GPS World

Tag: Defense PNT newsletter

  • Tim Tebow, GPS, Space Acquisition, 60 Minutes and the GAO

    Don Jewell
    Don Jewell

    Tim Tebow, GPS, space acquisition, 60 Minutes and the GAO.

    One of these things is not like the others. When you first learn this Sesame Street song as a child, where it may be presented as a series of cartoonish pictures, the odd item is usually fairly obvious. Years later, when you encounter this deceptively simple statement on a physics test at Stanford University — where the choices are beguilingly similar formulas or algorithms — the correct answer may be a bit more difficult to determine, and may actually require serious thought.

    It seems the U.S. government (USG) acquisition cadre seems to have a similar problem when it comes to recognizing the critical importance of small businesses. The USG has a federally documented mandate and stringent policies (unfortunately, often ignored) in place to support small businesses in the United States. Supposedly, a quota system is in place where, in a perfect world, 23 percent of all eligible contracts should be won and performed by small businesses — the word eligible being the fly in the ointment.

    Small Business

    For government contractor purposes, what exactly is a small business? This is not an easy question to quantify or answer simply but let’s try. NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) codes specify, among other requirements, the maximum number of employees in a business qualified to compete for contracts of a certain dollar amount — that is one way to designate not only a small company, but their small business qualifications as well. Some companies are not only small in size, but have special qualifications that allow them to compete in a special category for certain contracts; such as being owned by a woman, a Native American, an Eskimo, a handicapped person (any of the five senses), or by the economic success or lack thereof, where the business is geographically located, or the population it serves and employs.

    As you can readily see, this small business definition can become unwieldy in a hurry. For our purposes, let’s describe a small business as a company of 500 employees or less that may meet any or all of the aforementioned qualifications, but most importantly meets the operational requirement of having a certain field of expertise for which it is known and at which it excels in. In short, the small company is the domain expert in a certain field of endeavor and typically is sought after by government (municipal, state and federal) and commercial entities alike for their expertise.

    Such companies are also sought out by large government contractor competitors known as prime companies that may range in size from several thousand to hundreds of thousands of employees. These companies have historically been likened to a battleship that takes forever to change course. The large primes are the Warren Buffets of government contracting, as they typically have tons of resources and stores of cash, but they historically lack the flexibility, expertise and low cost structure (read low overhead) of the small companies. Therefore, the smaller companies are frequently sought out as critical team members on large government contracts at all levels. Plus, since there is supposedly, in writing anyway, a small business quota system in place, if you can place a small company on any government contract, so much the better. To the prime and the U.S. government, it may be just statistics, but to the small company, it is often a matter of success or failure for the company.

    It is a fact of life in government contracting that many times the small companies’ domain expertise is why the prime, who put a winning team together, wins the big contract in the first place. You would think this would ensure success for the small company. However, “build a better mouse trap” and “build it and they will come” are nice clichés, but often get lost in the real profit-and-loss world of government contracting.

    In my experience, problems typically come about because both the government and the prime contractors lose sight of why the small, domain expert company is on the team in the first place. Great small companies are so good at what they do, they typically under promise and over deliver and begin to make both the government oversight institutions and the prime look bad. By bad, I mean less efficient, not as capable, and burdened with a plethora of rules and regulations and monstrous overhead rates that rarely apply to small companies.

    Don’t think that I have a problem with prime contractors. I worked for two of the largest for many years and they were and are great companies. None of the satellites we have in orbit today would be there without prime contractors. So prime contractors are a great asset to this country and to the space programs, but even large primes occasionally lose their way or fail to deliver.

    Acquisition Analogy

    Bear with me as I present a simple football analogy some serious thought as it pertains to GPS contracting.

    Tim Tebow was/is arguably one of the most famous and sought after American college football quarterbacks of all time. He was the first college sophomore to win the coveted Heisman Trophy, the First round NFL draft pick in 2010, and the winner of two NCAA National Football Championships.

    At the conclusion of his phenomenal college career, Tim Tebow held the Southeastern Conference’s all-time records in college football for both career passing efficiency and total rushing touchdowns, appearing second and tenth (respectively) in the NCAA record book in these categories.

    Playing his rookie season for the Denver Broncos, Tim started the last three games and became the team’s full-time starting quarterback beginning in the sixth game of 2011. The Denver Broncos were a dismal 1–4 before Tim became the starting quarterback, but began winning with him on the field, playing just as he did in college, often scrambling and running with the football and coming from behind late in the fourth quarter to win. Under his tutelage and leadership, Denver won their first AFC West title and first playoff game since 2005, defeating the Pittsburgh Steelers in overtime.

    Tebow the Pro

    What happened next? This is where is gets interesting and pertinent to government space acquisitions.

    What happened is Tebow changed. He was made to conform to what is viewed as proper professional football behavior. Professional football pundits criticized Tim Tebow for everything from his scrambling and running plays to his obviously devout displays of Christian faith. Statements were made such as “He will get hurt scrambling and running the ball so much, then Denver will not have him as a starting quarterback.” “These college plays he keeps running just don’t work in the NFL.” “Tim needs to wake up and realize he is not in college anymore.”

    Amazingly, despite all the critiques, the Tim Tebow college-based solution was working. College plays and Christianity were the formula that worked for Tim in college and was obviously, despite his critics, working well in the NFL, at least for the Denver Broncos. For all the other NFL teams, not so much. Then it all started to come apart, because what the other NFL teams were really admitting to was what psychologists call social phobia or the fear of being embarrassed. In other words, what the other NFL teams were really saying was:

    “Come on Denver, we can’t have a college quarterback, using old college plays, defeating the NFL’s finest teams. It makes us all look bad. People pay big money to see NFL teams win on Sunday and Thursday. So get this flea flickering wunderkind under control and come back into the fold. You and your college quarterback are embarrassing the league with your success!”

    The Denver Broncos and subsequently other teams in the NFL bowed to pressure and forced Tim Tebow to drastically change the way he played football. The winning formula was shelved, and T2 was made to conform. When that happened, he became the league’s top-losing quarterback. His once accurate passes started to miss their mark because he was told to stay safely in the pocket and not scramble or run with the ball, even though historically his most accurate passes were thrown while on the run. Since he no longer scrambled or ran, he not only lost accuracy but historically the yards he gained running with the football were gone as well. So he rapidly became just what the league declared he should be, not a winning collegiate quarterback in the NFL, but a nominal losing NFL quarterback. At least he was not doing anything outside the norm for the NFL. He was no longer embarrassing the league by winning, but by finally playing by the rules and losing.

    Now let’s take the Tim Tebow saga and apply it specifically to federal government GPS acquisitions, or simply to space acquisition practices in general.

    Random Scenario

    Let’s take a random and totally make-believe scenario and say the federal government requires a new command and control system (C2) for a large global satellite constellation. For purposes of this imaginary scenario, I need to remind you of an old adage, that unfortunately is not imaginary, in the national security space business concerning space C2 systems. It goes like this: The space hardware is 95 percent complete when a team member remarks, ‘Wow! this satellite system is going to be the best in the world at what it does! I can’t wait to see the whole system up and running.” Another team member ponders that statement and replies, “A system, what system? All we have is space hardware. How are we going to launch it, control it (TT&C) and send and receive operational data? Oh yeah, we need a space C2 system. We better get right on that!” You may laugh, but this exact scenario has been played out more times than anyone cares to admit. But, of course, this is all just make believe! Right?

    RFI/RFQ

    Now imagine for a moment that you find yourself in this situation. As a member of the U.S. government acquisition team, at an SPO or (Special, Space, Strategic, Scientific — take your pick) Program Office, you quickly put an RFI (Request for Information) or an RFQ (Request for Quote) together just to see which companies have the requisite expertise and how much they, the companies, estimate it will cost to complete the C2 system for your constellation. The only problem being that in the RFI or RFQ, which is typically just a few pages, you only delineate the actual basic requirements and you only give the responding companies 30 days to determine how they will go about controlling a constellation you have been building for the last five years. Imagine that! The important part of the scenario is that the RFI/RFQ is actually on the street.

    You can be assured most of the five big space primes are going to reply. After all, they have teams of highly qualified proposal writers that do nothing but respond to these requests. While the response process is often a thing of beauty, it is also frequently highly inefficient and misleading. Remember an RFI/RFQ format is almost inconsequential, as it is just the response the government is looking for at this point: Does your company or team of companies have the qualifications to do the work? How long will it take? How much will it cost?

    This is far from the end of the story or process. Typically several small companies also respond to Space C2 RFIs and RFQs, primarily because the request concerns their area of expertise, not from a process point of view but from a domain expertise point of view, which may require radically different approaches.

    Small technological companies in the space control business are usually flexible and agile, no-nonsense, lean and mean, replete with subject matter experts that specialize in C2 for satellite systems, both commercial and for the USG. They may well be the best in the world at what they do. Alas, they initially and naively think that is all that is required. They may even be under contract to the federal government doing exactly the type of work the RFI/RFQ specifies is needed, but they are frequently overlooked because they are, you guessed it, a small company. However, being small and sometimes naïve, they answer the RFIs and RFQs with enthusiasm, expectations and hope that the system will work and they will be recognized for their expertise, low cost, low overhead and even their outstanding past and present performance. Then, to quote Gilda Radner, “Oh, Never mind!”

    Finally, the other shoe drops, as eventually the actual thousand-plus page RFP (Request For Proposal) is released. The RFP has critical detailed data for program success but unfortunately also contains frequently superfluous documentation and tedious requirements lists known as CDRLS (Contract Data Requirements Lists) that commonly reference hundreds of compliance documents so obscure that the USG provides the documents in a special digital online library, because no entity other than the USG would ever bother to keep such sleep-inducing documentation on hand. In this case, 90 percent of the CDRLs do not involve actual C2 of a space constellation, or whatever expertise is required to accomplish the mission, but rather they invariably pertain to some obscure government regulation concerning report formats and interfacing with the government oversight companies and committees.

    Too Small To Succeed

    Unfortunately we have all heard of companies and institutions that are supposedly too big to fail but what about too small to succeed? In one real-world example, and the USG actually put this in writing, the small expert company that was utilizing its expert system software to actively launch and control spacecraft flawlessly for seven years and is still actively controlling critical space payloads today was told in a competition debrief that they did not fully qualify for the new C2 RFP. Not because of any lack of expertise or past or current performance issues, but because they were too small — not that they could not and were not actually successfully accomplishing the same mission currently (they were the incumbent), but that they did not have the requisite number of personnel to interface with the government on a daily basis during the C2 contracts development phase. This 200+ person small expert company was told they would need to hire another 80 administrative staff just to keep up with the government paperwork and oversight the new C2 program would generate. None of these ‘required’ positions were engineers or subject-matter experts, just paper pushers that generate tons of paper and of charge at a high hourly rate that would add approximately $5M to the contract bid price. True story; sad but true.

    So the small company, fully qualified to accomplish the task in record time and for a pittance, a fact nervously recognized by some in the government and by the primes, is not awarded the contract because their hourly rates are half those of the big primes, they can do the work in two years versus six, which for some reason is considered a high-risk proposal, and they do not have the additional 80 staff members sitting around waiting to respond to every government inquiry. Just like Tim Tewbow they were embarrassing the USG and worrying the big primes.

    All is not lost. The small company is approached by Prime-A, a large company that is competing for the C2 contract even though they had never launched or controlled a satellite of this type before and are not known for their expertise in the space C2 area. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, the small company agrees to join Prime-A’s team on the six-year $900M effort that the small company was prepared to accomplish for $200M in only 24 months. Twelve months later, the contract is awarded to Prime-A. During the government debrief, one of the primary reasons for the “win” for Prime-A is because they teamed with the right small company — you guessed it, the one with all the domain expertise that was currently doing the work. Smart move by Prime-A.

    Ok, so all’s well that ends well, right? Unfortunately, Prime-A now makes a bad move and announces just days after winning the new C2 contract that, having reconsidered their position, now that they have won, they will not be utilizing the tried-and-true operationally proven system from our small expert company, that actually helped them win the contract. No, Prime-A has decided to develop their own brand-new C2 system, become a competitor to the small expert company (a teammate), and allow the government to pay for it all. Of course, the end product, if it is ever successfully developed, will be a totally unproven and proprietary system and will take twice as long, cost five times as much and be far less capable, without any flexibility. But competition is king!

    Time Passes

    Five years into our imaginary scenario and the C2 program is years behind schedule. The only deliverables the USG has in its possession are those accomplished by the small company partner with the C2 domain expertise, along with invoices from Prime-A that add a 20 percent handling fee or surcharge to all the small company’s accomplishments and that now make the original $900M program a $1.8B program that will only accomplish 50 percent of the original RFP’s stated objectives. The program has moved so far to the right that full completion of all program phases will now take 10-12 years at a cost surpassing $4.2B, during which time all the space hardware will be placed in storage for an additional cost of $1M per space vehicle per year, because the space hardware cannot be launched and fully utilized without the C2 system that makes them incredibly valuable global assets instead of space junk on orbit. More space debris if you will.

    Of course, if the small expert company had been awarded the contract or their product had been utilized by Prime-A at the outset, to do the job it currently does so well, valuable space assets would be ready for launch today and ready to benefit mankind worldwide. BTW the USG would also have $1.4B more in its coffers.

    But, alas, that is not how our imaginary scenario plays out. In this scenario the small space company experiences the Tim Tebow process and government indoctrination. Their expertise is discounted because they are playing with the “big boys” now, and they are required to hire 80 additional administrative personnel just to compete. They are required to submit all work product through Prime-A that adds an extra 20-50 percent just to process the paperwork and keep the marching army of support staff employed.

    As a consequence of the teaming agreement, the small expert company can no longer talk directly to USG representatives who are now suddenly very interested in the original $200M, 24-month proposal. As a member of Prime-As team, the small expert company cannot undertake any independent actions. It is under the thumb of the prime, and the USG will never have the opportunity to take the road less traveled that leads to success and a winning season with a small company. They have been Tebowed!

    Rare

    Fortunately, the imaginary scenario you just read rarely happens. The USG acquisition teams are very good at what they do, and they rarely allow the scenario described to take place. However, rarely is not “never,” and unfortunately similar scenarios do occasionally take place. Sometimes the USG just makes bad decisions. They fail to realize the true potential and the true domain expertise provided by small expert companies.

    Budget

    In this budget seques-castration era USG acquisition personnel and decision makers need to look beyond procedures, precedence and tradition. They need to think outside the proverbial box and consider all their options. A satellite C2 system does not require a huge prime company and a marching army of a thousand or more personnel. Constellation C2 can and has historically been accomplished by companies just like the 200+ commercial company in our scenario. Additionally once the USG realizes the prime has failed they need to stop throwing “good money after bad” and restructure the contract, reassign tasks or simply re-compete the contract. As I have said in these pages many times there is not a single satellite constellation in orbit today that requires a $1.6B and certainly not a $4.2B C2 system. And we should not have to wait for 10-12 years for it to come to fruition.

    That is outrageous, I hear you say, and you would be correct. But, of course, this is just an imaginary scenario! Surely that never really happened, did it?

    To quote Winston Churchill, as I have numerous times, “Gentlemen, we have run out of money; now we have to think.”

    60 Minutes and GAO

    Recently the investigative news program 60 Minutes has become keenly interested in space and so far it has been a great experience for AFSPC (Air Force Space Command), the United States Air Force (USAF) and the USG. Space and the technology it enables are force multipliers and our freedoms in this great country of ours depend more and more on the space domain and billions of people around the globe depend on GPS for positioning, navigation and timing. GPS is without a doubt the most successful and important constellation in orbit today; bar none. It is a good news story and one of which we can all be proud. Let’s hope it continues to be a good experience.

    However, when the GAO, or Government Accountability Office, comes calling the story or experience is not always so positive. The word is out that the GAO has been snooping around AFSPC and several prime space contractors and small space companies as well. As the investigative arm of Congress, government programs rarely fare well or, should I say, sometimes bid “farewell” once the GAO is on the scent. I challenge you to find a single government program manager that can say he is just waiting with fond hopes for Congress to tell him how to run his program.

