On June 3, Raytheon demonstrated the advanced capabilities of the GPS Next Generation Operational Control System (GPS OCX) to key U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and other stakeholders through a series of realistic operational demonstrations.
The demonstrations, which incorporated software that will be delivered with the Launch and Checkout System, validated how automation will improve system efficiency and effectiveness.
GPS OCX is the ground-based command and control system that will manage GPS satellites with significantly improved accuracy and precision, while providing unprecedented levels of cyber protection.
“These successful demonstrations incorporating actual GPS OCX software reflect Raytheon’s significant and continuing progress on this program and the growing maturity of this very complex system,” said Dave Wajsgras, president of Raytheon’s Intelligence, Information and Services. “Once delivered, this pathfinding, cyber-hardened ground system will significantly enhance the capabilities GPS brings to military, civil and commercial users worldwide,” said Wajsgras.
The demonstration provided DoD and other stakeholders with a look at how OCX will automate many tasks currently performed manually, resulting in reduced opportunities for error and increased operational tempo for delivering military and other applications, Raytheon said.
Raytheon demonstrated the benefits of OCX in providing new high-power, jam-resistant military signal known as M-code, as well as the system’s unprecedented cyber automation, detection and response capabilities.
Raytheon is installing the Block 0 Launch and Checkout System (LCS) hardware at Schriever Air Force Base. LCS software, which includes the cyber-hardened infrastructure for OCX Block 1, is in the qualification test phase and is on track for delivery in mid-2016.
The Lockheed Martin GPS III Non-Flight Satellite Testbed (GNST).
A Lockheed Martin vice president has stated that the first GPS III satellite will likely launch in 2017, not 2016 as had been projected in the most recent update.
The company is readying the first satellite for launch availability by the end of 2015, for launch as early as the end of this year, but Space News reports that Mark Valerio, vice president and general manager of Lockheed Martin’s military space business, stated in a Feb. 18 news briefing that he expects the Air Force will schedule its launch for early 2017.
The GPS III generation of modernized satellites — with new signals, added signal strength, and resistance to interference and jamming — was originally projected to begin orbiting in 2014. Technical difficulties have delayed the program. The principal issues, those with the payload, have now been resolved, according to Valerio.
Valerio expects a firmer GPS III launch announcement for 2017 in March. He expected the final launch date “will depend on the health of the existing constellation, the availability of launch slots and synchronization with the ground system.” Ultimately, the Air Force always makes the final decision on the launch date.
Lockheed Martin is contracted to build eight GPS III satellites.
Late last year, a spokesman for the Space and Missile Systems Center said that “The first GPS III launch is tentatively considered for the first half of FY17, based on booster availability and Air Force launch priorities.”
The Air Force has put out feelers for other contractors to finish out the full generation of GPS III satellites. Lockheed Martin is building eight, with an option for four more, totalling 12; a complete constellation of III-generation satellites would require 24. Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems and Northrop Grumman Aerospace are reportedly interested.
“The best thing I can do is keep marching along the plan we have,” Valerio said. “We’re certainly not afraid of the competition.” Lockheed Martin has submitted cost-cutting proposals for the current GPS III satellite design, he added.
Ground Control
The corresponding new ground system for GPS III, the Operational Control Segment (OCX), has also fallen behind schedule. Just this month, the Air Force announced that Lockheed Martin may develop an interim control capability, a set of changes implemented upon the current control segment, the Architecture Evolution Plan (AEP), as a backup.
Michael Gilmore, the Defense Department’s director of operational test and evaluation, recently stated that OCX delays have pushed back GPS III operational testing “until after at least six, and as many as eight,” satellites have been launched into orbit. “This introduces significant risk that effectiveness and suitability deficiencies in GPS III satellites will not be discovered until it is too late to prevent their introduction to the operational constellation.”
Budget Blues
Don Jewell, GPS World’s contributing editor for defense, has written at length about the GPS III and OCX situations in his February newsletter column, “USAF FY16 Budget Plus $10B More, Please!”. We condensed some of his remarks, particular to the budget battle on Capitol Hill, for the Out in Front column of the March issue of the magazine, due out soon. Here is a further digest of those comments.
