Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) and TacSat Overview for NSF Small Sat Workshop

1
Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) and TacSat
Overviewfor NSF Small Sat Workshop
OSD Office of Secretary of Defense
TacSat-1
TacSat-2
TacSat-3
TacSat-4
Supporting Authors on Joint RSC5 Paper and
Similar Presentations Also Shown

• May 16, 2007

Mike Hurley202-767-0528mHurley_at_space.nrl.navy.mi
l
Col Tom Doyne 703-696-5766Thomas.Doyne_at_OSD.mil
Mark Johnson202-404-5328mJohnson_at_space.nrl.navy.
mil
Chris Olmedo505-853-2867Christopher.Olmedo_at_kirtl
and.af.mil
Presented by
Chris Huffine202-404-4272Chris.Huffine_at_nrl.navy.
mil
Tim Duffey202-404-3041tDuffeyy_at_space.nrl.navy.mi
l
Dr Peter Wegner 505-853-3486Peter.Wegner_at_kirtland
.af.mill
Lt Col George Moretti505-846-0623George.Moretti_at_
kirtland.af.mill
2
Topics and Reference

• ORS Big Picture
• TacSat Experimentation
• ORS Payload Technology Initiative
• Bus Standards Initiatives
• Emerging ORS Office and Community
• Conclusions

For a Summary of the ORS Activities In Progress a
Good Reference Paper is in AIAA Responsive Space
Conference 5 April 2007 Paper 2007-4001
3
Why ORS? The Need

• Global Environmental Changes Require Increased
  Agility to Respond to Increased Uncertainty
• 1) Increased Geopolitical Uncertainty
• End of Cold War With Stable, Predictable
  Adversary
• Global War on Terror Changing Locations and
  Techniques
• More Countries Achieving New Space Military
  Capabilities
• 2) Rapid Technology Improvement Cycles Resulting
  in New and Unpredicted Capabilities and Tactics
  Used by Others
• This New Environment Affects All Elements, Not
  Specific to Space

4
Where Is ORS Development?
OFT ORS Unarticulated RequirementStarted TacSat
-1 May 2003, Spacecraft Complete May 2004
Service ST Communities (ONR, Army, AFRL) Began
Funding and POMs for TacSat Experimentation
(20M per TacSat Experiment)
Acquisitions Start FY08-10 (POM)
120 Day ORS Study Report to Congress

WE ARE HERE
FY08
FY05
FY07
FY06
FY03
FY04
ORS Momentum Picked Up in FY04-FY05
ORS Requirements in Development STRATCOM Vision
and CONOPS Defined
TacSat-3 4 Missions Selected via Joint Process
Led by AFSPC and STRATCOM
Joint ORS Office being Stood Up 5/21/07
Jan 2005 US Space Transportation Policy Calls for
ORS Access Use

• Moving From Unarticulated Rqmts (OFT) to Formal
  Requirements and Initial Acquisitions .About 3/4
  Way Through the Process Now
• TacSat Experiments Help to Shape the CONOPS and
  Inform Future Requirements

5
TacSat Update 1 - 4

• TacSat-1
• Navy Led Experiment for OSDs OFT
• Tactical RF Payloads and UHF Cross-Platform Link
• Low Resolution Visible (70m) and IR (850m)
  Cameras
• Direct Access Via SIPRNET and VMOC Web Site
• Spacecraft Completed May 04, Within 1 Year
• Launch Falcon-1 Winter 07
• TacSat-2
• Air Force Led Experiment
• Tactical Imaging and RF Payloads
• Tactical CDL and UHF Links
• Multiple Science Payloads
• Launched on Minotaur-I, Dec 2006
• TacSat-3
• Began First Joint Process for Selection
• Selected October 2004
• Air Force Led Experiment
• AF/Army Hyperspectral Primary Payload
• Navy Small Data-X Payload for IP-Based Buoy Comms

TacSat-1
Overall Experimentation Purpose
Experiment w/ Key System Elements to Mature
Understanding and CONOPS for Operational Utility
and Systems
TacSat-2
TacSat-3
TacSat-4
6
TacSat Cycle Selections are Approximately Annual
COCOMS OPERATIONAL SERVICE COMPONENTS
Needs Requirements
OPSAT Acquisition Consideration
Operational Utility, CONOPS, TTPS
Operational Experimentation and MUA
TacSat Design Selection
TacSat Implementation
Enabling Technologies and ORS System Development
Increased Technology Readiness and/or System
Development
DoD ST Vector 2 Enabling Tech Objectives for
Launch, Spacecraft, Operations, Theater
Integration
ST/RD COMMUNITY
7
TacSat CycleSelections are Approximately Annual
COCOMS OPERATIONAL SERVICE COMPONENTS
Needs Requirements
OPSAT Acquisition Consideration
Operational Utility, CONOPS, TTPS
Battlefield Characterization for Camouflage,
etc.? HSI
Operational Experimentation and MUA
TacSat Design Selection
TacSat Implementation
Enabling Technologies and ORS System Development
High Rate Theater CDL Downlink
Increased Technology Readiness and/or System
Development
DoD ST Vector 2 Enabling Tech Objectives for
Launch, Spacecraft, Operations, Theater
Integration
ST/RD COMMUNITY
8
From ST Vector 2 (SPRING 06) Responsive
Satellite Enabling Technology

• Advanced Small / Microsat Technologies
• Efficient propulsion
• Advanced power
• Lightweight, low cost apertures
• Low cost rad-tolerant components

• Tactical Operations and Data Dissemination
• Integrated with existing ISR C2 (e.g. Space CDL,
  UHF, JTRS, GBS)
• New COMSEC techs. processes
• Decision quality data to the warfighter