    Bottom Line

    This could be an outstanding and pivotal year for NFL football, for Tim Tebow and for USG space acquisition programs, if we all learn the hard lessons from the Tim Tebow experience. Don’t mess with success, and bigger and more sophisticated is not always better.

    So, which word in the title is not like the others? Only time will tell.

    Until next time, happy navigating, and remember: GPS is brought to you free of charge, courtesy of the U.S. Air Force.

  • USAF FY16 Budget Plus $10B More, Please!

    The long-anticipated 2016 President’s Budget (PB) was submitted to Congress in early February. The PB is the spark that ignites the lengthy and often contentious congressional budget process, including: adopting a budget resolution framework, developing numerous discretionary spending bills, reconciling legislation between the House and Senate, approving continuing resolution stop-gap measures and finally, hopefully, appropriating funds for various programs — including the Global Positioning System (GPS) as part of the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) U.S. Air Force (USAF) budget request.

    For FY (Fiscal Year 1 Oct – 30 Sep) 2016, the U.S. Air Force requested a topline budget of $122.2 billion in Air Force controlled funding that exceeds funding levels recommended by the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) and laid out in the Budget Control Act by almost $10 billion. Several well-meaning friends still in high places in the government immediately sent me copies of the USAF budget while it was still warm, so to speak, and thought that I would be “properly incensed” — proffered one old friend — over the so-called $10B overdraft. I hate to disappoint my friends, but in the spirit of the USAF policy of putting the Bottom Line Up Front, I applaud the Air Force action and personally think it may be too little, too late. The supplemental request or overdraft should probably have been more on the order of $20B, not $10B.

    Hollow Force

    This is not an emotional reaction, but a reasoned statement by a seasoned veteran airman of 30 years in the USAF, yours truly, who served through at least two periods of a “hollow force” that were devastating not only to the USAF as an institution, but to the DoD as a whole and to all the personnel who served during these austere and dangerous times. And, yes, I am equating a hollow force with a dangerous force. Indeed, the term “hollow force” officially refers to military and government forces that certainly, on the surface, appear to be “mission ready,” but upon close examination suffer from moderate to severe shortages of personnel and equipment as well as deficiencies, to varying degrees, in training.

    Gen Mark A Welsh III, Chief of Staff, USAF, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee 201 (Photo courtesy of USAF - SSG Sean K. Harp).
    Gen Mark A Welsh III, Chief of Staff, USAF, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee 201 (Photo courtesy of USAF – SSG Sean K. Harp).

    In recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, along with his fellow service chiefs, General Mark A. Welsh III, chief of staff of the United States Air Force, laid out the dangers inherent in the hollow force when he stated:

    “Last year, our readiness levels reached an all-time low. As we struggle to recover, we don’t have enough units ready to respond immediately to a major contingency, and we’re not always able to provide fully mission-ready units to meet our combatant commanders’ routine rotational requirements.

    “The Air Force’s modernization forecasts also are bleak. About 20 percent of [our] aircraft flying today were built in the 1950s and 1960s, and more than half of the rest are 25 years old or older.

    “And now, due to sequestration, we’ve cut about 50 percent of our currently planned modernization programs.”

    To someone who lived through the hollow force in the past, this is a scary description and prospect for our airmen. In describing the results of budget cuts and difficult decisions regarding program terminations that result in a hollow force, General Welsh put it this way:

    “Without these tough calls, the Air Force ‘will be neither ready to fight today, nor viable against the threats of tomorrow’.” 

    Indeed, a hollow force puts every ones lives in danger. During the post-Vietnam hollow force created by the peanut farmer, there were times when there were B52 aircraft sitting alert just for the spy satellite photo ops that did not have engines in the nacelles nor certified crews to fly them. Aircrews were lucky if they were able to fly four hours per month, and believe me, that made us all less than proficient. I remember one incident specifically. My oxygen (O2) mask had failed on a previous flight and I needed a new one. In the high-performance aircraft in which we flew, regulations required an O2 mask be attached to our helmet and actually in place with crewmembers in the cockpit breathing pure (100%) O2 above a certain altitude. Because of budget cuts, I was issued a waiver, a piece of paper that said I was legal to fly without a fully functioning O2 mask. Fortunately I never was forced to fly without a fully functioning O2 mask, but what if I had been? What if I had passed out from O2 deprivation? What about the other members of the crew? What purpose did the piece of paper serve, other than mollifying a paper pusher’s conscience? Would the Air Force crash investigators have found it in the wreckage and said, “Oh, it’s OK, he had a waiver!” These are the types of things that can happen with a “hollow force.” We don’t need to go there again, and if nothing else, the extra $10B may be just the ticket to keep the aircrews proficient and equipment maintained.

    The Color of Money

    I know that budgeting and spending other people’s money seems like a simple issue, but with the government, nothing is ever simple. Consequently, the DoD has established an entire university system, known as the Defense Acquisition University (DAU), to train acquisition, program and financial officials in handling government acquisition funds, along with other procurement activities. Under the Budget Control Act guidelines and the Congressional cost-cutting exercise known as Seques-castration, 2016 is another cost-cutting year. That is significant when you understand that the USAF and all of DoD are still reeling from more than ten years of war, on more than one front, along with previously mandated significant budget and manpower cuts that seriously impacted the ability of the USAF to accomplish its multitude of missions.

    Consider that budget cuts have a lingering, insidious and costly effect in equipment not maintained or replaced, training not accomplished, R&D not conducted, new technologies not developed, and inevitably the inability to accomplish the mission. A lot of the complexity in these budget-cutting moves relates to what the government refers to as the color of money. For example budgetary funds are appropriated and obligated for the USAF, and most other services, according to the following formula:

    • O&M – Operations and Maintenance – Obligated for 1 year
    • MILPERS – Military Personnel – Obligated for 1 year
    • RDT&E – Res Dev Test & Eval – Obligated for 2 years
    • PROC – Procurement – Obligated for 3 years
    • MILCON – Military Construction – Obligated for 5 years

    As you can see, all funds are not obligated for just one year and then the money expires. Indeed, there are several colors of money, and failing to fund an RDT&E effort can have catastrophic results on the future of that program and associated programs that might benefit from the technology not developed. At any one time, the USAF is juggling budgets stretching across years and programs and moving money or robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    FM (Financial Management) or financial and program management gurus at any one time are managing funds that originated as many as five years previously, plus the current year’s budget, while planning on how to use funds that might carry over to next year. They have just submitted the FY16 budget, which also means they are now hard at work on the FY17 budget without knowing what will be obligated for FY16. Across all those budget years, they have to deal with the arcane rules concerning the color of money. Yes, they are professionals (I’ve been married to one of the best for 35+ years), and they do a great job, but face it — sometimes they are just taking a well-educated guess and hoping for supplemental funding just to meet basic requirements.

    Seriously, FM’ers live for the fairytale that one day a combatant commander will say, “Hey, your mission is more important than mine, so I will ‘MIPR’ (a one-time financial move) my funding to your budget line for your project.” Let’s see — a pig is not aerodynamically designed to fly…

    Space    

    Funding for all space programs is especially critical, as the entire space arena is known as a force multiplier, in that satellites and space platforms provide and enable capabilities that increase the effectiveness and reach of all military and government personnel. Therefore, when space programs are not funded, delayed or are cut, the impact ripples across the entire DOD. This is especially true of GPS and PNT (Position, Navigation and Timing) systems which have become so ubiquitous, they are considered a must-have utility for billions of users around the globe, not just the U.S. government. In fact, military and government users may be the smallest segment of users for GPS and PNT services today, which is ironic when you consider that, as General John Hyten (USAF), commander of Air Force Space Command, loves to remind us, “GPS is provided to the world, and over three billion plus users, free of charge 24/7, by the United States Air Force.”

    OCX – Next-Generation Space Control Segment

    Unfortunately, a couple of major GPS-related programs are in trouble. For OCX, the Next-Generation Control Segment for GPS, my sources tell me, and 2016 budget documents clearly show, that current costs attributable to the prime contractor greatly exceed the contract award specification of ~$886M by a factor of 100% ,with a delivery date still far out on the horizon — somewhere around 2020 with a total program costs of $3.6B. That’s the bad news; the good news is there are definitely sound alternatives, and my sources tell me they are being belatedly explored.

    Sometimes the behemoth primes are just that: too big and too expensive. Oftentimes the real subject matter experts (SMEs) reside in the smaller, boutique, more agile companies that can do the job in 24 months for $200M, which is a price that was quoted to me recently by a company with skin in the game, since their software products are responsible for launching and controlling all of the GPS satellites launched in the last eight years without a single failure. Plus, sources inside the company tell me that they have already developed a complete launch and initial checkout system for GPS III, which the OCX prime contractor is still struggling to construct.

    This is where the USAF and OSD must step back and assess the OCX program for all its merits versus costs. GPS is not that complicated a satellite system, and yet we are on course to spend $3.6B for a ground C2 (Command and Control) system that will still have significant shortcomings. If it were the perfect C2 system in the end, that would be one consideration, but in fact, as the prime has admitted, it will be far from what was initially envisioned, and the total program costs will have grown by almost 400%.

    This scenario begs the question: As the GPS acquisition authority, which product would you trust, a known product derived from a proven government and commercial satellite launch and C2 capability in operation today from a reliable company that has a flawless track record of GPS launches for the last eight years? Or a brand-new unproven product costing billions of dollars from a company that is clearly struggling technically and financially and has, at the end of the day, never launched or controlled a single GPS satellite? The answer seems clear to me. Obviously, there are valid alternatives, and in this budget environment the USAF needs to take a look at replacements, alternatives, supplements and backups, however you choose to phrase it, to OCX.

    As we were going to press, we learned that Mr. Kendall has given the OCX Program a green light, but with several caveats indicating the program will be closely watched in the future. Mr. Kendall confirmed that while the OCX costs had indeed doubled, he was going to stay the course for now.

    Major General Roger Teague, director of space programs for the Air Force acquisition chief, said a review by chief arms buyer Frank Kendall went well, but program officials and the contractor got “tough marching orders” to stick to schedule and cost targets. That is well and good, but history shows us that it has never happened in the past with the OCX program, and so some tough changes are going to have to be made if they are going to stay on track. We wish them well.

    GPS III – Next Generation Space Segment

    On the satellite or hardware side of the house, the GPS III — or next-generation GPS satellite — is also having problems, but in this case it centers on development and delivery issues with a subcontractor having serious technical issues and who has failed to deliver on cost or schedule. That subcontractor was just last week bought by a bigger prime, so we will have to wait and see what happens. In this case, however, the whole satellite program is not failing just a component, albeit an important one, the Mission Data Unit or MDU. Although again the answer seems simple, there are bigger forces at play, and one of them is wrapped up in a new government initiative known as Better Buying Power 3.0.

    Better Buying Power 3.0 

    The current GPS III+ budget input states: “In an effort to implement Better Buying Power 3.0 (BBP 3.0) to control production costs, the [U.S.] Air Force intends to create a competitive environment. Options for the GPS III competition continue to be explored by USD (AT&L) [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics], Mr. Frank Kendall.

    Frank Kendall, under secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; the Under Secretary flag.
    Frank Kendall, under secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics; the Under Secretary flag.

    The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, or USD (AT&L), is a senior civilian official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense within the Department of Defense. USD (AT&L) is the principal staff assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense for all matters concerning departmental acquisitions and the general management of the department as a whole, which means he is a significant decision-maker where DoD acquisitions are concerned, and he has something to say about the plans for those acquisitions. Obviously, those plans need to make sense, financially, operationally and hopefully logically. Mr. Kendall, who has been in his current position for almost four years, has brought a much needed common-sense approach to government acquisition, and we can only hope he continues to make judicious, practical and logical decisions.

    For GPS III+, the U.S. Air Force’s published notional plan is for a two-phased competition process. Phase one is a Production Readiness competition for up to three firm-fixed price contracts to mature competitors’ production designs for a competition in Phase two. Phase two will be a full and open competition for up to 22 GPS III Production SVs [satellite vehicles] with an expected award in FY17/18. The [U.S.] Air Force GPS Directorate received USD (AT&L) approval to purchase GPS III SV09-10 from the incumbent Lockheed Martin (LMCO) at the December 2014 Defense Acquisition Board (DAB), in order to sustain the GPS constellation while competitive options are pursued.” [Bold added for emphasis.] See the budget document here.

    The “government speak” sounds great if you need an entirely new GPS III system, which consists of, at a minimum, a new payload, satellite, launcher and ground C2 system (remember OCX is only designed to work with current and planned GPS SVs, and it doesn’t even do that today). But, in fact, the U.S. government only needs an MDU, which is a critical part of the payload. Indeed, failure to produce the MDU on time has delayed the entire GPS III program by about 18 months to date.

    Even more troubling to me is the seemingly innocuous phrases from the government plan that states “create a competitive environment…firm-fixed price contracts to mature [up to three] competitors’ production designs,” which is nothing more than government speak for “We are going to pay competitors to mature their technology so they can compete against the current prime (LMCO), who is currently building the first 10 GPS III satellites.” In effect, the government is saying the competitors on their own cannot compete against LMCO so we, the government, are going to give them contracts and lots of money to help them get to a point where they can compete, and then we are going to have a recompetition. Of course, this is going to take at least three years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and LMCO may well win again in the end, but at least we will have conducted a competition. Does this approach make sense? Does it pass the financial, operational, and logic tests? Does it pass the Washington Post test? I guess we will have to wait and see if Frank Kendall agrees.

    BBP 3.0

    So, what exactly is the initiative known as Better Buying Power 3.0? It’s DoD’s mandate to “do more with less”:

    “DoD’s Mandate To Do More Without More

    “Better Buying Power (BBP) is the implementation of best practices to hopefully strengthen the Defense Department’s buying power, improve industry productivity, and provide an affordable, value-added military capability for the warfighter and government user. Launched in 2010, BBP encompasses a set of fundamental acquisition principles to achieve greater efficiencies through affordability, cost control, elimination of unproductive processes and bureaucracy, and promotion of competition. BBP initiatives also incentivize productivity and innovation in industry and Government, and improve tradecraft in the acquisition of services.”

    Sounds great, doesn’t it? Now for the rest of the story.

    We can all agree that defense budgets are tight, so it will be interesting to see how BBP 3.0 plays out in the arena for GPS SVs. Will the U.S. Air Force initiate a competition to acquire an entirely new GPS III SV, or fix the problem with the current GPS III program, the MDU? Recall my previous column concerning the GPS III Sources Sought, in which the GPS III MDU was compared to an aircraft engine and the GPS III satellite was compared to an aircraft. In this analogy, the Air Force didn’t ask for companies/competitors to produce a new aircraft just because it needed an alternate engine. It simply contracted for another engine supplier — the most cost-effective competition that adheres to the principles of BBP 3.0. However, from the GPS Directorate budget language quoted earlier, it appears as if the Air Force is looking to pursue an entirely new GPS III system to include SVs, rather than just procure an alternate MDU.

    In my humble opinion, stringently applying BBP 3.0 to GPS III issues means simply to employ competition at the correct level (i.e., for the engine rather than the entire aircraft). An interesting feature and significant added cost to the GPS budget, which I briefly mentioned earlier, concerns the need for a new ground C2 system if the total new systems approach is taken. For, indeed, if preliminary elements of the GPS space segment are developed without cross-checking the impact to the GPS control segment, the technical, operational, budgetary and schedule impacts will be significant. For example, the already troubled next-generation GPS ground control system, OCX, budget likely has not considered the integration costs of a newly developed, yet-to-be-procured “production ready” GPS III+ SV. Indeed, OCX today is geared for the GPS III already contracted for and it is failing to meet that challenge in a spectacular and expensive way. So it is possible, even probable, that OCX integration costs for yet another new model of GPS III family of satellites would increase the OCX budget significantly…unless of course one assumes that the U.S. Air Force acquires a perfectly matched, new GPS III satellite that integrates seamlessly with OCX. In other words, an entirely new GPS III SV would need to be perfectly matched to the current GPS III SV — and what are the chances of that, and why would you spend hundreds of millions of scarce acquisition dollars to procure an exact and more expensive replica?

