR mission requires mostly outbound data so that HD video can be transmitted in real-time, that can also be accommodated. Government and military users will have the flexibility to tailor the capacity in either direction to meet their unique mission requirements.

GSR: Security is a major issue for the military today. How can O3b mPOWER protect military networks and data at a time when satellite is more essential, but the space and cyber domains are increasingly threatened?

David Fields: The nature of the O3b mPOWER satellites, themselves, make them more secure and more assured for government and military users. The ability to provision and steer a small beam of connectivity makes O3b mPOWER inherently more assured than wide beam satellite solutions.

The smaller beams that are utilized by O3b mPOWER are harder to locate for adversaries. They’re also harder to deny. As you know, satellite jamming needs to happen from within the beam, so a smaller beam is – by its nature – more difficult to jam for adversaries.

“The service is not a closed system. It enables military and government users to leverage their own gateways. It enables them to bring their own waveforms. It’s compliant with all of their most rigid security requirements.” – David Fields

But, jamming aside, security and assurance come down to the resiliency of the network.

Since the O3b mPOWER satellite service was designed with government and military users in mind, SES has ensured that they can bring their own waveform. This includes protected waveforms. Also, since the service was purpose-built for government and military users, it offers something that many commercial satellites can’t – bandwidth that is always available when and where they need it.

The O3b mPOWER satellite service offers capacity that is committed to government and military users, which ensures that they’re not competing with other authorized users. There won’t be a lack of capacity for government or military users because gamers, or consumers that are streaming entertainment content are dominating the capacity.

GSR: What advanced use cases and capabilities could you envision the government and military leveraging O3b mPOWER for in the immediate future?

David Fields: SES was one of the first companies to build an NGSO commercial capability. We have years of experience operating an NGSO constellation and truly understand the advantages and disadvantages of NGSO commercial satellite services.

O3b mPOWER leverages that experience and expands on our ability to deliver capabilities that government and military users have been asking for. That includes things like mobility and comms on the move for our military users.

“These satellites are some of the most capable ever built. This enables them to deliver incredible flexibility for government users.” – David Fields

Since O3b mPOWER provides smaller, more powerful beams, it can deliver capabilities to smaller antennas for use in ISR, land mobility, and other use cases that require small aperture terminals. These are capabilities that have not been served to date and are in high demand from our government and military users.

GSR: Obviously, when it comes to satellite services and solutions, the launch of a satellite doesn’t mean that the service is immediately available. What needs to happen in space after the satellites are launched? How long will it take for the satellites to come online? When will O3b mPOWER service be available for users?

David Fields: Every journey begins with a single step, and the O3b mPOWER journey begins this week with this launch. The current launch date is tentatively scheduled for December 16, 2022. That launch starts the process.

We’re very excited to see these first satellites launched and get into orbit. But, as with any NGSO satellite service, the satellites do not remain in a fixed point or location in the sky. This means that you need to have the full constellation launched for it to function.

There will be several additional launches after this initial launch. However, these first satellites that we’re launching will enable us to validate the service and capabilities. As the additional satellites are launched, SES will be building out the network and testing functionality to ensure that O3b mPOWER is ready for customers when it comes online.

We anticipate that this revolutionary service will be available for our users in Q3 of 2023.

For additional information about O3b mPOWER, click HERE.

The post Starting the Countdown to O3b mPOWER appeared first on SES Space and Defense.