• Responsive
• Affordable
• Employable
• Integrated

• Rapid Deployment
• Mission planning tools / tailored orbits
• Fast assembly and test
• Rapid autonomous deployment / checkout

• Modular Design
• Plug n play architecture
• Standard, open architecture interfaces

ST Vector 2 Guides DoD Investment in Response
Space Area for Coordinated Investment in Enabling
Capabilities. AFRL Leads for DoD.
9
ORS Payload Technology Initiative
10
ORS Payload Technology Initiative

• Goal ORS Technology Development for Future
  Capabilities and to Help Support the Industrial
  Base in the ORS Area
• 75 Proposals were Received from Industry and
  Evaluated using an Army SMDC, AFRL, and NRL Joint
  Evaluation Process
• Achieved Solid Consensus and Selected 15
  Proposals for Award with OSD and STRATCOM
  Concurrence
• These Contracts are All in Place and Industry
  will be Developing Over the Course of the Next
  Year
• NRL is the Program Manager of this Initiative for
  OSD
• Chris Huffine and LCDR Joe Gherlone are Primary
  Contract CORs

11
ORS Payload Technologies Awarded
12
Joint Evaluation and Award Summary
Out of 15 Total Awards

• So Good Consensus was Achieved Resulting in the
  Top Picks of Each Department being Awarded Almost
  Evenly

13
Spacecraft Bus Standards Initiatives
14
Four Phase Bus Standards Development

• Phase 1 Analysis and Team Building (MIT/LL Led)
• Phase 2 Test Bed and Standard Avionics (AFRL
  Led) also Modular Bus
• Phase 3 Govt / Industry Prototype Standard Bus
  System Development
• Naval Research Lab (NRL) and JHU Applied Physics
  Lab (APL) Led
• Phase 4 Production Phase (SMC Led)

General Officer/Lab Director Steering Group
PHASE 3 NRL/APL LEAD Spacecraft System
Design Core Architecture
PHASE 4 SMC LEAD Production Quantity Bus Buys
PHASE 2 AFRL LEAD Bus Technology Standards
Insertion and Test Bed
PHASE 1 MIT/LL LEAD Analysis
Bus for TacSat-3
Bus for TacSat-4
System Engineering Working Group (Government,
Industry, Academia)
All Phases Supported by the Nations Collective
System Engineering Expertise
15
Relationship to Other Standards Working Groups
NASA Modular Bus WG
AFRL Plug Play WGs
Long Term Visions
RSAT
AIAA Standards
Others
Ready Standards/Tech. for 2nd ORS/JWS Buy
Long Term Technology (ST) Oriented Efforts
Consortium Standards/Technology for TacSat-4
and 1st SMC ORS/JWS Buy
Ready-to-Aggressive Standards/Tech. for TacSat-3
Experiment
PHASE 3 NRL/APL LEAD Spacecraft System
Design Core Architecture
PHASE 4 SMC LEAD Production Quantity Bus Buys
PHASE 2 AFRL LEAD Bus Technology Standards
Insertion and Test Bed
PHASE 1 MIT/LL LEAD Analysis

• On-going Standards Development will Continue
• OSD Initiative Focused on Getting to Initial Buy
  and Setting Up a Sound Spiral Process

16
Bus Standards May Provide Good Opportunity for
ORS and NSF Collaboration

• Achieving Broad Acceptance and Volume is a Key to
  Success of Any Standards
• Generally these ORS Bus Standards Complimentary
  STP SIV Bus Standards Nicely In Terms of Size,
  Weight, Power and Cost Class of Bus
• SIV Spacecraft 180kg ORS Spacecraft 400kg
  (buses are about half)
• AFRL Led Plug-and-Play Standards Work Generally
  Supports Component Level Standardization and is
  Well Suited for All Cost Classes
• Reference Paper is in AIAA Responsive Space
  Conference 5 April 2007 Paper 2007-4001 which
  Includes web Links to Standards Documents Etc
• Phase 3 Documents are at https//projects.nrl.n
  avy.mil/busstandards/index.php

17
Joint ORS Office and Community
18
ORS Core Office and Broader Community

• ORS Office Standup is May 21, 2007. Properly
  setting up the core office relationships,
  incentives, and authorities is probably the
  biggest current challenge effecting long term
  success of ORS.

19
Core Office Design Essential to Reduce Inertia
Required to Move from Needs to Capabilities
Properly Understood Documented Rqmt
New Capability Acquired
Operational System Available
Service Rqmts Divisions
Enabling Tech / New Capability Developed
COCOM Support Services
Operational Use
Operational Need
DoD National Ops Community
Govt Acq Industry
ST/RD Community
Informed Development
Rqmts Process
Force Training
Acquisition Process
Transition To Space Ops

• ORS Office Formally Includes All Key Functions to
  Increase Information Flow and Reduce Inertia
  Needed to Transition Through Each Community

20
Conclusions

• ORS is Maturing from All ST/RD Efforts to Now
  Include COCOM Support, Acquisition and Operations
  Arms in a Formal Office Construct
• The Joint ORS Office Standup will Occur May 21,
  2007
• TacSat Experiments are Intended to Co-Evolve
  Concepts and Technologies to Spiral Operational
  Capabilities and Inform Acquisition
• Although Not Their Main Focus, TacSats may have
  Potential for NSF
• Expect NSF-ORS Technology Development
  Collaboration would be Productive
• ORS ST Vector 2
• ORS Payload Technology Development Initiative
• Achieving Broad Acceptance and Volume is a Key to
  Success for the Spacecraft Bus Standards
• Would be Great to See Some ORS and NFS
  Collaboration with these Bus Standards