    Budget constraints are tight and getting tighter. BBP 3.0 mandates the Air Force “do more with less” in every context. For GPS III SVs, this means developing an alternate MDU rather than buying a new block of GPS SVs.

    Until next time, Happy Navigating, and remember: GPS is brought to you free of charge by the United States Air Force.

     

       

  • Reflections and Hope for GNSS

    For me, 2014 marks 40 years of my long association with the positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) gold standard we call the global positioning system (GPS), and I find it only prudent and natural to reflect on what has, for many, been a tumultuous 12 months.

    In this regard, I find that I am not alone. Many seasoned veterans (who, unfortunately, by necessity must remain anonymous) have taken the opportunity to take pen in hand and jot down a few of their thoughts for my perusal and cogitation. Not to digress, but I find that many of us of a certain age, when we wish to convey our considered thoughts privately to a trusted colleague, more often than not accomplish said task with a fountain pen and luxurious heavy linen writing stock or in a private conversation, versus email and quick messages on social media.

    In putting the following thoughts together, I have availed myself of those thoughtfully scribed missives from trusted colleagues. The following conveys some thoughts to contemplate on current tactical and strategic PNT matters.

    Political SMEs

    Without a doubt, the most troubling, or certainly discussed, topics this year have revolved around the spurious thoughts, rhetoric and unfortunate resulting public statements by PNT neophytes in positions of power whom, not being from the most lucid generation, seem to believe that GPS or GNSS are vulnerable and should be replaced — end of discussion — no further thought given to the problem other than surely something will come along to replace it — and preferably overnight, at that. Obviously, I am incredulous and find the statements to be nothing more than political hype purveyed by luddites that are essentially technically hapless and clueless. Alas, some are in positions of power where they are frequently and regrettably quoted in the press. Lamentably, the technically clueless parameter rarely keeps them from speaking their — if you will pardon the over-generous appellation — mind.

    Rather than merely complain about political appointees and their hapless, uninformed ramblings, as it is after all a national pastime, I will follow the edict and sage advice of a fellow thinker, mentor and Eminence Grise, General Pete Piotrowski (USAF, Ret.) who pontificated to a young executive officer over four decades ago, “Never come to me with a problem, as problems are nothing more than opportunities waiting to be recognized — so come to me with opportunities and implementation plans that are actionable.”

    Applying that astute and long-remembered advice to our GNSS opportunity leaves us with an essentially technical and actionable way ahead. There can be no question that GPS or GNSS should remain as the baseline bedrock for all PNT solutions while technology provides ample opportunities for enhancements, augmentations and verifications, not merely inadequate substitutions. As one of my colleagues at the Royal Institute of Navigation stated recently, “Truly robust position, navigation and timing will always require a combination of dissimilar PNT technologies.” The top three that come to mind are:

    1. eLoran
    2. Inertial systems
    3. All signals available

    At the risk of belaboring the obvious for my regular, informed readers, let’s take a brief look at each supporting opportunity.

    eLoran

    eLoran in many forms has been around for decades longer than many users realize, and was just months away from being fully implemented in 2010 (more than 80% complete) when it was unceremoniously, all politics aside, abruptly curtailed by those technical luminaries in the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) and the current administration. Since that time companies and countries around the globe, except for the United States of course, have charted their own course for eLORAN both as an independent PNT system and as an augmentation, enhancement and backup to GNSS with accuracies and availability (essentially not capable of being jammed) that rival and exceed most any other non-GNSS PNT system available today.

    In Rotterdam earlier this year, I saw firsthand and wrote about an eDLoran or differential eLORAN system,that, “with modern monitoring can result in consistent horizontal accuracies approaching five meters on a moving platform.” eLORAN has shown the capability to broadcast continuously with several thousand watts of low frequency signal power and provide a PNT system that is reliable and accurate, while essentially making it ludicrous to try and jam or intentionally interfere with GNSS signals. The two systems utilized jointly, GNSS and eLORAN, are an unbeatable combination.

    I am currently contractually embargoed, but hope to write more about some amazing new eLoran receivers in the New Year. However, I can legally say now that I have recently been made aware of two separate multi-GNSS-eLoran receivers that are both affordable and portable. More than that I cannot say, but just think about what that means when you consider there are fully operational eLoran transmitters literally scattered around the globe today, except for the United States, of course. An embarrassing situation that hopefully our Congress will remedy soon.

    Some exceptional multi-PNT devices, which I am allowed to mention, are the UrsaNav UN-155 Resilient PNT receivers from Chuck Shue and company. These innovative new products utilize PNT information from multiple sources including GNSS, eLoran, and maritime medium-frequency beacon systems. The UN-155 contains an embedded computer for easy updating of software and algorithms for resilient PNT, and provides a robust navigation and timing output. While this is not yet a portable unit, miniaturization is all the rage.

    Inertial Systems

    Which is a great segue to our next opportunity, MEMS (micro-electro-mechanical sensors) inertial devices. These are routinely and historically described as devices capable of providing tightly coupled integration of GPS precise point positioning (PPP) and MEMS-based inertial systems. While the tightly coupled descriptor essentially involves Kalman filters and shared positioning data descriptors and fields, there have recently been cogent arguments for an independent non-tightly coupled MEMS inertial device as well, perhaps even both types of devices coupled to a multi-GNSS device with eLORAN.

    Think about it only momentarily and the advantages become obvious for both approaches, and even more so for a combined approach. Again, I am prohibited from providing too many details, due to upcoming press releases and device announcements from major players in the field, but 2015 appears to be promising for new and innovative inertial integration technologies. Suffice it to say, the U.S. Army is enamored with this approach, as well they should be, with the key for the U.S. military being a sustainable low-cost MEMS-inertial . . . and there my tale of new advancements must end — for now.

    For your edification and to help me better understand the new MEMS gyros and inertial units, a well-known GPS-savvy Stanford University professor emeritus recently stated, “Don, think of it this way, the rotation of a MEMS gyro component exerts perpendicular coriolis force on a resonating proof mass and the displacement is measured capacitively and converted to algorithmic terms for inputs to a Kalman filter or to an independent display for the user as required. Our desire is that, in the near future, both operations will transpire simultaneously and independently. Simple, right?”

    Of course it’s not simple or we would all have them in our iPhones, I thought. Then it hit me, we do have accelerometers in our iPhones, as well as basic gyroscopic functions. There are applications today that make use of these devices as highly evolved pedometers capable of correcting and tracking our position inside GPS-denied environments, such as underground, in dense urban environments and deep inside buildings. Not to be flippant, but it appears there is an “app for that,” and 2015 holds the promise for even better technology for PNT device integration. Stay tuned.

    All Signals Available

    Which brings us to one of my favorite topics — all signals available. As simple as this concept seems to be, as in “are you smarter than a fifth grader?”, I was briefed earlier this year along with several of my fellow technical SME (subject-matter expert) journalists by one of those interim pseudo-technical political appointees that wants to replace GPS/GNSS. Be assured it was a very serious briefing and venue, no clown costumes in sight. The appointee briefed — with a straight face, no less — that current government PNT receivers would have a difficult time with GEO (Geostationary Earth Orbit) versus MEO (Medium Earth Orbit) PNT signals simply because of the physics involved. To which, channeling John Belushi in Continental Divide, I very ungraciously and forthrightly replied, “Difficult physics such as the physics employed daily in my iPhone 6+, which is a multi-GNSS device, utilizing MEO and GEO GNSS signals globally, which are integrated with inputs from ground transmitters and onboard accelerometers. You mean those difficult physics?” Can you picture speechless?

    Consider that the iPhone 6+ today incorporates multi-GNSS signals (GPS and GLONASS) plus WAAS and EGNOS, which are GEO PNT transmitters — bent pipes, if you will. The iPhone utilizes and fully integrates PNT signals from space, terrestrial signals from cellular towers, and Wi-Fi computer networks, as well as onboard accelerometers in an area of real estate roughly the size of a quarter.

    Trimble navigation has a fixed commercial PNT unit today, about the size of a softball, that does all this and much more while parsing 129 separate GNSS signals globally, which allow it to determine its position to the centimeter and reject all signals that try to deviate from the known truth set. Plus, it transmits all known positioning parameters, utilized and automatically rejected, to a website. So I submit that our opportunities for PNT today are not restrained by technology, but by atrocious limitations imposed by politicians masquerading as subject-matter experts. Someday I may deign to tell you how I really feel. Allow me to caveat my remarks by saying there are some wonderfully competent government technologists that I have the pleasure to work with on a regular basis, and I applaud their acumen, dedication and hard work.

    Fight Back

    The question remains: How do we fight back against the pseudo-technical pols and their pronouncements concerning the future of PNT? The solution is simple. Educate yourself concerning the art of the possible. Read a book on the subject. I have recommended many fine references over the years. By all means, for the most up-to-date information, read fine publications like GPS World, and of course, I humbly commend my column to you, if you are so inclined. Education may not be the only panacea, but historically, the more we know about a subject, the less likely we are to fall for the falderal and spin routinely spewed forth by the technically clueless with a political agenda.

    To paraphrase Winston Churchill, who once said, when he was encouraging his neophyte code breakers at Bletchley Park to be more well read, “Read a single book on any single subject and you will know more about that subject than most of the world.” I would add a single caveat from Harry Potter’s creator:

    Books are like mirrors: if a fool looks in, you cannot expect a genius to look out.

    —J.K. Rowling

    Stay with me, and we will explore all these opportunities and more in the coming New Year. Fortunately, hope springs eternal.

    Until next time, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, happy navigating and remember: GPS is brought to you courtesy of the United States Air Force.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Professors That Make a Difference

     Being First

    Despite being an avowed Anglophile since my first visit to the United Kingdom, somewhere around 50+ years ago, I just could not help myself. Professor David Last, Professor Emeritus at the University of Wales (Bangor) and former president of the Royal Institute of Navigation (RIN) was holding forth, with that wonderful, attention-arresting public school accent, on weighty PNT (position, navigation and timing) matters before an awestruck audience.

    Professor Emeritus David Last.
    Professor Emeritus David Last.

    And what did I do? I just could not stop myself reminding him and everyone within earshot that the American Institute of Navigation (ION) predated the British Royal Institute of Navigation by more than two years. The point being, of course, that while two years actually makes little difference in the scheme of things, actuarially speaking we yanks rarely have the opportunity to make such a claim where our stiff upper-lipped Red Coat cousins are concerned. So, when the opportunity presents itself, as it typically does at ION GNSS+, then in my opinion, we former colonists just have to jump in with both feet — or one if by land and two if by sea, and all that.

    An even more compelling argument for being first revolves around GPS versus Galileo operational satellites. The first GPS operational launch occurred in 1978, while Galileo has yet to launch a non-R&D operational PNT satellite, into a useable orbit that is. Now, before you accuse me of being smug, I am actually making a case for increased cooperation between the United States Air Force (USAF) and our European counterparts (ESA) where precision positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) schemes are concerned. For when it comes to satellite navigation and PNT, we yanks can definitely declare “been there, done that” mistakes and successes. What better place to “crow,” or rather, impart our considerable knowledge and network with fellow PNT aficionados, than at ION GNSS+.

    ION GNSS+

    All vocal eloquence jealousies and juvenile kidding aside, in many respects the ION GNSS+ event is actually the epitome of international cooperation in the PNT and GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) arena. This annual premiere event is described as “the world’s largest technical meeting and showcase of GNSS technology, products and services,” and I wholeheartedly agree. Indeed, the 2014 event, which took place from September 8-12 at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida, had the stated goal of bringing together international leaders in GNSS and related positioning, navigation and timing fields to present new research, introduce new technologies, discuss current policy, demonstrate products and exchange ideas. It was a networking paradise in a wonderful, albeit somewhat steamy, venue, which you can review in two excellent videos concerning the event at the ION website.

    This ION conference improves every year in content and attendance, and this year was no exception. Congratulations to Lisa Beaty and her whole team for a great conference, year after year. My favorite events are the annual GPS World Leadership Dinner and the prestigious annual ION Kepler award luncheon. Notice a trend?

    GPS World Leadership Dinner

    This much ballyhooed event becomes more and more of a draw each year. Tickets are coveted (as scare as hen’s teeth as Granny used to say) and competition is fierce. Every year we have about twice as many people wanting to attend as we have room to accommodate them. So the competition is never boring. This year was special in that one of our own GPS editors was nominated for an award and was overwhelmingly elected to receive it.

    The Leadership Award winners this year were Javier Benedicto Ruiz, the Galileo Project Manager from the European Space Agency (ESA), who won in the Satellites category, while an old friend Sherman Lo, who is a senior research engineer and associate investigator (APNT) at Stanford University, won in the Signals category. Our own Eric Gakstatter, contributing editor for Survey and GIS from GPS World, won in the Services category; and finally Oliver Montenbruck, who is head of the GNSS Technology and Navigation Group, from DLR, the German Space Operations Center, won in the Products category.

    The 2014 leadership awards, determined by a poll of 40 industry professionals, await the start of the ceremony.
    GPS World 2014 Leadership Trophies.

    The invited guests, and there was not an empty seat in the house, heard various perspectives from sponsors Lockheed Martin, Exelis, Raytheon, and Braxton Technologies, as well as visions of GNSS progress from our four award winners.

    This event will be covered in much more depth in our December issue, but suffice it to say it was as usual a great event. I wonder from year to year how we will ever top the previous year’s entertainment, which always involves audience participation, but Alan Cameron just keeps coming up with outrageous ideas that seem to always pan out. Hope to see you there in Tampa next year.

    The Kepler Award

    This year, the highly prestigious ION Kepler Award was won by Dr. Pratap Misra. Even though I am happy to say that through the years many of my friends and colleagues have won this coveted award, I can honestly say, in my opinion, there has never been a more deserving award winner than Professor Pratap Misra.

    [Correction: The newsletter summary of this article misspells Pratap Misra’s name. We apologize for the error.—Editors]

    Pratap Misra, 2014 Kepler Award recipient.
    Pratap Misra, 2014 Kepler Award recipient.

    I have had the good fortune to know Professor Misra for many years, and frankly erroneously assumed, along with many others, that since he is so obviously deserving he had previously won the Kepler Award.

    The Kepler Award is presented annually by ION in recognition of an individual’s unparalleled, sustained and significant contributions to the development of satellite navigation. It is the highest honor bestowed by ION’s Satellite Division. Professor Pratap from Tufts University meets and exceeds all of these qualifiers and more. He is simply self-effacing and polite as he quietly goes about being the best in all he endeavors.

    Throughout the years, I have found Pratap to be extremely dedicated to his work, and more recently to his students. These are key attributes. Academically, I can honestly say that the authoritative tome Global Positioning System: Signals, Measurements and Performance that he coauthored with, another friend and colleague, Professor Per Enge of Stanford University, is among the most dog-eared in my PNT library. This widely praised volume is often described as a “comprehensive introduction to GPS: the system, signals, receivers, measurements, and algorithms for estimation of position, velocity, and time.” And while it was originally intended as a textbook for senior or graduate-level engineering courses, it also serves remarkably well as a self-study guide for practicing engineers and as a reference tool for writers and researchers. I consider it to be one of the three PNT bibles that are a must-have in every PNT subject-matter expert’s (SME) library. (The other two are  Global Positioning System: Theory and Applications, Volumes 1 and 2, by Bradford W. Parkinson and James J. Spilker, and Understanding GPS: Principles and Applications, Second Edition, by Elliott Kaplan and Christopher Hegarty.)

    Revised Second Edition by Pratap Misra and Per Enge.
    Revised Second Edition by Pratap Misra and Per Enge.

    In recent years, Pratap Misra has been honored as both an ION and IEEE Fellow and has served as a past chairman of the ION Satellite Division. He has held numerous volunteer positions within ION, but most recently he has focused on something near and dear to his heart, the support of student programs. This is where Professor Pratap Misra is without peer. Frankly it is obvious that his students adore him, and it is due in no small part to his single-minded dedication to and concern for them.

