1
Introduction

THE NAVY AND SPACE, PAST AND PRESENT

The Navy and the Marine Corps both as users and as developers have a long, highly diverse, and important history involving space.1 Every day, naval forces around the world rely on hundreds of thousands of “space exchanges”—Global Positioning System (GPS) locations, instant messages, e-mails, and weather images—all due to an amazing history of space-related developments. The Navy’s interest in space is long, officially starting with the establishment of the forerunner of the U.S. Naval Observatory in 1830. Its interests in space are diverse, divided among surveillance, communications, navigation, environmental monitoring, rocket design, and support of manned spaceflight. And the Navy’s interest in space is important, because without space contributions it would not be possible to conduct modern naval operations. The importance of space to naval operations is the reason for examining the history as part of the prologue to future investments in naval space research and development. This history (further expanded in Appendix A) focuses first on the significant leverage gained from satellite system performance supporting naval needs and then on the resulting naval satellite acquisition and operational efforts.

Many “firsts” in space are a credit to earlier naval space research and development activities: first space communications used in operations—Moon Bounce;

1  

An extended review of the Navy’s history in space is presented in Gary Federici, Robert Hess, and Kent Pelot, 1997, From the Sea to the Stars: A History of U.S. Navy Space and Space-Related Activities, Working Paper, Center for Naval Analyses, Alexandria, Va., and in the references cited therein.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities 1 Introduction THE NAVY AND SPACE, PAST AND PRESENT The Navy and the Marine Corps both as users and as developers have a long, highly diverse, and important history involving space.1 Every day, naval forces around the world rely on hundreds of thousands of “space exchanges”—Global Positioning System (GPS) locations, instant messages, e-mails, and weather images—all due to an amazing history of space-related developments. The Navy’s interest in space is long, officially starting with the establishment of the forerunner of the U.S. Naval Observatory in 1830. Its interests in space are diverse, divided among surveillance, communications, navigation, environmental monitoring, rocket design, and support of manned spaceflight. And the Navy’s interest in space is important, because without space contributions it would not be possible to conduct modern naval operations. The importance of space to naval operations is the reason for examining the history as part of the prologue to future investments in naval space research and development. This history (further expanded in Appendix A) focuses first on the significant leverage gained from satellite system performance supporting naval needs and then on the resulting naval satellite acquisition and operational efforts. Many “firsts” in space are a credit to earlier naval space research and development activities: first space communications used in operations—Moon Bounce; 1   An extended review of the Navy’s history in space is presented in Gary Federici, Robert Hess, and Kent Pelot, 1997, From the Sea to the Stars: A History of U.S. Navy Space and Space-Related Activities, Working Paper, Center for Naval Analyses, Alexandria, Va., and in the references cited therein.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities first controllable launch vehicle—Viking/Vanguard; first satellite tracking system—Minitrack; oldest orbiting satellite—Vanguard; first successful electronic intelligence reconnaissance satellite—GRAB (for Galactic Radiation and Background); first space navigation satellite—Transit; first space object tracking system—the Naval Space Surveillance System; first demonstration of on-orbit atomic clocks—Timation, which led to the current GPS constellation; first operational military broadcast satellite—the naval Fleet Satellite (FLTSAT) communications system; first American man in space; first American man to orbit Earth; first Space Shuttle crew; first American woman astronaut; and many others. The list is long and diverse; the results are a key enabler for today’s naval operations. These and many other technical accomplishments were advanced in a larger historical environment that included the following: The large U.S. space effort, urgently begun in 1958: formation of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (to which much of the Navy space technology capability was transferred) required Navy operational support and used Navy and Marine Corps astronauts; Appreciation by the U.S. Congress of the large expense of space programs, and the push for “common user systems”—for example, weather satellites; Issuance of the Department of Defense (DOD) directive (with the transfer of the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) space program and the formation of the National Reconnaissance Office) giving the Secretary of the Air Force the “Executive Agent” role in 1961;2 it was rescinded in 19703 but reinstated in 2003;4 Dominant strategic nuclear priorities in DOD space programs, which continued to the end of the Cold War; Large-scale, rapidly developing commercial space communications activity, beginning with the first commercial communications satellite (COMSAT) in 1961, exploited by the Navy beginning in the mid-1960s; Experiments by the Naval Research Laboratory with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory’s Lincoln Experimental Satellite series in the mid-1960s, indicating advantages of ultrahigh-frequency (UHF) communications for Navy ships, which led to the Navy’s proposal for a UHF fleet satellite communications constellation (later called FLTSAT); 2   Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense. 1961. “Development of Space Systems,” DOD Directive 5160.32, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., March 6. 