resources allocated according to priorities (fiscal as well as personnel). A useful strategic analysis would address the following four major items:

• An assessment of the current state of affairs.

• Specific goals in each of the major space situational awareness areas, along with concrete metrics for success and associated timelines over, for example, 5 to 10 years.

• The funding required to meet the goals laid out above, detailed with clear priorities identified in case full funding cannot be provided by the U.S. Air Force (USAF).

• A means of assessing progress in achieving AFSPC objectives. This will allow AFSPC to gauge its ability not only to meet the original strategic goals but also to respond dynamically to the ever-changing space environment.

A good strategic analysis will result in a vision that will provide not only a roadmap of what an organization intends to accomplish over a reasonable period of time (probably 5 to 10 years), but also information on how these activities will be completed. The vision would include short- and long-term objectives, a schedule of benchmark achievements to be accomplished, and priorities among them. Noting budget realities within the plan will help focus its priorities. Regular meetings involving JSpOC stakeholders and users would be part of the vision’s development, execution, and review, providing opportunities for the JSpOC’s activities and work to be communicated to the space community, while also providing for any algorithm and model development or upgrades to be peer reviewed and validated. The vision would be revised and updated at regular intervals, as would requirements and assessments of how well the JSpOC is meeting them.

Recommendation: The Air Force Space Command should conduct a strategic analysis of its space situational awareness-related activities, particularly as they pertain to the directives of the 2010 National Space Policy.

Recommendation: The Air Force Space Command should further develop the vision for the future of the Joint Space Operations Center Mission System and the system of systems based on the 2010 National Space Policy.

AFSPC CULTURE AND INTERACTION WITH THE COMMUNITY

Beyond the improved hardware and software infrastructure support that the JSpOC Mission System (JMS) represents, the committee also found that cultural changes within AFSPC will be necessary for the continued and future success of the JSpOC enterprise. There is currently a significant disconnect between advanced research in the field of space situational awareness, writ large, and the actual practice enshrined in the current AFSPC standardized astrodynamics algorithms. A similar disconnect exists between the activities and needs of the user community and the activities of AFSPC and the JSpOC. This indicates that a culture at AFSPC has developed that is isolated from current research trends and advances, meaning that the knowledge and even vocabulary of key players within AFSPC have in many instances diverged from those of the research community over time. This disconnect not only inhibits AFSPC from taking advantage of new ideas and processes that could improve the system and potentially increase efficiency, but also means that AFSPC becomes unable to describe its current practices in terms of commonly used terminology within the larger space community. This divide cuts both ways and also prevents the user community from properly understanding and interpreting the information that is distributed by AFSPC and the JSpOC. These disconnects can be traced back to a lack of proper documentation of the AFSPC algorithms, the absence of external technical peer review of AFSPC activities, and the lack of direct interaction between the larger user and research communities and AFSPC. This divergence between AFSPC and the user and research community will only grow if it is not appropriately addressed.

A key component of these disconnects is a lack of peer review of technical developments and activities. While some groups and individuals within AFSPC might publish their work through a rigorous peer review process, the



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