    Every time we meet, the majority of his words and thoughts concerns his students. Their welfare is always uppermost in his priority list. Inevitably, while we are attempting to conduct a quiet and private conversation or interview, we are constantly being interrupted by well-meaning students, past and present, who just want to thank Pratap for his help and support. I could fill up several pages with the technical accomplishments of Professor Pratap Misra, but none of those accomplishments, recognitions or awards mean as much to him as the love, support and success of his students. It is so obvious to anyone who pays attention that he wholeheartedly thinks of his students as and treats them just like family.

    I am sure, or at least hope, we all have past professors or teachers in our lives that we remember fondly, and then there are the few or perhaps only the one that changed the course of our lives for the better. Professor Pratap Misra is one of those rare latter individuals, so deserving of the appellation — a professor that made a difference in the lives of his students. I am so proud that he deservedly won the Kepler Award and am deeply honored that I can call him my friend.

    GPS-IRT Update

    The Global Positioning System Independent Review Team (GPS-IRT) is now officially part of the Independent Strategic Assessment Group (ISAG) under the auspices of the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA). For 19+ years, the GPS-IRT was a separate team within IDA that researched GPS matters with the “goal of insuring both the military and civilian communities would benefit from new GPS/PNT capabilities and services.”

    As a result of this organizational change, Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) chose to formally recognize the GPS-IRT’s 19+ years of effort in support of GPS modernization.

    Last Thursday, General John Hyten (USAF), the commander of Air Force Space Command, presented a commemorative plaque to Mr. Kirk Lewis, the executive director at IDA, for both the GPS-IRT and the ISAG. The plaque will be displayed with the GPS satellite on permanent display at AFSPC headquarters, in the James V. Hartinger building on Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado. The plaque contains the names of the four prestigious chairmen who led the GPS-IRT over the last 19 years, as well as the names of the members of the IRT over that same time period. Sadly, two of the chairmen and five of the members are no longer with us, but we can only hope they are looking down upon us fondly and giving us guidance of a different sort.

    Until next time, happy navigating, and remember: GPS is brought to you courtesy of the United States Air Force.

  • Galileo Conspiracy Theory

    Galileo Conspiracy Theory

    PLUS: Flying for GPS Book Review

    Do you know any conspiracy theorists? You know, those folks who I am sure are well meaning, but see a conspiracy behind every event? Think Mel Gibson in the great 1997 movie with the very imaginative title Conspiracy Theory. Well, the conspiracy theorists have been coming out of the woods following the Galileo launch fiasco, and they are blaming both the Russians and European Space Agency for allowing the Russians the capability to effectively render useless what should have been the first two operational Galileo PNT satellites.

    Think about it. The European Union spends more than 17 years gearing up for a launch of the first two operational Galileo satellites, and they leave the final orbit determination to equipment from a country (Russia) that their countries, and the United States, are collectively (European Union) currently sanctioning for numerous treaty and humanitarian violations.

    Who knows? Maybe this was all just a big mistake, and there were no overt actions taken by Russia to place the two Galileo satellites in the wrong orbit. Frankly, I have no idea if the final stage was sabotaged or not, but it makes for an interesting theory and gedankenexperiment. It also should serve as a warning to the U.S. government, especially the USAF when it comes to utilizing the remaining Russian rocket engines we have in stock.

    I have been to the location where the handover of the Russian rocket motors takes place. The motors are delivered by the Russians and accepted by USAF and United Launch Alliance officials. Then, I have been assured, that the engines are gone over with a fine-tooth comb. Hopefully, there is no opportunity for a motor that has been tampered with passing our inspections, validations and launch certifications. Still, there is always that niggling worry in the back of your mind that won’t go away. So, even if the conspiracy theorists are all wet, and I hope they are, the whole Galileo launch fiasco should still serve as a warning to our National Military Space (NMS) acquisition and launch certification officials. A little extra scrutiny of Russian-manufactured space equipment might be in order.

    Of course, there does not have to be a conspiracy. It could be just bad luck or poor workmanship. It is public knowledge that the Russians have had numerous launch and space-equipment failures in recent months, while the U.S. has had more than 115 consecutive NMS launches without a single failure. Indeed, there has not been a single NMS launch failure since the Broad Area Review (BAR) in the late ’90s.

    There have been two additional follow-on BARs since and they all recommended greater situational awareness and attention to detail. So maybe the Russians just need a good BAR — pun intended. At any rate we should know in the next few months as there are no fewer than three separate European investigations being conducted as I write this. Let’s hope the conspiracy theorists are all just crying wolf.

    Flying for GPS Book Review

    Flying-for-GPS-JacobsonThis is the title of a new book by an old friend and colleague, Len Jacobson. This is Len’s second full-length book, as he writes copious articles (many for GPS World) and chapters of books for other writers. In my opinion, this is the better of his two books, although the first book was much more technical in nature. It sits on my GPS bookshelf and I refer to it frequently. So maybe this one is just a better read.

    When Len’s autographed book arrived, I dove into it and immediately discovered it is as much about Len and his life before and since GPS (BCEGPS and ADGPS if you will) as it is about the Global Positioning System per se. This is certainly not a criticism, merely an observation, since the personal touch makes this book come alive.

    Seriously, this book is an unabashed personal history, a travelogue and a history of the GPS program all rolled into one, and although Len cautions readers to only read Part Two if they only want to know about GPS, I maintain that you will miss a great read if you go that route.

    Len Jacobson
    Len Jacobson

    As I said, I have know Len since about 1975 ,and even though we have known each other for 39 years I had no idea of all the qualifications Len brought to GPS and how his life, after 1975, has revolved around this singular military weapons system.

    The book is a tour de force for GPS, but also is about an engineer coming of age in the 1960s during the Vietnam War. Len describes the technology and communications capabilities and programs that made GPS possible. But more than that, he also goes into the personalities, and this may be the highlight of the book for many. He names names when possible, and obscures them when circumstances, personal preferences and legal precedents demand it. Still, most of the time ,if you were around in the halcyon days of Parkinson and Getting, then you know exactly who Len is describing. And even if you don’t know, it is fun to guess.

    Len gives some painful insights to the birth pains that GPS experienced — to include the early rejections by both the military and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). And his description of the whole Selective Availability saga sheds new light for me on just what took place, and I was there.

    Throughout the book, Len describes his life and key roles in self-deprecating terms, and yet acknowledges he was known far and wide. I can personally attest to this, as a GPS proselytizer. There is another word I could use, but since this is a family magazine I will forego the opportunity. Let’s just say that if Len was in the room, you knew you were going to hear about or talk about the latest in GPS technology.

    Some of you might describe parts of the book as esoteric trivia concerning GPS, and while that may be true, Len presents it in such a way that you want to file that bit of trivia away for a rainy day and then spring it on your PNT colleagues when they least expect it. For instance, I found it very compelling when Len describes on page 95 the history of the Chinese BeiDou program. I think you will be surprised. I was.

    And in the end, many of the companies that Len worked for over the years no longer exist today, such as Figgie, but fortunately many of the people are still around. And Len doesn’t pull any punches. He relates stories of business intrigue, intransigence and even bigotry. He even manages to include the Lacy Peterson murder investigation.

    I hope I have piqued your interest, because this is a unique book that everyone who is evenly remotely interested in the history of GPS and PNT in general should read. Highly recommended. Read a quick excerpt from this unique GPS tome on the GPS World website if you have the time.

    Happy navigating!

    Don Jewell

     

    Until next time happy navigating and remember GPS is brought to you free of charge by the United States Air Force. Aim High!

     

     

     

  • GPS III Sources Sought?

    GPS III Sources Sought?

    Artist's rendering of GPS III satellite (courtesy of Lockheed Martin).
    Artist’s rendering of GPS III satellite (courtesy of Lockheed Martin).

    So, there I was, sipping a cold green tea in the shade on my back deck in the beautiful foothills of the Rocky Mountains in early June, when the phone began to ring off the hook. Upon answering, I was hit with a barrage of questions. Have you seen the GPS III Sources Sought? What should we do? Do you have any advice? Should we respond? But by far the question I thought expressed most everyone’s initial reaction of incredulity was “Are these guys serious?” For frankly this Sources Sought does contain a bit of a giggle factor.

    The questions continued and the phone rang all week. Officially the Sources Sought being referenced is the GPS III Space Vehicles Production Readiness Solicitation Number: FA8807-14-R-0008. Prepared or not prepared by, take your pick, the space acquisition folks at SMC (USAF, Space and Missile Systems Center), and it has caused quite a stir in the PNT (position, navigation and timing) industry.

    Before we get ahead of ourselves, I should explain exactly what a Sources Sought means in terms of what the U.S. government is looking for and how to respond — in my humble opinion of course.

    First a Sources Sought, as defined by the business folks at Georgia Tech (GTPAC) who have researched the matter thoroughly and who I absolutely agree with, is not an actual bid or proposal solicitation; instead, it’s a solicitation of interest. You should think of a Sources Sought as market research being conducted by a government agency or service to determine the capabilities and interests of the marketplace in a specific area, product or capability. This specific Sources Sought should be of interest to companies having an interest and capability to produce products relating to GPS III specifically.

    So, that’s the boring official definition, but what is a Sources Sought really? Certainly, the official definition works, but more often than not in my experience, the Sources Sought has also been used to:

    1. Determine what companies, new and established, are players and who is still in the game.
    2. Determine what partnerships might be formed and how companies might work together to provide a required and often difficult capability. Often government acquisition officials will discover a new capability from a trusted supplier, or discover new teaming arrangements that provide a synergy otherwise unavailable.
    3. Determine who is paying attention.
    4. See which companies answer the announcement. Acquisition officials say it is often just as interesting and enlightening to see which companies do not submit a response as it is reading the proposals of the responders, especially if the Sources Sought is being used as justification for a Sole Source award.
    5. Determine if the project has any hope of succeeding, and if so, how do various companies approach the problems involved?
    6. Provide an official and public catalyst for lethargic or too-comfortable contractors that are not getting the job done on a current contract. Fear can be a great motivator.
    7. Enact the old marketing axiom, “Let’s run it up the flag pole and see who salutes.”

    Regardless of what you feel the real reason or reasons for the GPS III Sources Sought might be, or even if you have doubts about the seriousness of the release, the one hard and fast rule among marketers is that if you have any capability that even vaguely matches the Sources Sought announcement, then by all means respond.

    The official GTPAC advice — and again, I totally agree — is to always respond to a Sources Sought if it appears to be of any interest to you.  Just as I have always said to company marketing reps, when asked about the company’s capabilities, the answer, a la Marketing 101, is always “Yes” until it is emphatically “No.” As in:

    “Can you build that MDU?”

    “Absolutely!” (Stage whisper) “What’s an MDU?”

    “Dude, it’s a Mission Data unit.”

    “Oh yeah, that MDU. Of course we can build it!”

    It may be hard to believe, in this technological day and age, but contracting officials frequently complain about the limited responses they routinely receive to Sources Sought. Responding is usually quick and painless, and can be the first step to place your company in the running for a lucrative government contract. It distinguishes you from your competitors, who did not take the time or effort to respond. The bottom line is it may very well lead to an inside track on an eventual government contract. Just like poker — you can’t win if you are not in the game.

    Of course, the reverse is also true, as almost every Sources Sought states. There are no guarantees, and a Sources Sought announcement may — or may not — be followed up by the agency or service with the issuance of an actual bid or RFP (Request for Proposal). The GPS III Sources Sought legalese reads this way: “This notice does not constitute a Request for Proposal. There has been no decision to develop an RFP for the effort in this sources sought notice.”

    You take your chances, but nominally it is time well spent, as most Sources Sought require very little in the way of scripted paperwork and government forms. Sometimes the response may be in the form of a simple response on company letterhead laying out your qualifications and stating clearly that you and your company are interested.

    However, the government being the government, more often than not the reverse is true, and there may be very specific instructions in a Sources Sought for responding. GTPAC recommends, as do I, that your company follow these instructions to the letter. Give the government no more or less than requested — in other words, give the federal agency or service which posted the Sources Sought notice exactly what it asks for in exactly the form it asks for it.

    Now that we are all on the same sheet of music and fully understand exactly what a Sources Sought announcement means, why did this particular GPS III Sources Sought generate so much interest?

    Caught off Guard

    First I think, well actually I know, this announcement caught almost everyone off guard. It was a surprise, even to those of us who heard rumors about it for some time, not only because of the timing, but also the scope. It far exceeded what most everyone expected —we will get to that shortly. My sources inform me the exact wording and timing were even a surprise to Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) and Exelis, who are, of course, as incumbents officially excluded from responding.

    In retrospect, however, perhaps it should not have been that big of a surprise. General William (Willie) Shelton (USAF), who when this column is first released will have only 48 hours remaining as the commander of Air Force Space Command, had been telegraphing for some time, in sometimes strident language, that he was not happy and something was in the works. He has been uncharacteristically publicly critical of both LMSSC and Exelis for schedule slips and overruns pertaining to GPS III.

    Without a doubt, Lt. General Ellen Pawlikowski (USAF), the most recent former commander at SMC (Space and Missile System Center) where the GPS Directorate is located in Los Angeles, California, at LA AFB, let her misgivings concerning a single provider for the GPS III payload be known for some time. Earlier this year, referring to LMSSC, General Pawlikowski was quoted as saying “They know we are not happy — that we are disappointed at the delays we have seen, the technical issues that their subcontractor [Exelis] has had, and probably they are considering whether an alternative source could provide them a better opportunity…I think that Lockheed is doing the right things to figure out how do they best deliver the GPS III in the timelines that they’re expected to.”

    In LMSSC’s defense, it was always aware of a possible schedule slip, as was the USAF — for more than two years a bevy of LMSSC engineers and senior managers have been putting in overtime at the Exelis facility in Clifton, New Jersey, to try and wrestle the wayward Mission Data Unit back on track. Many of them are still there, plugging away, including the indefatigable and always optimistic former LMSSC GPS III Program Manager and VP for Space Keoki Jackson.

    The MDU is the beating heart of the payload for the GPS III SVs, and it has been in trouble for some time. So, although LMSSC and Exelis are late to need for the three LMSSC GPS III payloads awaiting a heartbeat in the City of Oz or the new LMSSC manufacturing facility in Deer Creek Canyon in Littleton, Colorado, it is not from want of extraordinary efforts to deliver the payloads on time, and those efforts continue today.

    Lockheed Martin spokesman Chip Eschenfelder dropped me an email recently that stated: “All GPS III SV01 (Space or Satellite Vehicle Number One) Navigation payload components — including the Mission Data Unit — have successfully completed unit acceptance testing; these components have been integrated onto the payload panel; and the panel is now undergoing panel-level testing [at Exelis]. The SV01 Navigation Payload forecast delivery to Lockheed Martin is Fall 2014.”

    As I write this, I have just received an email from Kristin Jones, the senior communicator for Geospatial Systems at Exelis. She states: “Delivery of the GPS III navigation payload to Lockheed Martin continues to progress following recent Mission Data Unit build and successful test activities. The GPS III navigation payload is an original, highly advanced system that brings new capabilities to the GPS constellation, including improved user accuracy and a more robust signal for contested environments. The new flexible design is also optimized to accommodate additional capabilities in the future. This system has now successfully completed testing and has been added to the payload panel. The integrated payload panel is now going into ambient testing. Also, all six of the navigation payload transmitters have successfully completed their ATP testing. To date, significant testing with flight-like engineering units and the SV01 flight hardware indicates that signal crosstalk variances have been addressed, and GPS III will meet all mission and quality requirements. Exelis is on track for a fall delivery to Lockheed Martin.”

    The Farmers Almanac states: “In 2014, the autumnal equinox brings the fall season to the Northern Hemisphere on September 22 at 10:29 P.M. EDT. Let’s see, that is only a biblical 40 days and 40 nights from now, and according to both LMSSC and Exelis the MDU problems have been resolved, to the best of their knowledge to date. The MDU for GPS III SV01 is in the final portion of panel testing, and will undergo more rigorous testing, including thermal vacuum testing at the LMCO (Lockheed Martin Company) facility in Deer Creek this Fall. That is very positive news, and it sounds as though the MDU is back on track.

    LMSSC has been involved with GPS for decades, and Exelis, formerly ITT, has been involved in producing all or some portion of almost every GPS payload for four decades, since the GPS program began. So why were there technological problems at this late date? I can only say that providing the Gold Standard for space-based PNT is a complicated business, and as the Europeans are learning the hard way with Galileo, slips are just part of the environment in spaceborne PNT platforms.

