1. Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) and TacSat Overview for NSF Small Sat Workshop May 16, 2007 OSD Office of Secretary of Defense Mike Hurley 202-767-0528 mHurley@space.nrl.navy.mil TacSat-1 TacSat-2 TacSat-3 TacSat-4 Col Tom Doyne 703-696-5766 Thomas.Doyne@OSD.mil Dr Peter Wegner 505-853-3486 Peter.Wegner@kirtland.af.mill Lt Col George Moretti 505-846-0623 George.Moretti@kirtland.af.mill Mark Johnson 202-404-5328 mJohnson@space.nrl.navy.mil Tim Duffey 202-404-3041 tDuffeyy@space.nrl.navy.mil Presented by: Chris Huffine 202-404-4272 Chris.Huffine@nrl.navy.mil Chris Olmedo 505-853-2867 Christopher.Olmedo@kirtland.af.mil Supporting Authors on Joint RSC5 Paper and Similar Presentations Also Shown:

2. .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. .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. .4 Where Is ORS Development? 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 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY03 FY04 OFT ORS Unarticulated Requirement…Started TacSat-1 May 2003, Spacecraft Complete May 2004 Acquisitions Start FY08-10 (POM) ORS Requirements in Development… STRATCOM Vision and CONOPS Defined ORS Momentum Picked Up in FY04-FY05 Service S&T Communities (ONR, Army, AFRL) Began Funding and POMs for TacSat Experimentation (~$20M per TacSat Experiment) WE ARE HERE Joint ORS Office being Stood Up 5/21/07 TacSat-3 & 4 Missions Selected via Joint Process Led by AFSPC and STRATCOM 120 Day ORS Study & Report to Congress Jan 2005 US Space Transportation Policy Calls for ORS Access & Use

5. .5 TacSat Update: #1 - #4 TacSat-1 – Navy Led Experiment for OSD’s 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 – Launch on Minotaur-I, December 2007 TacSat-4 – Mission Jointly Selected on October 2005 – Navy Leading With COTM/Data-X/BFT – Launch on Minotaur-IV, October 2008 TacSat-5 : Selection this Summer TacSat-2 TacSat-3 TacSat-4 TacSat-1 Experiment w/ Key System Elements to Mature Understanding and CONOPS for Operational Utility and Systems Overall Experimentation Purpose

6. .6 TacSat Cycle Selections are Approximately Annual COCOMS & OPERATIONAL SERVICE COMPONENTS S&T/R&D COMMUNITY Needs & Requirements DoD S&T Vector #2 Enabling Tech Objectives for Launch, Spacecraft, Operations, & Theater Integration TacSat Design & Selection Operational Experimentation and MUA OPSAT Acquisition Consideration Operational Utility, CONOPS, TTPS Enabling Technologies and ORS System Development TacSat Implementation Increased Technology Readiness and/or System Development

7. .7 TacSat Cycle Selections are Approximately Annual COCOMS & OPERATIONAL SERVICE COMPONENTS S&T/R&D COMMUNITY Needs & Requirements DoD S&T Vector #2 Enabling Tech Objectives for Launch, Spacecraft, Operations, & Theater Integration TacSat Design & Selection Operational Experimentation and MUA OPSAT Acquisition Consideration Operational Utility, CONOPS, TTPS Enabling Technologies and ORS System Development TacSat Implementation Increased Technology Readiness and/or System Development Battlefield Characterization for Camouflage, etc.  HSI High Rate Theater CDL Downlink

8. .8 From S&T Vector #2 (SPRING 06) Responsive Satellite Enabling Technology 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 Modular Design: – Plug ‘n play architecture – Standard, open architecture interfaces Rapid Deployment: – Mission planning tools / tailored orbits – Fast assembly and test – Rapid autonomous deployment / checkout Advanced Small / Microsat Technologies: – Efficient propulsion – Advanced power – Lightweight, low cost apertures – Low cost rad-tolerant components S&T Vector #2 Guides DoD Investment in Response Space Area for Coordinated Investment in Enabling Capabilities. AFRL Leads for DoD. Responsive Responsive Affordable Affordable Employable Employable Integrated Integrated

9. .9 ORS Payload Technology Initiative

10. .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. .11 ORS Payload Technologies Awarded

12. .12 Joint Evaluation and Award Summary So Good Consensus was Achieved Resulting in the Top Picks of Each Department being Awarded Almost Evenly Out of 15 Total Awards

13. .13 Spacecraft Bus Standards Initiatives

14. .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 – Gov’t / Industry Prototype Standard Bus System Development – Naval Research Lab (NRL) and JHU Applied Physics Lab (APL) Led Phase 4 – Production Phase (SMC Led) All Phases Supported by the Nation’s Collective System Engineering Expertise System Engineering Working Group (Government, Industry, Academia) 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 General Officer/Lab Director Steering Group PHASE 1 MIT/LL LEAD Analysis Bus for TacSat-3 Bus for TacSat-4

15. .15 Relationship to Other Standards Working Groups On-going Standards Development will Continue OSD Initiative Focused on Getting to Initial Buy and Setting Up a Sound Spiral Process Long Term Visions RSAT AFRL Plug & Play WGs Others NASA Modular Bus WG 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 AIAA Standards Long Term Technology (S&T) Oriented Efforts Consortium Standards/Technology for TacSat-4 and 1st SMC ORS/JWS Buy Ready-to-Aggressive Standards/Tech. for TacSat-3 Experiment Ready Standards/Tech. for 2nd ORS/JWS Buy

16. .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.navy.mil/busstandards/index.php

17. .17 Joint ORS Office and Community

18. .18 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. ORS Core Office and Broader Community

19. .19 Core Office Design Essential to Reduce Inertia Required to Move from Needs to Capabilities ORS Office Formally Includes All Key Functions to Increase Information Flow and Reduce Inertia Needed to Transition Through Each Community Operational Need Rqmts Process Informed Development Acquisition Process Properly Understood & Documented Rqmt Enabling Tech / New Capability Developed New Capability Acquired Transition To Space Ops Force Training Operational Use Operational System Available Service Rqmts Divisions S&T/R&D Community DoD & National Ops Community COCOM Support Services Govt Acq & Industry

20. .20 Conclusions ORS is Maturing from All S&T/R&D 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 S&T 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