It seems to me – based on analyses we did several years ago – that as the U.S. Navy flies out their existing UFO and FLTSATCOM constellations – which primarily support UHF tactical comms – and replace them with MUOS spacecraft – that there will still be a gap in “required” versus “existing/planned” UHF SATCOM capability for DoD.
As UFO/FLTSATCOM spacecraft are retired and replaced by MUOS - will there even be a reduction of UHF tactical comms capability?
Common suggestions: 1. “Soldiers” can always just use their cellphones for tactical comms 2. Use Iridium
Re: #s 1 and 2 above: Iridium has limited capabilities – akin to tactical UHF, but: 1. Are units equipped with it? 2. Are the handsets qualified for snow/desert/jungle (i.e., “ruggedized”)? 3. DoD has added an encryption “package” (making the handset larger and bulkier than its commercial version) – so now tactical units have to deal with an additional layer of daily encryption protocols as well? 4. Do units practice there TTPs (tactics, techniques and procedures) solely Iridium-phone based for a tactical engagement? 5. Are we going to send a tactical unit out on a mission and tell them all to make sure they have their cellphones turned on? a. Do we issue them their cellphones? b. Do we tell them their “codenames”/”screen names” for the day? 6. There are THOUSANDS of UHF SATCOM pieces of equipment already fielded - troops and the command structure are used to training and fighting that way - massive embedded capability already paid for 7. What is the cost/benefit analysis of annual leased Iridium support versus deploying more dedicated MILSTACOM UHF? a. Or is it just fait accompli that DoD is so SATCOM-capability limited that they have to eat the costs to obtain required capability?
What if: (An idea to supplement UHF comms on an as-needed, responsive basis) 1. Build 3 small satellites whose only function is UHF comms payload a. Have them “in the barn”, replicate current MUOS payload ? 2. Size them so 3 can fit on a Minotaur 1 vehicle 3. Launch in case of a need in a particular region/area (say a short-notice military deployment) a. Launch from Vandenberg b. Tailor orbit for coverage centered over area of interest i. Orbital altitude of 5,000 km should provide continuous coverage with pass duration of 142.1 minutes; altitude of 10,000 km gives pass duration of 465.4 minutes ii. Orbit part of the trade space to optimize size, weight and power (SWaP) of the spacecraft and payload performance parameters
It seems to me – based on analyses we did several years ago – that as the U.S. Navy flies out their existing UFO and FLTSATCOM constellations – which primarily support UHF tactical comms – and replace them with MUOS spacecraft – that there will still be a gap in “required” versus “existing/planned” UHF SATCOM capability for DoD.
ReplyDeleteAs UFO/FLTSATCOM spacecraft are retired and replaced by MUOS - will there even be a reduction of UHF tactical comms capability?
Common suggestions:
1. “Soldiers” can always just use their cellphones for tactical comms
2. Use Iridium
Re: #s 1 and 2 above:
Iridium has limited capabilities – akin to tactical UHF, but:
1. Are units equipped with it?
2. Are the handsets qualified for snow/desert/jungle (i.e., “ruggedized”)?
3. DoD has added an encryption “package” (making the handset larger and bulkier than its commercial version) – so now tactical units have to deal with an additional layer of daily encryption protocols as well?
4. Do units practice there TTPs (tactics, techniques and procedures) solely Iridium-phone based for a tactical engagement?
5. Are we going to send a tactical unit out on a mission and tell them all to make sure they have their cellphones turned on?
a. Do we issue them their cellphones?
b. Do we tell them their “codenames”/”screen names” for the day?
6. There are THOUSANDS of UHF SATCOM pieces of equipment already fielded - troops and the command structure are used to training and fighting that way - massive embedded capability already paid for
7. What is the cost/benefit analysis of annual leased Iridium support versus deploying more dedicated MILSTACOM UHF?
a. Or is it just fait accompli that DoD is so SATCOM-capability limited that they have to eat the costs to obtain required capability?
What if: (An idea to supplement UHF comms on an as-needed, responsive basis)
1. Build 3 small satellites whose only function is UHF comms payload
a. Have them “in the barn”, replicate current MUOS payload ?
2. Size them so 3 can fit on a Minotaur 1 vehicle
3. Launch in case of a need in a particular region/area (say a short-notice military deployment)
a. Launch from Vandenberg
b. Tailor orbit for coverage centered over area of interest
i. Orbital altitude of 5,000 km should provide continuous coverage with pass duration of 142.1 minutes; altitude of 10,000 km gives pass duration of 465.4 minutes
ii. Orbit part of the trade space to optimize size, weight and power (SWaP) of the spacecraft and payload performance parameters