    How Would It Work?

    A subset of the official wording of the GPS III Sources Sought, which you can view in its entirety at Fed Biz Ops.gov goes like this:

    SMC/GP is conducting market research to review the industrial base and determine whether viable alternate sources exist to the continued GPS III SV production on the current baseline by LMSSC. For every block of GPS satellites over the past 40 years, the primary risk has been the navigation payload. This market research seeks to determine if alternate sources can attain a production-ready configuration for a GPS III SV with an alternate navigation payload in time to allow the Production Ready Alternate Source to compete with LMSSC for up to 22 satellites.

    For many, the key phrases are “product ready” and “compete.” This is not only, as many first thought, a Sources Sought searching for an alternate source for a GPS III MDU. It is that and much more. It is a Sources Sought for new competition. SMC is also looking for a full up GPS III production capability that is able to compete with LMSSC for up to 22 more GPS III SVs, and they want it at a FFP (firm fixed price). At this stage, some pundits might say it is a solution looking for a problem.

    The bottom line is SMC is asking for companies to step up and produce a full-blown and fully compliant GPS III space vehicle, with NDS and all the associated payloads. This includes a validated, certified and integrated launch capability to compete with LMSSC for the next 22 GPS III SVs, and even though it is not specifically mentioned, competitors could find themselves competing against the United Launch Alliance with launch services from SpaceX, who bill themselves as the world’s fastest-growing launch provider. Who are the competitors? Can you say Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics? Because these are the usual suspects, and all conspiracy theories aside, it appears the government does not want LMSSC to have a monopoly on GPS, and the Exelis MDU worries have given them…well, let’s just say, have justifiably fed that fear.  The GPS III Sources Sought is just one result.

    Results

    So, just what were the results of the GPS III Sources Sought? I could easily say your guess is as good as mine, but I do have my sources, and they tell me on the one hand SMC heard from the usual suspects, and now you know who they are, about what they expected to hear, but then again they also heard from a couple of surprise (only to SMC) companies. Both have significant space capabilities, but have in one case not played in the GPS arena in some time (several decades), and in another case, a well known company may be looking for a way to increase their GPS role.

    I also heard that few of the submittals were compliant or met all of the required criteria, and that should definitely not have come as a surprise to SMC. Consider they are asking companies with space capabilities to commit to designing an MDU from scratch — and indeed it may need to be an advanced MDU for new capabilities that will work with the current GPS III LMSSC interface. Those specifications are not exactly common knowledge, certainly not for a Sources Sought. SMC is asking for a full-up compliant system, and only gave companies two weeks to think about it.

    Going back to my original premise: How should these companies have responded? Again, Marketing 101 — hopefully they said, “Sure, we can do that,” submitted the required paperwork, and then started scrambling to put a team together and figure out how they can produce and compete. And competing against the incumbents, especially when they are LMSSC and Exelis, is no easy task. Hopefully past performance still matters.

    The 2014 Lamborghini Gallardo.
    The 2014 Lamborghini Gallardo (Wikimedia Commons).

    Still the disconcerting, curious and, according to some space companies, the giggle factor, concerns the scope of this would-be proposal. LMSSC has three almost-complete (missing only one crucial part) GPS III space vehicles waiting for a fully tested and certified MDU. Every other aspect of the GPS III program is on track and has been tested.

    This is analagous to Sant’Agata Bolognese, a small comune in the province of Bologna, which just happens to be the home of Lamborghini, complaining that it has three brand-new Lamborghinis waiting to be delivered, if only Audi would ship the engines. One of the reasons I like this analogy is that it happened, it works, and I love exotic sports cars. The other reason is that it is easy to see the problem is the engine, not the Lamborghini, which remains as exotic and flamboyant as it has always been. Lamborghini is only going to fix the actual problem, a tardy engine delivery. They are certainly not going to scrap everything and fund competitors to build a new Lamborghini from the ground up.

    Or closer to home, consider the F-35 engine issue. The USAF did not ask for companies to design a new F-35 just because it needed an alternate engine. It just contracted for another engine supplier — a simple solution to a complex problem. Viola! Bob’s you uncle!

    The F-35C Lightning II test aircraft CF-1 performs a flight test (photo by Andy Wolfe, courtesy U.S. Navy).
    The F-35C Lightning II test aircraft CF-1 performs a flight test (photo by Andy Wolfe, courtesy of the U.S. Navy).

    The U.S. government, DoD, USAF, Air Force Space Command, and SMC is putting forward the proposition that it will pay for another company or companies to compete with a proven system that works, and works well. LMSSC GPS IIRs and IIRMs are on orbit today and preforming well past their programmed life. LMSSC knows how to build the best GPS satellites in the world today. Like Lamborghini and the USAF, LMSSC is just waiting on a subcontractor to supply the GPS III engine or MDU.

    So regardless of the purpose or multiple purposes of the GPS III Sources Sought, and whether you think it is an overreaction or not, in the end it opens the door to numerous potential players in the GPS space arena. To paraphrase that paragon of wisdom, Martha Stewart, “Competition is a good thing,” even if you have to pay for it.

    Until next time, happy navigating, and remember GPS is brought to you free of charge by the United States Air Force.

     

  • Year of the Generals

    Several pleasant surprises popped up at this year’s Institute of Navigation’s Joint Navigation Conference (ION JNC) in Orlando, Florida, and the best by far centered on the presenters and the attendees. In a change from recent years due to budget restrictions, better known as sequescastration, this year two senior Air Force generals attended and actively participated in several events.

    General (S) John Hyten – Vice Commander AFSPC - Courtesy of the USAF
    General (S) John Hyten – Vice Commander AFSPC – Courtesy of the USAF

    General (S) John E. Hyten (USAF), currently the Vice and soon to be the Commander of USAF Space Command (AFSPC), participated in two days of ION JNC and was featured as the keynote speaker on the second day of the plenary session. As a senior steward of the Global Positioning System, indeed for all USAF Space Systems, General Hyten has a special place in his heart for GPS, having served as the Commander, 50th Space Wing, Schriever AFB in Colorado, the home of GPS.

    The 2nd Space Operations Squadron is a component of the 50th Operations Group, 50th Space Wing, Schriever AFB, CO. The squadron was activated Jan. 30, 1992.
    The 2nd Space Operations Squadron is a component of the
    50th Operations Group, 50th Space Wing, Schriever AFB, CO.
    The squadron was activated Jan. 30, 1992.

    Conference attendees were pleasantly surprised with the access they had to General Hyten as he toured exhibits and joined fellow attendees for lunch, presentations, and discussions in the hallways. General Hyten made it clear that he was there to interact with ION JNC attendees and welcomed everyone to engage him in conversation. A rare invitation from a very busy general officer with huge responsibilities — and an invitation that many attendees clearly took to heart, as General Hyten was continually engaged in discussions during his two-day stay.

    In his plenary presentation, General Hyten addressed GPS and the general lack of knowledge in the public today concerning the origins of the system. Hint — the answer is the United States Air Force. More on that later.

    Major General (USAF) Robert Wheeler
    Major General (USAF) Robert Wheeler

    Major General Robert Wheeler (call sign Wheels) also attended ION JNC this year to speak during the classified day on June 19 and to participate as an ad hoc member of the always-popular War Fighter Crosstalk Panel. General Wheeler  currently serves on the staff of the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) as  Deputy Chief Information Officer for Command, Control, Communications and Computers (C4) and Information Infrastructure Capabilities (DCIO for C4IIC). General Wheeler is a command pilot with more than 5,000 hours in multiple aircraft, including the B-2 bomber in which he saw combat time over theater.

    It was obvious from his initial comments in the classified sessions that General Wheeler is a warrior and staunch supporter of GPS and all things PNT-related. As much as I would like to relate some of his more pithy remarks, they were made in a classified environment, so sharing them is impossible in this venue. However, suffice it to say the General’s comments were well received by the war fighters who attended as well as the classified session attendees, which included many of our closest international allies.

    The comment was made several times in my hearing that “We sure hope General Hyten and General Wheeler are invited back again next year.”

    If all goes according to plan, General Hyten will be a four star and a MAJCOM Commander in just a few weeks. If he thought he was busy before . . .

    Now let’s utilize that sage observation as a segue to General Hyten’s Plenary remarks at this years ION JNC. Having known John Hyten for over 20 years it has always been my experience that he does things just a bit differently – he hears a slightly different drumbeat and this year’s plenary speech was certainly no exception. Right from the start this speech was a bit different. General Hyten warned his audience he was going to praise them for their hard work and then gently admonish them but in a good way. With that opening statement he certainly had everyone’s attention. General Hyten asked for a show of hands from those attendees who knew that GPS originated with the USAF, the 50th Space Wing at Schriever AFB and particularly the 2SOPS (2nd Space Operations Squadron).

    2SOPS operators on the GPS Operations Floor at Schriever AFB, CO
    2SOPS operators on the GPS Operations Floor at Schriever AFB, CO

    In the GPS/PNT-savvy audience Gen Hyten was addressing, literally every hand went up, and that was evidently what he hoped to see. The response was not a surprise to anyone, however the general went on to make the point that if he went out into the general population in the Renaissance Hotel at SeaWorld he would be lucky to find one in ten who even knew what GPS stood for, and that it came from space, and almost none would know that it was, is, and will for the foreseeable future always be provided free of charge to global users courtesy of the USAF.

    GPS has been provided by the USAF free of charge for global users ever since President Ronald Reagan declared it so via a Presidential Decision Directive issued in 1988 shortly after the Soviet military shot down a Korean Air airliner (Flight 007) that had strayed off course and into Soviet Airspace due to a navigation error.

    Ironically, General Hyten made the point that if the U.S. Government charged for use of the GPS signals, even at a nickel (5 cents) per user per device per year, it would pay for itself, and everyone would know that the USAF provided the service on behalf of the U.S. Government.

    However, since it is free, ubiquitous, and considered almost a utility today, everyone around the world just assumes it will always be there and they don’t think about how or why the signals are provided. GPS is just always there.

    GPS Orbitology 101- Courtesy of the USAF
    GPS Orbitology 101- Courtesy of the USAF

     

    General Hyten went on to make several cogent points concerning current and future use of GPS and other PNT assets. At the same time he warned us that there are those in the Pentagon  [Obviously shortsighted, my comment, not the general’s.— DJ]  who erroneously question why we still need GPS today. They myopically see it as an antiquated, compromised system. When in fact GPS and multi-GNSS PNT systems are on the cutting edge of technology.

    The general made the comparison with WWII bombers that were being shot down at an alarming rate until the War Department (circa 1943) started the practice ofusing fighter escorts to help them fight through and return home safely. The analogy applies to GPS, which even today is being purposefully and at times maliciously attacked by spoofers and jammers.

    Augmentations

    Fortunately there are numerous actions that can and are being taken to secure GPS as a critical global service — fighter escorts if you will — that will not only help GPS maintain its preeminent Gold Standard position in the world of global PNT, but allow the system to grow and mature, even flourish, with additional high tech capabilities such as CNAV and MNAV (new civilian and military navigation messages).

    Indeed the general stated that we have just begun to explore all the transformational capabilities being added to our GPS/PNT and multi-GNSS arsenal with the addition of L1-L2 M-Code (military code) and L2-L5 CNAV signals.

    Of additional interest are space-based augmentations (SBAS) such as WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) and EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service) as well as independent regional terrestrial augmentations and backups such as E- and D-LORAN (long range navigation), which today have demonstrated a time stability of 1×10(-12) and a position accuracy of 5-10 meters,  an order of magnitude better than LORAN C’s 50-1,000 meters.

    General Hyten went on to warn the commercial PNT vendors and government program managers in the 400+ audience that they must cease placing commercial GPS receivers in critical government systems that support the war fighters, government users, and our critical national infrastructure. Indeed he said this is why we have SAASM (Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module) and M-Code: to help secure these critical systems against interference, jamming and spoofing, intentional or otherwise. He also pleaded with industry manufacturers and vendors of PNT devices to please build their devices in strict adherence to the U.S. government;s ICD process. While the general declined to mention specific cases or companies, most in the room were aware of the ramifications of ICD non-compliance, from usefulness, mission and financial perspectives.

    The general cited several known cases where, due to noncompliance, several systems just never did work well or consistently in a war zone. He said he knew of cases where “…the PNT systems worked fine in Yuma, Arizona but failed to work in Afghanistan. Please do not put commercial systems in critical military equipment.”

    Pseudolites

    Pseudolites are another area where the general has concerns. This is of course a hotly debated spectrum issue. Whereas we in the United States have been fighting highly-publicized spectrum battles, attempting to preserve the sanctity of the GPS spectrum globally, the Europeans are on the verge of approving pseudolite implementations all over the European continent that could seriously degrade GPS/PNT/Galileo signal reception and make PNT systems unusable or at least undependable in some critical areas, especially around the approaches to airports. Although on the surface pseudolites may seem like a good solution, I always remember what Dr. Bradford Parkinson is fond of saying: “An improperly implemented pseudolite is just another name for a potential GPS or PNT jammer.”

    The Unofficial Test

    After General Hyten’s comments, I decided to put his theory to the test. Just how many people know GPS is provided free to the world courtesy of the United States Air Force?

    As someone who has been working GPS issues since 1975, I find it hard to believe that the American public is so uninformed about a system that is so critical to their everyday existence, because as most of you know, GPS is pervasive in almost all of our critical and not-so-critical national infrastructure. Indeed stealth GPS chips and receivers are embedded in so many devices today that it would be easier to name the devices that don’t use GPS. So I took the General at his word and set out to conduct my own mini-survey.

    However, before I even had a chance to think much about what I would ask, I stepped into an elevator at the Sea World Renaissance Hotel where the ION JNC was taking place and found myself face to face with an elevator full of attendees from a major medical convention in the same hotel. They saw the ION JNC patch on my black golf shirt and asked me about it.

    I told them and then asked what they knew about GPS. As in, did they know where the GPS signals came from and who provided them? Lots of answers were given and none of them remotely correct.

    Frankly I was appalled, and before they exited the elevator I made sure they knew that GPS signals came from space and were provided totally free by the USAF. Mission accomplished. But not so fast; unfortunately the rest of my day and ad hoc surveys went about the same way. Some actually knew that GPS signals were free, some knew or thought they were provided by the government but had not a clue what agency or service.

    Most thought they were radio signals from ground transmitters and were provided by the GPS equipment manufacturers. After asking more than 100 people where GPS signals originated and who provided them, I received exactly two correct answers, from wives whose husbands had recently served in the military in theater.

    In my informal survey, 2% (two percent) of the respondents knew the right answers — and they had a military background. None of the true civilians had a clue. It was appalling and discouraging! Apparently General Hyten has done his homework and his point is well taken.

    We need to get the word out that GPS is totally free, provided to the world by the United States Air Force. A simple but important message. Simple yes, and certainly discouraging at this specific venue, as this is a major part of the mission of ION and JNC — educating the world about the capabilities of GPS. Now I guess we need to emphasize the basics, just as GPS acquisition has reverted to a “back to a basics” approach. I agree with General Hyten that we (all those of us who care about GPS and all that it enables) need to do the same: get out the basic message every chance we get. Join me, won’t you, in getting that simple message across?
    The next ION symposium, ION GNSS+ 2014 will take place September 8-12, 2014 at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida. I hope to see you there.

    Thanks

    In closing I tip my hat to Lisa Beaty, the Executive Director of ION, and her entire team especially the new Military Division headed by my good friend and Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) colleague Jim Doherty. Jim arranged  the classified Cross Talk Military Panel this year, which was the hit of the show, as it has been under Jim’s leadership for the past several years. Jim stepped down this year as the Military Division Chair during the ION JNC symposium, and he will be sorely missed, although I suspect he will still be involved in some fashion.

    The bottom line is that the ION symposia just keep getting better every year. The venues and the host hotels are first class, the food is excellent, and most of all the speakers and papers presented are scrubbed to the point that you really only get the cream of the crop. Unfortunately, you can’t say that about every GPS/PNT symposium today.

