Government Satellite Acquisition Needs Improvement, AIAA Told
ANAHEIM, Calif. - The highly specialized capacity the U.S. government often needs poses a difficult situation for satellite operators and manufacturers, which place more value on generalized capacity, said industry executives during a panel on satellite communications acquisitions. More generalized capacity allows operators to switch among private industry users once a contract is up or business plans change, something far more difficult for satellites made for government use, said Kay Sears, president of Intelsat General, at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics conference. “Once you start to introduce the anti-jamming or military frequencies, then it becomes a risk to sell,” she said. As a result, different types of acquisition models are necessary to make sure the capacity is always there for military needs, she said. One way to improve the process would be to allow long-term contracts for satellite capacity, she said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The government and taxpayers could be better served if government acquisition was more like the commercial process, said John Celli, president of Space Systems/Loral. For instance, the government and the manufacturer should “understand and maintain” a requirements baseline for the satellite, meaning changes can’t be introduced throughout the process, allowing for timely delivery of satellites, he said. A “stable funding baseline” is also important to keep things on track, he said. Satellite funding should be appropriated three years prior to the launch date and launch vehicle funding should be appropriated two years before launch, he said. The use of “competent” and “empowered” on-site teams to manage development would also improve the process, said Celli. Such teams could resolve issues quickly if problems arose, he said.
The Defense Department has a very different mindset from commercial providers, said John Wormington, Aerospace Corp. vice president of program assessment. The Defense Department is “very intolerant of risk” since the services are often being used in new environments outside of the “knowledge base” and that “don’t have predecessors,” making them riskier than most commercial operations.
Commercial satellite industry input shows a modified Defense Department procurement is needed to reduce cost and maximize scheduling benefits, said Col. Chuck Cynamon, commander of the U.S. Air Force’s Advanced Concepts Group. ACG recently requested information on the acquisition process and recommended further study, he said. The industry said the Defense Department must minimize research and development requirements and adopt a commercial business rhythm to improve the process, he said. Reviews and documentation requirements often drive up costs that can kill satellite deals, he said. Commercial access to military spectrum would also be a help to the commercial/government communications relationship, he said. The Defense Department will have to offer its support to commercial providers in filings with the ITU and FCC to open the spectrum for commercial providers, he said.
The mix of commercial and government satellites used by the military isn’t expected to change much over the next decade, said Douglas Loverro, executive director of the U.S. Air Force’s Space and Missile Center. Since the mid-1990’s, about 80 percent of the military’s satellite traffic has been handled by commercial satellites and the rest by government satellites, a ratio unlikely to change as the government relies increasingly on satellites for complex and sensitive military operations, Loverro said.
But the military will likely rely more on its own satellites to provide some of the highest-bandwidth and most sensitive services, such as for unmanned aerial vehicles, Loverro said. He said he doesn’t want to write off commercial satellites for UAVs in the future, but he hasn’t “seen the investment” by commercial providers in anti-jamming technology that the military needs. To handling increasing needs for transponder capacity, the government will be buying and leasing more, he said. In general, the government will “buy for backbone and lease for surge,” he said. Laser communications over satellite, long touted as the satellite technology “of tomorrow,” may become operational this decade, he said.