3   David Packard, Secretary of Defense. 1970. “Development of Space Systems,” DOD Directive 5160.32 (Revised), Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., September 8. 4   Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense. 2003. “DOD Executive Agent for Space,” DOD Directive 5101.2, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., June 3.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities Soviet fleet expansion in the 1970s, leading to Navy Outlaw Shark experiments on over-the-horizon targeting; Resurgent DOD space activity in the early 1980s, leading to these events: recommendations made by the Naval Studies Board for increased Navy space activity and a space cadre;5 establishment of the Strategic Defense Initiative; establishment of a commander-in-chief for space; creation of the Navy Space Command; issuance of the first Navy space policy statement; and recognition of the Navy’s role in theater and ballistic missile defense (TBMD); Use of Air Force Defense Satellite Program satellites to detect some types of large aircraft; The end of the Cold War, together with the Navy’s new strategy in the early 1990s of overland power projection from the sea, leading to a new Navy space policy and an expanded need for overland space imagery for Navy fire support (especially important during operations in Kuwait and Kosovo); A network-centric warfare thrust in the mid- to late-1990s, indicating a need for greater Navy space connectivity; An erosion of Navy (and national) space science and technology capability; Renewed space activity by all Services initiated by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; a new, responsive Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) space program established; Secretary of the Air Force (again) given the DOD oversight role for space;6 and a panel report issued by the Center for Naval Analyses recommending renewed Navy response to space development;7 and The appearance of recurrent themes of space warfare and space control (studied beginning in the late 1950s) and space-based radar (studied intensively for ocean surveillance by the Navy in the 1970s). Over the next 6 years (FY04 through FY09), the Navy plans to spend approximately $1.3 billion on space-related activities annually.8 Of this total, nearly 90 percent is allocated to the Navy’s communications satellite programs (the 5   National Research Council. 1980. Volume I: Report of the Panel on the Implications of Future Space Systems for the U.S. Navy (U), National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. (classified). 6   DOD Directive 5101.2 assigns the DOD Executive Agent for Space responsibility to the Secretary of the Air Force, but goes on to further delegate the responsibility to the Under Secretary of the Air Force. The complete text of DOD Directive 5101.2 is presented in Appendix B of this report. 7   Panel to Review Naval Space. 2002. Report of the Panel to Review Naval Space: Assured Space Capabilities for Critical Mission Support, Center for Naval Analyses; Alexandria, Va., March 19. 8   Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). 2002. “RDT&E Programs (R1),” Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., February, p. N-1.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) and the UHF Follow-on (UFO) system) and the acquisition of satellite communications terminals. In total, the Navy’s space-related budget is allocated to the following: Communications satellites (UFO, MUOS), 49.8 percent; Satellite communications terminals, 38.7 percent; Naval Network and Space Operations Command, 5.2 percent; Global Positioning System receivers and equipment, 2.8 percent; Spectrum management and interference reduction, 1.5 percent; Navy Technical Exploitation of National Capabilities Program and the Ground Moving Target Indication Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration, 1.1 percent; Meteorology and oceanography (satellites and operations), 0.9 percent; and Missile warning, 0.05 percent.9 In addition to these direct space-related funds, the Navy supports a small amount of space science and technology (S&T) development work, much of it performed through the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) and its Naval Center for Space Technology (NCST). In FY03, the Office of Naval Research (ONR) funded studies of environmental effects ($10.7 million in basic research (6.1) funds) and spacecraft technology ($3.3 million in applied research (6.2) funds) but supported no advanced research and development (6.3) projects.10 This support amounts to less than 1 percent of the Department of the Navy’s FY03 combined 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget.11 These amounts contrast sharply with typical spacecraft costs. For instance, NCST recently received a contract from the Office of Force Transformation to develop and launch a new Tactical Microsatellite (TacSat) for under $15 million (approximately $9 million for the spacecraft and $6 million for the launch); if TacSat had been supported by ONR, it would have consumed ONR’s entire annual space S&T budget. Recent experimental meteorology and oceanography (METOC) satellite programs (Coriolis-WindSat, Naval EarthMap Observer (NEMO), and Geosynchronous Imaging Fourier Transform Spectrometer (GIFTS)) received (or were projected to receive) a total of $50 9   Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). 2002. Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., February. 10   RADM Jay Cohen, USN, Chief of Naval Research, presentation to the committee, July 29, 2003. 11   DOD budget figures show that the Department of the Navy total 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budgets were approximately $1.61 billion in FY03. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). 2002. “RDT&E Programs (R1),” Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., February, p. N-1.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities million to $80 million in Navy support (primarily as 6.3 funds) for satellite development construction and prelaunch testing.12 Current Navy responsibilities include the operation of UFO and Geodetic Satellite (Geosat) systems and the operation (coordinated with NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)) of Coriolis—a satellite, launched through the Space Test Program, that carries the NRL-built WindSat sea-surface wind speed and direction measurement sensor. The Naval Space Surveillance (NAVSPASUR) system—in continuous operation by the Navy since 1958—was recently transferred to the Air Force. The Navy also participates in planning for NOAA’s National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), due for initial launch in 2012. NASA supports space science activities at NRL and at the Applied Physics Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University, and the Air Force, through its GPS Joint Program Office, supports NRL to provide GPS clock-monitoring and orbit-calculation functions. CROSSCUTTING THEMES The Department of the Navy strategy and framework for transformation and implementation of the National Security Strategy is embodied in the Naval Operating Concept for Joint Operations, of which Sea Power 2113 is an integral capstone concept. In brief, Sea Power 21 is composed of pillars—Sea Strike, Sea Shield, and Sea Basing—and a foundation, FORCEnet, that addresses the command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) architecture and operations necessary to achieve Sea Power 21. As discussed throughout this report, Sea Power 21 has critical and enduring dependencies on capabilities provided by space mission areas under the National Security Space (NSS) umbrella:14 intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; meteorology and oceanography; theater and ballistic missile defense; communications; position, navigation, and timing; and space control (see Box 1.1 for further description of these areas). It is significant that all of these space mission areas are currently undergoing transformation as new systems or major block 12   Figures extracted from recent DOD budget documentation: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). 2002. Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., February. 13   ADM Vern Clark, USN, Chief of Naval Operations. 2002. “Sea Power 21,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, Vol. 128, No. 10, pp. 32-41. 14   National Security Space (NSS) is currently headed by the DOD Executive Agent for Space and includes all U.S. military and intelligence satellite systems and much of their operational support.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities improvements are developed and fielded. The Navy’s continuing involvement and influence in this NSS transformation will be essential. In addition, the Navy is beginning to recognize the new environment, processes, and opportunities created by the designation of a DOD Executive Agent for Space and coincident reorganizations of other DOD offices.15 As part of the Navy’s ongoing response to its needs and priorities, the Navy has established a multitiered approach to the development of large-scale systems (such as the space mission areas referred to above). This approach focuses on high-level input to establish and direct the Navy’s priorities and responsibilities across six elements of involvement: Strategic guidance, Needs and requirements, Acquisition, Science and technology, Experimentation, and Personnel. These elements help to demarcate the Navy’s involvement in NSS programs into a three-tiered response: (1) guidance on the Navy’s strategic goals, (2) guidance on the Navy’s roles and responsibilities, and (3) specific guidance on implementation, tailored to optimize the Navy’s participation within each of the relevant space mission areas. Thus, top-down direction and support backed up by rigorous operations analysis across the Department of the Navy will be needed to integrate these elements with the space mission areas and related space programs to generate the desired Sea Power 21 capabilities. Recent Navy reorganizations, particularly in the Fleet Forces Command and in the offices of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs, appear to be moving in the right direction to meet these needs, but updates to the Department of the Navy space policy,16 needed to provide overarching and cohesive guidance regarding space support, remain uncompleted. 15   See Appendix B for the full text of DOD Directive 5101.2 establishing the DOD Executive Agent for Space. Additional reorganizations include disestablishment of the U.S. Space Command and the transfer of its responsibilities to the U.S. Strategic Command; integration of the Naval Space Command and Naval Network Operations Command into the new Naval Network and Space Operations Command and placement of this command under the newly created Naval Network Warfare Command; and creation of a Marine Corps component command (Marine Corps Strategic Command) in the U.S. Strategic Command. 16   The current Department of the Navy space policy was established in 1993. See John H. Dalton, Secretary of the Navy. 1993. “Department of the Navy Space Policy,” SECNAV Instruction 5400.39B, Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C., August 26.