    This year the exhibitors were in a large area that allowed everyone more room, and it made for a much more relaxed atmosphere in the exhibit area. I found that I spent a great deal more time with the exhibitors this year than in years past, and what I discovered there will be the subject of several future columns.

    Until next time, happy navigating and remember, GPS comes to you courtesy of the United States Air Force.

    Aim High!

    What’s Don Reading?

    Beyond Horizons – A Half Century of Air Force Space Leadership

    David N. Spires, PhD – Professor Emeritus University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.

    Reading good history volumes is one of my favorite pass times and when it comes to an early history of Air Force Space there is none better than Beyond Horizons.

    Dr. Spires does an excellent job of setting the stage and explaining exactly how Air Force Space Command came into existence and why it was so sorely needed. The current volume covers the US Air Force and Air Force Space from its very beginnings at the end of WWII; think Dr. Theodore von Karman (Toward New Horizons) and General of the Army (Five-star) H.H. Arnold.

    General Arnold actually flew a Wright Flyer back in 1911 and would have retired as a 5-star Army General but on May 7, 1949, Public Law 58-81 changed the designation of Arnold’s final rank and grade to that of General of the Air Force, and he remains the only person to have held the rank. He is also the only person to hold five-star rank in two U.S. military services. General Arnold was instrumental in funding and authorizing research conducted by von Karman, and von Karman was instrumental in research that eventually led to an Air Force and an Air Force Space Command. It is all here in this fascinating book which is edited by longtime friends and colleagues George W. Bradley III (PhD) and Rick W. Sturdevant (PhD), who serve today as the Chief and Deputy Historians respectively at Air Force Space Command.

    I highly recommend this wonderful historical masterpiece, which is now in its third printing, and I predict will see many more versions and updates. In fact you can read it online at: http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-110125-038.pdf

    The only pastime better than reading, this book is talking about it with the author personally, who was also a career Air Force Officer, which I have had the pleasure of doing briefly, on several occasions, and the conversations were fascinating. David is just full of interesting facts and stories concerning Air Force Space. I am convinced that if he were to commit them all to paper, there would be several volumes. I hope you enjoy this fascinating Air Force Space history.

     

  • 30th Space Symposium Plus: A Truly Global Event

    30th Space Symposium Plus: A Truly Global Event

    The 30th Space Symposium offered a lot to see and do.
    The 30th Space Symposium offered a lot to see and do.

    I have said before and will undoubtedly say again, there is absolutely no space-related event in the world today that approaches the sophistication and professionalism of the Space Symposium held annually in Colorado Springs, Colorado, at the five-star Broadmoor Resort. The Space Symposium, carefully engineered and meticulously overseen by the Space Foundation, is truly the premier, must-attend space event of the year on a global basis.

    I have been honored to attend 27 of the 30 symposiums, and I hope to attend many more before I shuffle off this mortal coil. Believe me when I say this; it is not merely an oblique reference to health issues. I was hospitalized for four days afterwards with exhaustion among other issues, and the chairman of one of the key companies in space today now has walking pneumonia. So, while this is a major event, you can overdo it, but that is a personal issue and not by any means the fault of the Space Foundation or the event sponsors. Instead, it is an affirmation of the quality and necessity of the event. Indeed, the Space Symposium, with an average attendance of 9,000+, has grown to the point that a single individual just cannot take it all in. It is just not physically possible, whether you are 25 or 65 — believe me, I tried.

    Therefore, planning your time at the Space Symposium is essential. Unlike many symposiums where you are able to “play it by ear” and take events as they come, at the Space Symposium if you don’t plan well you will truly miss some crucial space-related event. Plus, it is difficult to relate the quality of the networking opportunities. You have access to space professionals and company VIPs at the Space Symposium that you would never be able to contact in normal daily business circumstances, and the beauty of it is they don’t have an office to escape to. There are so many additional cultural and social events that most VIPs attend, so if you don’t contact your target company VIP, it is probably just for lack of trying. Having said that, it is always good to have your elevator speech polished, because your quantity of time may be limited. You must take advantage of every opportunity. And no matter how well you plan, there are always those chance encounters, which is one of the aspects that make the Space Symposium so worthwhile. Sometimes just the opportunity to rub shoulders and discuss space matters with other professionals is all that’s required; those opportunities were abundant at this year’s symposium.

    May Day versus April Fool’s Day

    This year circumstances prevailed, and the 30th Space Symposium was held 30 days later than normal. The events that led to that scheduling change are significant in their own right. For instance, I will list just a few events and names; they might initially seem random, but they are intricately related:

    • Phil Anschutz
    • Broadmoor Resort
    • Construction
    • Renovation
    • Colorado weather
    • School schedules
    • Graduation dates
    • Space legislation
    • Sequestration
    • Colorado governor
    • Ambiance
    • Consistency
    • Education

    OK, the list could go on and on, but the point is that the Broadmoor Resort, as a resort, has been around since 1918, or 96 years. The property history actually goes back as far as 1871 and the founding of Colorado Springs by Spencer Penrose, but that is another story for another time.  The most recent important facts are that in October 2011, Mr. Philip Anschutz, a local Denver-based billionaire, purchased the Broadmoor, a place he fondly remembered from his childhood. He decided that it needed renovating in the best style of the early 1900 Italian Renaissance — which was always reflected in the older  resort buildings on the eastern side of the lake, but was not reflected in the newer western side, with a lack properties. Consequently, the two-plus-year renovation certainly impacted the dates and availability of rooms and services available for the annual Space Symposium. In 2012-13, the event took place in spite of construction, but the 2014 date needed to be moved from April to May to ensure all facilities would be available. Indeed, the formal completion and grand opening after renovations took place was on the Friday preceding the Sunday opening of the Symposium. But then, close only counts in love and horseshoes.

    So this accounts for a few words on the list, but the rest are definitely related to the conference itself. For years, many of the non-Colorado space companies and sponsors of the symposium wondered aloud if the second week in April in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains might be a bit early for such an event, since it invariably snowed, usually more than once, on participants sometime during the week-long event. However, the Space Foundation held firm on the dates for many reasons, one of which was the belief that flatlanders just don’t understand that the foothills of the Rocky Mountains are eligible for snow 12 months out of the year. Seriously, we have lived here for going on 25 years now, and we always said we were eligible for snow 11 months out of the year until a couple of years ago, when it snowed ten inches in August. It had been 80+ degrees the day before. So the Space Foundation pretty much ignored the clueless flatlanders and stuck to their guns on the date issue.

    But, in all honesty, there is much more to the date debate. The Space Foundation prides itself on education and fostering interest in all things space related. It helps fund numerous space-related institutions, scholarships ands organizations. The future of space and our national heritage as it relates to our future space professionals is a consuming force in the Space Foundation’s mission. In May, most schools in the Rocky Mountain region have been dismissed for the year, and quite frankly, as they discovered this year, the space symposium is significantly diminished if the students, teachers and professors cannot attend. This year the attendance was down almost 2,000 attendees, from 9000+ to 7000+, simply because schools and educators from grade school to graduate school found it difficult to participate. Be that as it may ,the Space Foundation could not ignore Philip Anschutz and the multimillion-dollar Broadmoor renovation, nor the major inconvenience to the guests and attendees. So they reluctantly agreed to move the date to May as a one-time experiment.

    The results of that experiment were definitely mixed. On the plus side, the renovations were complete and the transformation was phenomenal — if you had never visited the Broadmoor before, you would not be able to tell anything was changed. Facilities and buildings on both sides of the lake look like they were built in the early 1800s, but with all the modern conveniences of the 21st Century — a truly amazing accomplishment and tribute to Phil Anschutz’s vision. I visited the Broadmoor at least once a month during the two-year renovation, and I was still amazed at the transformation.  Nineteenth-century Italian ambiance and 21st-century convenience, what a combination.

    Now to the weather. Indeed, there were only a couple of small snow showers in the early morning hours during the week at around 0500, which most everyone missed. But Wednesday’s monstrous mega-hailstorm happened in the middle of the afternoon and was not to be missed, visually, aurally or physically. I was enroute to a meeting with Dr. Mark Crews and company from Ball Aerospace on the East side of the lake when the meteorological freight train struck. Fortunately I was under a huge Broadmoor umbrella at the time, or would have surely suffered a concussion, and that is no exaggeration. Golf-ball-sized hail appeared in biblical proportions (Moses would have been proud), and insurance companies executives, many who were in attendance, could be seen talking rapidly on phones and groaning visibly. Indeed, USAA, my insurance company for the last 50+ years, reported more than 800 automobile and 400 property insurance claims in a 24-hour period following the storm, and many insurance companies sent in their disaster and catastrophe teams. So, all in all, I vote for the occasional light snow in April versus the icy rocks raining from heaven in May. I know it is an anthropomorphic illusion, but it is as if Mother Nature were thumbing her nose at those flatlanders who dared be critical of a few snowflakes in April. On the plus side, the added moisture ensured the fireworks display could take place as planned this year, and it is always a spectacular event over the Broadmoor Lake.

    Politically Speaking

    Politically, the timing could not have been better for the Governor of Colorado, the Honorable John Hickenlooper, who came south of the Mason-Dixon line and attended the event where he ceremoniously signed significant Colorado State tax legislation that — bottom line — makes it more profitable for all space-related companies to operate in Colorado. Colorado currently ranks third in the nation for space-related income. Many believe it will return to the Avis, or number-two, spot that it held for many years, after this legislation has time to take effect. Current rankings are California first, Florida second, and Colorado third.

    Social Events

    And last but not least, let’s not forget about the entertainment and social gatherings. There are more breakfasts and luncheons than you could possibly attend. Of course you have to be invited, but if you have something somebody wants, the invites flow. The evening dinners and some social events are much more restricted in nature, but are in truth where much of the real “marketing” and work — read deals — are accomplished.

    This year just as last year there is one event that stole the show. Strictly invitation only — last year only 200 select individuals were invited, and this year although the number doubled (word got out), it was still very much the exclusive event. I am speaking of highly coveted invitations to the Connecting Colorado Gala hosted by Braxton Technologies at the Cheyenne Lodge at the Broadmoor, several miles from the main event. There were CEOs, company presidents, CFOs, politicians and wanna-be senators and congressmen. A small chamber music group  played quietly in the background, and you could actually talk in a normal tone of voice and be heard. Delicious delicacies streamed out of the world-class kitchen for hours. There were huge roaring fireplaces on the wrap-around deck, lit with torches, and of course lugubrious cigars, champagne and other fine wines and brandy in abundance. The weather cooperated and the stars put on a fine show. Security was clearly evident, and it worked. Because parking is extremely limited and buses provided the majority of the transportation, you could not board the bus without an invitation. There were no gatecrashers at this event. As my highly prized pass to the event clearly stated — Non-Transferrable — some names were checked against photos at the door. It was truly a classy evening, one that will be long remembered and one that absolutely works from a networking point of view, and if you are not networking, then why be there? My hat is off to the O’Neil brothers, Kevin and Kenny, as well as their CEO Frank Backes. It was a class act, the place to be, and they literally showed every other company at the symposium how it should be done.

    We haven’t even discussed all the announcements and events that took place at the 30th Space Symposium, and yet if you were there, you saw seamless million-dollar renovations at a major five star resort, all of your closest buddies in the space world, as well as VIPs you have been trying to get in to see for years, and meteorological and man-made fireworks second to none — along with networking opportunities that frankly only occur once a year at this prestigious event.

    I was able to meet with and have lengthy conversations with many VIPs from major space companies, and there are some exciting announcements to come. Believe it or not, some companies want to get out of the government space business — frankly, seques-castration has scared them away. They no longer want to bet the future of the company on congressional budgets. Certainly understandable. Then there are companies that have been out of or momentarily unsuccessful in the GPS/PNT business and are anxious to get back in the game. There are groups of companies that briefed me on proposals that will simply amaze you, and be assured I am doing my best to obtain permission to write about those opportunities. These stories and conversations with VIPs are just too important to give short shrift,  so I will be reporting on them in future columns.

    Now let’s address the huge shift in Who’s Who in Military Space. The national military space landscape is changing dramatically and is being led by the imminent retirement, in August, of my long time friend and colleague General William Shelton. Willie will retire in the Colorado Springs area and be replaced as the Commander of AFSPC by Gen (S) John Hyten, who I have also had the pleasure of knowing and working with for the past 20 years. Indeed, almost all the major space players in Air Force Space Command and at SMC are changing and those that remain are in the most part good guys, like Colonel Wild Bill Cooley and Mr. David Madden at SMC who understand this business and can be trusted to do the right thing. However, be advised the changes are still pervasive. A friend emailed me just this week and asked me for info on all the significant changes in the Command that I knew about, that affected the continuity of the national security space mission. Just off the top of my head, I came up with 14 moves and retirements — so you get the point.

    A Lunokhod Rover from the Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center on display at the Space Symposium.
    A Lunokhod Rover from the Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center on display at the Space Symposium.

    One of the major changes concerns the GPS IRT (Global Positioning System Independent Review Team), which John Darrah and I co-founded in the Chief Scientist Office at HQ Air Force Space Command just over 19 years ago in May. We decided that in order to operate totally independently, the IRT needed to be administered by a truly autonomous organization, so the IRT was designated to be tasked by the commander of AFSPC. For a time, this was the Undersecretary of Defense for Space through the auspices of an FFRDC (Federally Funded Research & Development Corporation) think tank, known as the Institute for Defense Analyses or IDA. During the last 19 years the IRT conducted studies and helped solve thorny space issues, mostly related to GPS and PNT, for eight commanders of Air Force Space Command and for key officials in the Department of Defense. Our first chairman was none other than the late Dr. James Schlesinger, who previously served as chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, director of the CIA, U.S. Secretary of Defense, and the U.S. Secretary of Energy. He also served and advised eight presidents, and at the time of his passing was serving (since 2007) as the chairman of the National Space-based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) Advisory Board. The PNT Board is composed of recognized GPS experts from outside the U.S. government that advise the deputy secretary level PNT Executive Committee in its oversight management of the GPS constellation and its governmental augmentations.

    No sooner was the IRT formed under Dr. Schlesinger’s leadership than it was given a non-GPS or PNT-related task, and it proved to be a major task indeed. The task was to form a Broad Area Review panel for space launch and determine why the U.S. had, over the period of a few months, put more than $4 billion worth of space hardware into saltwater versus the vacuum of space. Since that original and subsequent BAR, the U.S. has not had a single complete launch failure in over 120+ launches, a record that cannot be claimed by any other space-faring nation and testament to the value of world-class, truly independent review teams that tell it like it is, warts and all.

    Dr. Schlesinger represented the caliber of people that serve on the IRT, which still exist today as an independent panel led by Major General (USAF, Retired) Robert Rosenberg under the auspices of the Independent Strategic Assessment Group, also administered by IDA and chaired by former Chief of Staff of the USAF and former head of IDA, General Larry Welch (USAF, Ret).

    The landscape and leadership are changing, but the National Security Space mission remains the same. Hopefully the national leadership will be able to adapt and perceive the current changes as opportunities – because while brilliant and intelligent leaders matter, people matter. Success should never be about personalities but rather about integrity, professionalism, and dedication – about doing the right thing and making the right decision every time.

    What Is Don Reading?

    Lindbergh_bookThis month I only have room for one important tome: Lindbergh by A. Scott Berg.

    I initially read this wonderful volume several years ago and enjoyed it very much. I read it again recently because of the Time and Navigation display at the Smithsonian that piqued my interest in all things related to time and navigation through the ages. Lindbergh’s first solo flight across the Atlantic Ocean was not a flight of fancy, but rather a flight of daring as well as one of historical significance from a world-class aviator. He did not take any over-water navigation classes until after the event! As the jacket states, “…here at last is the definitive life of one of the most legendary, controversial, and enigmatic figures in American history.” I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. Highly recommended.

    Until next time, happy navigating, and please make your plans now to attend the 31st Space Symposium in 2015. I hope to see you all in Orlando, Florida, at the ION JNC (Institute of Navigation Joint Navigation Conference) event later this month (June 16-19, 2014).

