MILITARY URGED TO WORK WITH PRIVATE SECTOR TO BUILD SATELLITES

LONG BEACH, Cal. -- Private businesses should collaborate with military to build integrated satellite system with multiple uses to protect national security and provide armed forces with support for high-tech weapon and communication systems, govt. and industry officials said at International Satellite & Communications Exchange (ISCE) 2002 workshop here. “We've come a long way in integrating space and ground structure, particularly since Desert Storm when some of the first applications for Global Positioning Systems (GPS) were used,” Aerospace Corp. Senior Vp John Parsons said: “We still have a long way to go. There are a lot of new technologies and architectures that will enhance the role of space in military applications.” Other panelists were Asst. Secy. of Defense John Stenbit, Air Force Lt. Gen. Brian Arnold of Space Command, National Security Council Space Policy Dir. Gil Klinger, Booz-Allen & Hamilton Vp Keith Hall, TRW Space & Electronics Missile Defense Systems Vp Patrick Caruanna.

Arnold said military and private sector should focus on 4 key areas: (1) Removing bandwidth limitations. (2) Developing integrated space architecture. (3) Fielding systems at cost and on time. (4) Developing and retaining top-notch engineering talent. Systems are “stove-piped and we need to move to much higher technology such as laser communications,” Arnold said: “You must be able to remove the bandwidth limit for the warfighter to give them the data they need.”

Klinger said there was need to improve National Reconnaissance Office relationship with other agencies, one of which is Dept. of Commerce. “Virtually every portion of national space infrastructure is in a massive phase of commercial reorganization,” he said: “It’s very expensive” and “challenging… We need to turn loose the resources and capital to get where we need to be, but it’s difficult because of the rate of change.” He said govt. had many written policies that didn’t make sense and Bush Administration was evaluating military space policy to make it fit into current environment.

Hall cited attributes that brought space to military dimension, including: (1) Penetration. “There is no sanctuary for adversaries.” (2) Persistence. “We are forward deployed.” (3) Perspective for global reach. (4) Precision of GPS and imaging. (5) Speed, which is critical to how U.S. can provide information to military commanders. He said satellite industry was “unique and tough” because there were so many upfront costs for R&D and launch. “By the time you use a satellite, you've already paid 70% of its cost through [its] life cycle.” Govt. is “the pocketbook that finances the major advances in technology in space,” he said.

Teamwork between govt. and industry is needed, Hall said: “The accountability of a space system is all over the map in the government.” Stenbit said space was major reason there was so much productivity on “how to kill targets without getting killed ourselves.” Fundamentally, space changed the paradigm of warfare, he said.

Satellite systems must be “mission oriented rather than system oriented” to provide best use, Caruanna said. He agreed that architectural approach “must be taken to see how the system applies” to govt. and military markets. He said “key enabler is the ability to use space to increase bandwidth. We see the advances of the legacy systems without the ability to have network-centric ability to take immediate action.” With constant threat of terrorism, “those sorts of systems can’t wait,” Caruanna said.