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities BOX 1.1 National Security Space Mission Areas Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Most direct information-gathering systems of relevance to National Security Space (NSS) activities are included under the umbrella of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) functions. These include not only optical and radar imagery systems, but also electronic and radio-frequency monitoring and detection systems (broadly described as electronic intelligence, or ELINT). Historically, the Navy has taken a strong position in the development and use of national ELINT systems. Meteorology and Oceanography Also described as environmental monitoring, the space mission area of meteorology and oceanography (METOC) encompasses all measurements aimed at providing information about the physical environment (air, land, sea surface, and undersea) that may be needed by the Services. These functions include atmospheric and undersea weather predictions, and they also assist Department of Defense (DOD) mapping, charting, and geodesy activities. The Navy has always led the DOD activities with respect to all over-water environmental monitoring. As a result of a 1994 Presidential Directive, all DOD and civilian environmental satellites are to transition their fielding and operation to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) by 2010.1 NOAA is currently the lead acquisition authority for the national Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) and Polar Operational Environmental Satellite (POES), while the Air Force operates the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program. The Navy has built and is still operating the Geodetic Satellite (Geosat) and its successors; data from these satellites are made publicly available through NOAA. Theater and Ballistic Missile Defense Early warning for theater and ballistic missile defense encompasses those systems and capabilities necessary to detect and track cruise and ballistic missile threats. Owing to the high speed of these threats, integrated low-latency, early-detection systems are critical, to provide an ability to mount a counterstrike against an incoming missile. Currently all missile defense activities (theater and strategic) are managed by the Missile Defense Agency, with the Navy assigned as the lead Service with respect to sea-based theater missile defense. 1   National Science and Technology Council. 1994. “Convergence of the U.S.-Polar-Orbiting Operation Environmental Satellite Systems,” Presidential Decision Directive, Washington, D.C., May.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities Communications Communications provide the critical command-and-control links that enable effective coordination of all the components of the DOD. Current military satellite communications are provided by a wide range of systems, most of which are fielded under the Air Force’s acquisition lead. The exception is the Navy’s current acquisition and operation of the ultrahigh-frequency (UHF) family of satellites (UHF Follow-on, or UFO, and the Mobile User Objective System (MUOS)). Position, Navigation, and Timing Space-based navigation systems enable the determination of precise, three-dimensional global positioning data as well as providing a consistent global standard timing signal. Currently these capabilities are provided by the Navigation Satellite Timing and Ranging/Global Positioning System (NAVSTAR/GPS) satellite constellation. GPS is managed by the Interagency GPS Executive Board, co-chaired by officials from the DOD and the Department of Transportation. The Air Force is currently the lead acquisition authority for NAVSTAR/GPS; the Navy is the lead Service for DOD time standards. Space Control The DOD defines space control as “combat and combat support operations to ensure freedom of action in space for the United States and its allies and, when directed, deny an adversary freedom of action in space.”2 Accordingly, space control encompasses three mission needs: (1) monitoring of the space environment and disposition of all space assets (national and foreign), (2) assurance that U.S. forces will have access to space-dependent capabilities even in the event of hostile action against U.S. space assets, and (3) the ability to deny adversaries access to their space assets. Current space control activities are being undertaken throughout the DOD. The Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center has established a Space Superiority System Program Office, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is also involved in the development of new space control technologies and systems. The Navy built the Naval Space Surveillance (NAVSPASUR) system that was transferred to the Air Force in 2003. Following this transfer and additional Air Force study, the Air Force decided that NAVSPASUR fills a critical space control need and will continue its operations for the foreseeable future. 2   William Cohen, Secretary of Defense. 1999. “Department of Defense Space Policy,” DOD Directive 3100.10, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., July 9, p. 23.

OCR for page 20
Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT The Committee on the Navy’s Needs in Space for Providing Future Capabilities focused its findings and recommendations not only to provide specific recommendations for improvement with respect to space mission areas, but to also integrate these recommendations in order to offer guidance for general coordination and interaction on each of the six elements of involvement listed above. To this end, the report presents three levels of discussion: Chapter 2 addresses the space strategic framework, in which is set the Navy’s vision and concepts of operations regarding support of future space systems; Chapter 3 discusses the Navy’s roles and responsibilities necessary to achieve and support a Navy space strategy; and Chapter 4 provides implementation guidance tailored to the Navy’s participation within each of the NSS mission areas. Chapter 5 then provides a view of the potential role for space capabilities supporting naval forces in the future and a vision of the Navy’s engagement across the activities of NSS.