     

  • Governor Signs Colorado Space Bill at 30th Space Symposium

    Governor Signs Colorado Space Bill at 30th Space Symposium

    Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signs a space-friendly bill at the 30th Space Symposium in Colorado Springs.
    Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signs a space-friendly bill at the 30th Space Symposium in Colorado Springs.

    Colorado Ranks Third in Space-Friendly States

    Governor John Hickenlooper (D) of Colorado made the trek from the statehouse in Denver yesterday to sign key space-friendly Colorado legislation at the 30th Space Symposium in Colorado Springs. The world’s largest annual space symposium takes place at the famed Broadmoor Resort in Colorado Springs and nominally draws a crowd of space aficionados and professionals, government and civilian alike, approximately 9,000 strong. Colorado House Bill #1178 is titled the “Sales And Use Tax Exemption for Qualified Property Used in Space Flight,” and it is hoped this legislation will help expand aerospace industry growth in Colorado. Spokesmen from the governor’s office and Tom Clark from the Colorado Space Coalition stressed that Colorado currently has the nation’s third-largest aerospace economy, and the new tax-exemption bill is part of Colorado’s strategic initiatives to support and grow one of its strongest industries. Indeed, Colorado Springs is known in government circles as the Home of Military Space. Several key space industry experts (both government and civil) present at the bill signing stated that the new tax exemption will add an important boost to keep Colorado ahead of the competition and further stimulate the state’s massive aerospace economy. Colorado is known as a national hub for geospatial technologies, remote sensing and satellite-based services. The space services and technology providers comprise the largest category of the state’s space economic activity, bringing in $6.3 billion in annual revenue. Currently, the Colorado space-based revenue is growing at a steady 8 percent annual rate. In conversation with Tom Clark, he admitted that in years past, Colorado has actually occupied the number-two raking for a state’s space-based economy, but was recently surpassed by Florida, which has similar tax-friendly legislation on the books. Clark was confident that with the new legislation Colorado would, like Avis, soon be number two again.

    Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper discusses space matters at the 30th Annual Space Symposium with Braxton Chairman of the Board Kevin O'Neil and Braxton CEO Frank Backes.
    Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper discusses space matters at the 30th Annual Space Symposium with Braxton Chairman of the Board Kevin O’Neil and Braxton CEO Frank Backes.
  • eDLoran Surprise: European Navigation Conference 2014

    eDLoran Surprise: European Navigation Conference 2014

    At the ENC-GNSS Conference in Rotterdam, we delved into actions necessary to officially use EGNOS (giving me déjà vu from WAAS’s early days), heard sage words from Brad Parkinson, the father of GPS, and, on the last day, saw amazing proof of a claim many of us initially thought was outrageous — that differential (DLoran) with modern monitoring can result in consistent horizontal accuracies approaching five meters on a moving platform.

    When I was asked if I could cover the European Navigation Conference 2014 (ENC-GNSS) in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, it took me about two seconds to answer in the affirmative. Let’s see… Travel to Europe in the spring, visit The Netherlands — my old stomping grounds where my daughter was born — see miles and miles of beautiful Tulips in bloom, and visit with some old friends. Gee, what a tough decision. Oh, and of course, cover the ENC. Almost forgot that

    Seriously, my primary purpose, of course, was to cover the ENC and associated events such as the Resilient PNT Forum and a meeting of the European Maritime Radionavigation Forum (EMRF), but literally miles and miles of brilliant red, white, and yellow tulips interspersed with ancient windmills are hard to ignore. But I digress.

    In past years the ENC, with approximately 400 attendees, has been naturally dedicated to European PNT matters, and in reality it concentrated almost exclusively on Galileo with a slight mention of EGNOS. That was about it. This year, the venue was the same, but the program was more open, with presentations on PNT augmentations such as EGNOS and DLoran, and maritime navigation to include radar and inertial systems.

    For those of us that have been in the PNT (positioning, navigation and timing) or merely the navigation business, say, for the past 40+ years or so, in some respects it was more than slightly reminiscent of times past. As the great American octogenarian baseball philosopher and malapropism aficionado extraordinaire, Yogi Berra, once said, “It was déjà vu all over again.”

    European Maritime Radionavigation Forum

    The Port of Rotterdam today (2014).
    The Port of Rotterdam today (2014).

    The EMRF was the first official function to kick off in Rotterdam. When you consider that Rotterdam is one of the busiest ports in Europe and had been around since 1340, you would naturally expect one of the main conversations at the EMRF to concern the port of Rotterdam and navigating in less-than-perfect conditions. The Netherlands is known as the Low Country, and that is as an apt description since most of the country is below sea level — hence the persistent fog, dikes, sea walls, and windmills that pump water and grind grain and all those good things. Today, the modern versions of those windmills are huge — twenty stories tall — and generate electricity. Many of them are close to shore so precise navigation in foggy conditions is even more critical than in times past.

    The main topic of conversation at the EMRF revolved around the actions necessary to officially use EGNOS (the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service) as a precision and official safety-of-life augmentation for GPS (similar to WAAS, Wide Area Augmentation System) and Galileo.

    During those discussions, I swear when I closed my eyes, except for the accented English, I was propelled backward almost 20 years to discussions of WAAS as a safety-of-life system, not for maritime but for aviation purposes. Still, the dialogue and heated discussions echoed down through the years almost verbatim. The main difference, of course, being that in the U.S. it was 20 years earlier, we were embarking on virgin territory, and we had only ourselves, one nation, to debate. Whereas the Europeans are fighting the same battles two decades later, with a system that is purposefully almost an identical copy of WAAS technically, and they are working for maritime and aviation certifications simultaneously. And not with just one nation but the entire European Union. A truly daunting task.

    The EMRF website is sponsored by Trinity House in London, which is responsible for the safety of [English and European] shipping and the well being of seafarers, which have been their prime concerns ever since Trinity House was granted a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1514. I planned to list the EMRF website for your further edification, but since the latest news on the site concerns the upcoming January 2011 EMRF meeting in Paris, I thought it was best left to molder in obscurity. The website, not the EMRF.

    The bottom line for the EMRF is that while it fills an important role where EGNOS and maritime navigation are concerned, it still has a lot to learn and could benefit greatly by lessons learned from WAAS. However, I personally see no indication that will happen, so we wish them luck. Many of us are standing by to assist if asked. Even if it is only, “Been there, tried that, and here is why it did or did not work.” Quod homo non sit Island.

    Resilient PNT Forum

    I was happy to see Dana Goward (USCG Ret), the head honcho at the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation, which conducted the Resilient PNT Forum at ENC 2014. Dana’s forum, which took place just before the official ENC 2014 kickoff, concentrated on the need for and strategies to achieve resilient position, navigation and timing (PNT) services. The event was well attended, and was jointly hosted by the European Group of Institutes of Navigation, the International Association of Institutes of Navigation, and the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities. There was no charge to attend the event, and the collaboration proved interesting, especially since Dana really wanted to talk eLORAN and GPS/Galileo augmentations.

    Dana is retired U.S. Coast Guard and worked many years supporting LORAN-C and the USCG Navigation Center. Dana showed a brief video of his recent testimony before the U.S. Congress, where he lobbied for a cessation of the destruction of LORAN-C towers and their associated infrastructure. If recent congressional actions are any indication, he has been somewhat successful in that regard. Now all that is left is to help the U.S. Congress, services, and agencies realize how badly the United States needs LORAN as a backup, enhancement, and augmentation to GPS and other space-based PNT services on a global basis. No small task, but it is a task that Dana Goward and the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation have strapped on, and we wish them the best. Plus, as you will see later, a surprise presentation at ENC-GNSS may have given Dana and his cause just the boost they need. Keep reading.

    As it turns out, many others thought these non-Galileo presentations were timely topics as well, and the discussions were enlightening, especially the Resilient PNT Forum keynote address by Professor David Last. Among many other titles he holds, Last is a consultant engineer and expert witness specializing in radio navigation and communications systems. He is a professor emeritus at the University of Bangor, Wales, and past president of the Royal Institute of Navigation. He acts as a consultant on radio-navigation and communications to companies and to governmental and international organizations and is active as an expert witness, especially in forensic matters concerning GPS.David and I are old friends, and it is always enlightening and entertaining to hear him speak. On this occasion, Professor Last spoke eloquently and authoritatively concerning the ubiquity of GPS/PNT and the resultant and inherent vulnerabilities of space-based systems. David made the essential point that while GPS remains the sine qua non of PNT, it is still vulnerable and subject to failures as are all space-based PNT systems, the recent GLONASS debacles being prime examples. More on these unfortunate Russian examples of PNT vulnerability at a later date.

    David pressed the issue, as he has many times, that we desperately need a ground system or many different ground-based augmentations, backups, and enhancements to ensure that the user is never without navigation and timing data at a critical juncture, such as navigating through an insanely busy commercial port in thick fog.

    This theme was carried forward in the ENC-GNSS very adroitly by none other than Dr. Bradford Parkinson, the Father of GPS. Dr. Parkinson spoke at length on the need to “Protect, Toughen, and Augment GNSS” against all enemies, be they manmade or natural. Brad made the point, with all due credit to Will Rogers, that “Rumors of GPS’ death are greatly exaggerated.” Indeed, the GPS constellation has never had more satellites on orbit, in residual status, and spares in the barn than we do today. The SIS or Signal In Space has never been more accurate, and the GPS atomic reference systems have never been more stable than today, and yet GPS remains incredibly vulnerable. But take heart, as Dr. Parkinson is convinced “There are actions such as PTA that can be taken to safeguard PNT for all users.” We will cover Dr. Parkinson’s 60+-slide presentation in depth at a later date.

    Surprise! Loran Is the Answer

    The big surprise came on the last official day of the conference during a group of alternate PNT presentations co-chaired by Dr. David Last. The rather startling enhanced differention LORAN (eDLoran) presentation was given by Professor Durk van Willigen, representing his colleagues René Kellenbach and Cees Dekker of the Dutch consulting firm Reelektronika, and Wim van Buuren of the Dutch Pilots’ [ed. maritime] Corporation, who helped with the DLoran research and authoring of the paper for the ENC presentation.

    Professor van Willigen made what many of us initially thought was an outrageous claim, and then amazingly went on to prove that enhanced differential Loran with modern monitoring produced consistent horizontal accuracies approaching five meters on a moving platform. Needless to say, Professor van Willigen, who teaches at the Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands, was mobbed at the end of his presentation, but I did manage to catch him for a few minutes afterwards. Since then, GPS World Editor-in-Chief Alan Cameron has spoken with Professor van Willigen at length, and the result is the first of what I am sure will prove to be numerous articles on eDLoran in GPS World.

    Shipboard DLORAN receiver installation (orange boxes on rails).
    Shipboard DLoran receiver installation (orange boxes on rails).

    One would hope that with this rather startling improvement in differential Loran accuracy and the decision by the U.S. Congress to halt the destruction of Loran-C infrastructure in North America, that there might once again be a future for Loran, especially eLoran and/or DLoran in North America, and hopefully globally as well.

    As Professor David Last in his best imitation of John Cleese might say, “It is the answer to a maiden.s prayer.”

    Until next time, happy navigating. I hope to see you all at the 30th Space Symposium May 19-22 in Colorado Springs at the Broadmoor Resort. More than 10,000 attendees are expected, and I hope you will be one of them. Stop by the GPS World booth and say hello.

     

  • The Adventure of the Atomic Clock

    In consulting my notebooks for the spring of 2014, I find many remarkable cases that engaged the attention of my intimate friend Mr. Sherlock Holmes. Among them stand out the tragedy of the ancient British barrow, the disappearance of Pemblestoke the magician, and the curious facts associated with the giant rat of Sumatra, a tale for which the world is still not prepared. Perhaps none of these so well illustrate, however, the advanced technical insights and consultative powers of the great detective as did the intrigue into which we were drawn by the brilliant young American scientist, Geo. P. Hess.

    “Watson, we have a new client,” Holmes announced over breakfast, “a friend, actually, upon whom I have depended for many years. He has always proved reliable, helping me navigate the highways and by-ways all across the land.”

    “His name?” I inquired.

    “The Right Honorable George Parkinson Hess from California, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Florida, and doubtless many other parts of the American nation. I have watched G.P. Hess grow these last 36 years into a prodigiously successful entrepreneur, known the world round for his ubiquity, openhanded generosity to all, and, equally, his devotion to his own country. Now it seems he needs my advice, and I cannot refuse him.“

    “I wonder that an American should be able to find his way here this morning,” I replied. “There’s a beastly fog about, and London streets are no friendly environment under the best of conditions.”

    “Have no fear, Watson,” Holmes chuckled. “I have never known G. P. Hess to be late for any function. Since a lad he was always on time, right to the second. You can set your watch by him, and as far as I know he has never been lost. He has an uncanny sense of direction and is indeed a fount of knowledge concerning maps and directions. I believe I hear his ring at the bell even now.”

    Mrs. Hudson ushered in our American visitor, and Holmes introduced us. “It is always good to see you, G.P. How are you — in good health, I presume?”

    “Indeed, Mr. Holmes, things are neither as well they may seem on the surface, nor as well as they could be. I am troubled of late, severely troubled by potential gaps in my future. Not to mention the seismic activity lately in Los Angeles. In the last 18 months, the magnitude of the tremors has grown from 3.1 to 5.1 on the Richter scale. I just can’t understand why they thought to have our major acquisition headquarters in a place that is constantly threatened by tremors, outright quakes, wild fires, floods, landslides, and tsunamis. Not to mention the traffic. It would have been much better to co-locate acquisition with the main headquarters in Colorado. All they have to worry about there are blizzards, high winds, and an occasional wildfire.

    “While I could not agree with you more, G.P., I fail to see what I can do, try as I might, about Mother Nature.”

    Fire in Florida

    “Right you are, Mr. Holmes. I’ll get to the heart of the matter. I am deeply concerned about several of our business ventures: expansion and modernization efforts, if you will. You may have heard about a small but rather serious fire at the U.S. Air Force’s Cape Canaveral radar tracking facility and the subsequent launch delays. That small fire at a single tracking facility has already delayed a National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) launch, and a resupply mission to the International Space Station, currently manned by U.S. and Russian crews who, whether or not they are still speaking to one another, really need the replenishments. Now we aren’t allowed use Russian engine cores for space launch any more. A blessing, actually, as the Russians have put more malfunctioning GLONASS satellites into salt water lately than into the vacuum of space, when they aren’t simply blasting them to kingdom come.

    “With all the troubles besetting Cape Canaveral, Elon Musk is burning figure eights in his Tesla, and SpaceX is a very happy company — in the right place at the right time, what? Able to launch its Falcons and Falcon Heavies from Vandenberg as well as Canaveral.

    “Imagine, one little fire has caused the cancellation of several space launches, and those still on the manifest are moving to the right daily. We had hoped to put into orbit four new IIF models this year, but that looks next to impossible now. Plus it appears the GPS III payload has hit a snag. It is delayed six to nine months.”

    GPS III Delay

    “A delay in GPS III had not been looked for, had it?” queried Holmes.

    “No sir, it had not. Everything was proceeding smoothly, but now the satellite payload is in question. Subcontractor Exelis has provided every GPS payload since 1978 and all have worked marvelously well, some of them for more than 23 years. But now — there is a problem. Some say it is signal crosstalk, some say it is with the new rubidium clocks. One thing for sure, it is demoralizing. I am given to understand the powers that be in Colorado Springs and Los Angeles are calmly but firmly looking for some competition or even an alternate payload provider.

    OCX Delay

    “And then there is the GPS ground segment. It has moved one month to the right for every month it has been in existence, it has gone over budget, and now is on its third program manager in three years. Whatever happened to the days when a capable leader conducted a program from beginning to end, knew it intimately from top to bottom, from soup to nuts? What is this world coming to? Where are our leaders?

    “And don’t get me started on the effects of ‘seques-castration’!” fumed the young man.

    “And the Chinese!” he continued, gathering steam. “Just who do they think they are? Do you know they called their regional system a PNT gold standard? Gold standard! Don’t make me laugh!”

    “Now G.P., don’t despair,” soothed Holmes. “There are still excellent leaders out there, you just have to look a bit harder nowadays. In the space arena, Elon Musk, General William Shelton, Wild Bill Cooley, Frank Kendall, and Keoki Jackson are just five of many that come immediately to mind. Of course I would not want to play poker with any of them, but I digress.”

    Solutions Appear

    “I have been reading and thinking about the alternative payload issue,” the detective continued, “and I have other sources of information as well. Dr. Watson calls them my Baker Street Irregulars, and they are both resourceful and quite knowledgeable. These sources tell me there is another Colorado company, with excellent leadership, that is really on the ball, can move mountains (or huge boulders, anyway), and mark my words, they have top-notch crews, expertise, and even some past performance where an alternative GPS payload is concerned. They might be worth watching.

    “As far as OCX goes, frankly I am hearing there are indeed backups and alternatives. My sources have confirmed the existence of a bracket of applicable technologies belonging to a small residual company, run by an Irish clan, believe it or not, with considerable past performance and expertise. Once officially launched to work on the real-time issues, they should be able to help the ground-segment team get back on the fast track.

    “As for as the Chinese and their claims, all I can say is no one believes their gold standard rhetoric, although it obviously has a purpose.”

    “Mr. Holmes, I hope you are right,” the American replied with an assuaged look. “I knew that if I talked with you I would feel better about these perplexing issues.

    “I must resume my journey to Rotterdam, where I will hear a lot more about the Galileo program meeting its launch dates — or not — and the GLONASS outage. As rough a shape as we are in, we’re still far better off than the rest! In the meantime, I’ll pop over to Greenwich to synch up and universally coordinate with those folks before I move on to the Continent.”

    G.P. Hess carefully scrutinized his pocket watch. “Now Mr. Holmes, Dr. Watson, I must depart. As you know I have a reputation to maintain: always precisely on time, never lost, and as far as I know, I have never blacked out. Cheerio!”

    “What a remarkable fellow, Holmes!” I said after our client had left. “He is certainly full of energy.”

    “Yes,” my friend replied, “energetic and very successful. If you had observed him more closely, Watson, you would have noticed his pocket watch. Ah, you did not remark upon it? Standard-issue, atomic-reference version, crafted of solid gold. You might say, and rightly so, that where time is concerned, G.P. Hess is the undisputed holder of the Gold Standard.”

    So ends our brief visit with Holmes and the illustrious Watson. Stay tuned for further adventures, and until next time, Happy Navigating! G.P. Hess and I hope to see you all next week in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, at the European Navigation Conference, ENC-GNSS 2014. Drop by and say Hello!

    If you can’t drop by and say hello in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, then please join me at the 30th Space Symposium, which is slated for May 19-22, 2014, at The Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs. The Space Symposium is considered by many of us in the Space business to be the premier gathering of space professionals in the world.

    In June, I will be attending the 39th NIST Time and Frequency Seminar. It has a great lineup of speakers this year to include: Judah Levine who is the NIST civilian time leader, David Allan who is the original creator of the famous Allan variance, and Neil Ashby, an expert in relativistic timing effects. The seminar takes place in Boulder, Colorado, June 3-6, 2014.

    What Is Don Reading?

    I had very little time for reading this month, or so I thought — then I had a brief but enlightening correspondence and conversation with local author George E. Nolly, who also lives in Colorado. George sent all four of his wonderful books direct to the Kindle app on my iPad. I had told George I was so swamped I would save his books to read on the airplane on my way to Rotterdam and report on them after the European Navigation Conference.

    Then I read just one chapter of the first book and I was hooked. There was nothing for it but to devour all four volumes of the escapades of young Vietnam era USAF pilot, Hamilton “Hamfist” Hancock.
    Hamfist Out: The Chill Is Gone;
    Hamfist Over Hanoi: Wolfpack on the Prowl;
    Hamfist Down! Evasion, Survival and Combat in the Jungle;
    Hamfist Over The Trail: The Air Combat Adventures of Hamilton “Hamfist” Hancock

    Hamfist-Out Hamfist-Hanoi

    Hamfist-Down Hamfist-OverTrail

    It will be like going back in time for many readers of a similar age. George Nolly writes with such an easy-going grace and fluidity that reading of these often stressful and life-threatening times, while sitting in my lounge chair, was, for me anyway, indeed a pleasure.

    Certainly I can remember undergoing many of the same flying and ground ordeals, and Nolly tells his tales with such honesty and clarity that it brought back vivid memories. In fact I have never read such accurate descriptions of what it was like to fly the old T-29 with radial engines and all that entails. George actually brought back the unforgettable sound and smell of those two Pratt & Whitney R-2800 radial, air-cooled engines. They are from a long-forgotten era of aviation, but those of us who heard them will never forget them.

    T-29A Aircraft, Vietnam era, restored. Courtesy of CONVAIR T29A.
    T-29A Aircraft, Vietnam era, restored. Courtesy of CONVAIR T29A.

    George also makes wonderful plugs for GPS, possibly without knowing it, when he describes using LORAN maps under red lights in a cramped cockpit. This, along with all the time he spent just trying to figure out where he was or where the target was located, just screams for a GPS solution. In truth, in the Vietnam era we airmen spent a great deal of time trying to figure out exactly where we were, where our target was, and where the enemy was located, especially if he was shooting at us. Today all those tasks are made infinitely simpler with the use of GPS and modern electronics. However, this also highlights the amazing feats of airmanship accomplished in the Vietnam era, all while being constantly targeted by the enemy, all the more incredible.

    Radial engine.
    Radial engine.

    Just between us veteran airmen, the author relates the tales with such clarity and detail I suspect many of them are autobiographical. George E. Nolly, after graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy here in Colorado Springs, served as a pilot in the United States Air Force, flying 315 combat missions on two successive tours of duty in Vietnam, winning three Distinguished Flying Crosses and 24 Air Medals, flying O-2A and F-4 aircraft, so he knows whereof he writes.

    Even if you are a few generations younger than George Nolly and me, and don’t undergo a nostalgic experience as you read, you will certainly enjoy these fabulous books. Be sure to read them in order, as they are actually one running story that brings to life the trials, tribulations, and joys of Hamilton “Hamfist” Hancock for all of us and vividly recreates the way things were back in the 1960s and ’70s in the United States, the USAF, and what it was like flying in combat in Southeast Asia. I highly recommend these tales. I hope there are more to come.

    Upcoming Conferences

    If you can’t drop by and say hello in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, then please join me at the 30th National Space Symposium, which is slated for May 19-22, 2014, at The Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs. The National Space Symposium is considered  by many of us in the Space business to be the premier gathering of space professionals in the world.

    In June I will be attending the 39th NIST Time and Frequency Seminar. It has a great lineup of speakers this year to include: Judah Levine who is the NIST civilian time leader, David Allan who is the original creator of the famous Allan variance, and Neil Ashby, an expert in relativistic timing effects. The seminar takes place in Boulder, Colorado, June 3-6, 2014.

  • ANGELS, GSSAP, CNAV, and GPS: Guidance From Above

    ANGELS, GSSAP, CNAV, and GPS: Guidance From Above

    A still from the movie Gravity, where space real estate feels really small. (credit: Warner Bros. Pictures)
    A still from the movie Gravity, where space real estate feels really small and collisions frequently happen. (credit: Warner Bros. Pictures)

    Wow, what a bevy of acronyms. If you already know what they mean, great. If you don’t, just hang in and all will be made clear.

    E. L. Doctorow once wrote, “Writing is a socially acceptable form of schizophrenia.” Now, I am not sure how I feel about that or how my daughter who is a practicing Clinical Psychologist (PsyD) would interpret that, but as she publishes (publish or perish) behavioral science papers in the public domain, she did remind me of a paradigm shift in journalism today that has stuck with me. She said simply, “Dad, everything you publish today is out there and available to everyone, everywhere, all the time, in multiple venues.” As mundane as that may sound to everyone under 20 years of age, to those of my generation it is indeed profound, as it socially delineates the technical world we live in today that has afforded unprecedented data and document availability for the first time in history. Never before have so many had virtually instantaneous access to so much information. Can you say Siri?

    The really interesting part of this instant-access phenomenon is that it not only applies to articles and columns that I and my fellow journalists pen today, but includes access to everything we, and anyone else, has ever written that has been preserved. As you read this, thousands of books (some moldering for more than two thousand years), reports and articles are being scanned daily and made available for the world to read in a digital or new print format.

    Numerous major programs today are digitizing books, documents, magazines and newspapers daily, such as Amazon and the sometimes annoying Captcha program, which stands for Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart. In 2007 the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation awarded the Library of Congress more than $2 million for the “Digitizing American Imprints at the Library of Congress” effort. Thanks to this program and others, such as Project Gutenberg, most of the digitized volumes, 45,000 and counting for Project Gutenberg, include most of the writings of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, and they are available online free of charge. Depending on your point-of-view and physical location (think Mainland China, Russia and North Korea) that can either be a scary thought or wonderfully liberating.

    For almost everything written and published — and published has a new definition in this context — in the past ten years or so, and certainly for the knowable future, the digital and availability timeline equals immediate access. That is because today almost every written document originates in a digital format, while printing and publishing are secondary actions. Think about how this has changed the way you work and read today. It is truly a major revolution of epic proportions, taking place in an evolutionary manner.

    USAF SAB    

    Report-1Recently, I was reminded of this new electronic availability as it concerns an academic paper I was honored to edit and minimally coauthor as the Executive Officer for a very distinguished committee of preeminent scientist and physicists, more than 17 years ago when I served on a USAF (United States Air Force) Scientific Advisory Board, or SAB. I have been honored to serve on several SABs and have written or contributed to several SAB reports, but this one was particularly intriguing albeit esoteric in nature, and unless you were interested in the hazards of space debris at the time, which many of us were, you may never have heard of it until now. The full title of the report is rather lengthy, as is common with scholarly scientific reports:

    “The United States Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Report on Space Surveillance, Asteroids and Comets, and Space Debris, SAB-TR-96-04, June 1997.”

    A snapshot of the locations of all cataloged space objects (from the report).
    A snapshot of the locations of all cataloged space objects (from the report).

    The report was, at the time, and many of us feel today is still, the quintessential and defining document on the hazards or non-hazards of space debris and has been liberally quoted in scientific documents and treatises for the last 17 years.

    Meanwhile, NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) as an organization has always been a bit of a harridan concerning space debris, and it has been known to sensationalize the effects that cascading space debris may have on space assets. Of course, they are always quick to point out that we academics and scientists outside of NASA only worry about absolute numbers and probabilities, while they — as the recent blockbuster movie Gravity amply exemplifies — worry about human lives in an extremely hostile space environment. This is not to say that space debris is not a valid concern; however, this SAB report clearly points out that the NASA cascading theory is more sideshow sensationalism of the Hollywood blockbuster mentality rather than supportable scientific theory. Indeed, space is a very big place, and as Einstein stated, it is always expanding — so you be the judge.

    Space Surveillance

    But I digress, because for the first time in recent memory, it was not the space debris aspects or Volume Four of the SAB report that made it a document of interest, but rather the First Volume on Space Surveillance that evidently piqued the USAFs interest. In Volume One, the committee made a recommendation (remember, this was seventeen years ago), that to successfully surveil space, you must do it from space and not from the Earth’s surface. Our actual recommendation in part stated, “…the committee recommends that the Air Force pursue surveillance of space from space with search capability.” And then we proceeded to move into tens of pages of technical specifics, which is more than most of you would ever want to take the time to read.

    In a nutshell, as it turns out when you surveil space objects, natural and manmade from Earth, you encounter a multitude of bothersome effects you must deal with, such as weather (clouds, storms and lightening — none of which are good for sensitive optical sensors), atmosphere, solar disturbances, signal disturbances, background noise, and more. Now when you surveil space from space, most of these bothersome effects are mitigated to a major degree by the vacuum of space. In the SAB report, in much more detail than I can relate here, we basically concluded that the only successful way to continually monitor and surveil space and objects in space, both natural and man made, is to undertake that surveillance effort from space — in other words, surveil space from space — ideally from a GEO or near Geosynchronous orbit spacecraft with multiple sensors, including multi-spectral sensors that surveil both natural and manmade objects and phenomenon. Seventeen years later it appears that someone listened, and fortunately that someone belonged to an institution, the United States Air Force.

    The Secret’s Out

    A few weeks ago, General William Shelton, the Commander of Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) announced that by the end of the year, under a program formerly in the SECRET domain known as the Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program, or GSSAP, “…the USAF plans to launch two space surveillance spacecraft into high-altitude orbits later this year to monitor satellite traffic in the congested geosynchronous belt 22,300 miles above Earth…GSSAP will produce a significant improvement in space object surveillance, not only for better collision avoidance but also for detecting threats…GSSAP will bolster our ability to discern when adversaries attempt to avoid detection and to discover capabilities they may have which might be harmful to our critical assets at these higher altitudes.” Shelton made these remarks  in a speech at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Florida, in February.

    While these are not the first space surveillance satellites launched by the USAF, they are the first that peer down from on high. Currently the USAF also operates the SBSS or Space Based Surveillance Program, but these satellites surveil all of space from LEO (Low Earth Orbit) altitudes with an optical telescope. Their GEO targets are more than 22,000 miles distant. The newly announced GSSAP satellites will have much more fidelity and have the added advantage of surveilling GEO assets from GEO.

    ANGELS and GPS

    All very interesting, you say, but where does GPS come into play? Glad you asked. While the GSSAP mission will undoubtedly use limb-of-the-Earth GPS signals for guidance and orientation, the GSSAP mission will also host two other small satellites known as ANGELS, or Automated Navigation and Guidance Experiment for Local Space. The ANGELS job will be to test accelerometers and specialized algorithms that will utilize the GPS navigation signals being broadcast from 11,000 miles away in their MEO orbits, for precision guidance when in close proximity to other satellites, thereby reducing the probability of a collision. Think about this one for a while and all kinds of possibilities become apparent. Why not equip every U.S. satellite with ANGEL technology? Currently, the Air Force fact sheet on ANGELS states that the scope of the mission is limited to the space around the Delta 4 rocket’s upper stage, and while we all know from experience how dangerous inert, non-maneuverable upper stages can be, if you believe the AF fact sheet, I have some swamp land in Florida I would like to discuss.

    Seriously, however the GSSAP and ANGELS missions evolve, it is still nice to know that someone is reading what you write, even if it is 17 years later.

    Until next time, happy navigating and sleep well, because ANGELS really do exist.

    What Is Don Reading?

    Obviously I have been reading ancient but still pertinent SAB reports but more importantly this week I also read and highly recommend you read and comment on the latest Federal Register notice for comment submitted by DOT concerning deployment of GPS CNAV messages. The DOT comments are actually a bit misleading as they infer this is an early or pre-operational deployment of CNAV messages and that is a bit of a misnomer. Under the original guidelines CNAV signals would have been broadcast back in 2003 but events prevailed to prevent that from happening. However, and this is an update to the numbers in the original Federal Register Notice, there are currently 12 GPS SVs on orbit capable of broadcasting civilian L2C CNAV signals and military code or MNAV messages. Additionally there are five GPS satellites (IIFs) on orbit capable of broadcasting L5 safety of life signals for DOT.

    Frankly, the DOT objects to these signals being broadcast now for, in my humble opinion, very nebulous reasons, and the USAF is working hard to and has, again in my opinion, negated all of the DOTs concerns. So please just take a couple of minutes and go to the Federal Register site and let them know how badly we need these new signals.

    Hopefully, you read my February column affirming GPS as the reigning PNT Gold Standard. In order to maintain that status and indeed to continually exceed the capabilities of any of the current or planned PNT systems in existence today, the GPS needs these new signals. I predict CNAV and MNAV messaging capabilities will revolutionize the way PNT signals are utilized. These new signals bring about a capability heretofore unknown in the PNT arena. Just think about this, each CNAV and MNAV signal has the ability to broadcast 256 separate and definable messages to users globally. With 12 CNAV satellites on orbit today, global accessibility tests have shown that for the majority of users this means at least one CNAV SV in view at all times and you only need one CNAV SV in view to take advantage of the messaging capabilities. So the sooner the better I say. I don’t have the room to say much more than that this month but just imagine the possibilities. Please log onto the Federal Register site and let your opinion be heard.