The 2016 President’s Budget, submitted in February, contains an Air Force requested a budget of $122.2 billion. This may be too little, too late.
On the satellite side of the house, GPS III has problems centering on development and delivery issues with a subcontractor. In this case, however, the whole satellite program is not failing, just a component, albeit an important one: the Mission Data Unit (MDU).
For GPS III+, the Air Force plans for a two-phased competition process: a Production Readiness competition for up to three firm-fixed price contracts to mature competitors’ production designs for a competition in a full and open competition for up to 22 GPS III Production SVs [satellite vehicles] with an expected award in FY17/18.
This 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. In fact, the government only needs an MDU. Failure to produce the MDU on time has delayed GPS III by 18 months to date.
More troubling are the government proposals to entertain other bids to finish the second half of the GPS III constellation. Such a competition or re-bid will take at least three years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars — and Lockheed Martin may well win again in the end
A significant added cost to the GPS budget concerns the need for a new ground C2 system if the total new systems approach is taken. If preliminary elements of the GPS space segment are developed without cross-checking the impact to the GPS control segment, technical, operational, budgetary and schedule impacts will be significant.
The already perturbed OCX budget likely has not considered the integration costs of a newly developed, yet-to-be-procured GPS III+ SV. OCX today is geared for the GPS III already contracted for, and it is failing to meet that challenge.
Budget constraints are tight and getting tighter, mandating the Air Force “do more with less” in every context. For GPS III SVs, this should — but by no means necessarily does — indicate developing an alternate MDU rather than buying a new block of GPS SVs.
By Colonel William T. “Bill” Cooley, U.S. Air Force, Director, Global Positioning System
Last year in my “Directions” article, I emphasized the commitment made by the U.S. government to ensure GPS signals are available to all users, and I shared some of our excitement in the GPS Directorate regarding the modernized capabilities we are developing and fielding. This year I’d like to share with you progress we’ve made in the past 12 months, provide an update on the modernization initiatives, and challenge civil users and receiver companies to innovate and accelerate these modernized capabilities for users worldwide.
This past year has been productive for the GPS program. The most visible progress was the addition of four new Boeing-built GPS IIF satellites to the GPS constellation, bringing the total number of available satellites from 36 to 39 (SVN-33 was safely disposed in October 2014, or the number would be 40). These additions also reduced the average age of the satellites on orbit from 11.1 to 10.3 years. This year’s GPS launch tempo had not been matched since the early 1990s! Table 1 lists the current satellites in the constellation by block.
TABLE 1. GPS constellation as of October 31, 2014.
Perhaps the most exciting aspect of the GPS satellite constellation is the ever-improving performance. As I mentioned last year, the 2008 Standard Positioning Service (SPS) Performance Standard, issued by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, codifies our commitment to civil users. Among other attributes that make GPS the “gold standard” for positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT), the SPS requires a signal-in-space (SIS) user range error (URE) of 4.0 meters or less for every healthy satellite. The SIS URE is the difference between a GPS satellite’s navigation message (for example, ephemeris data and satellite clock correction data) versus the truth (for example, satellite transmit antenna location and satellite clock offset from GPS time). While the commitment of the U.S. government is four meters or less, the actual average performance over the past year has been 0.68 meters and in the past quarter has been an impressive 0.63 meters!
While this is admirable, continued modernization efforts will allow us even better performance. A significant contributor to the errors experienced by GPS receivers are ionospheric delays that can be eliminated only with knowing the characteristics of the ionosphere (free electron density in the region roughly 100-1,000 kilometers above the Earth’s surface) or by using two signals at different known frequencies. While systems like Federal Aviation Administration Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) and the U.S. Coast Guard National Differential GPS (NDGPS) provide a modeled approximation of the ionosphere, the new L2C and L5 civil signals on the GPS IIR-M, GPS IIF, and soon-to-launch GPS III satellites enable GPS receivers to directly measure and eliminate the ionospheric delays altogether — thereby delivering on the GPS modernization program first announced in 1999. These new signals began pre-operational Civil Navigation (CNAV) message broadcast on 28 April 2014 (with the L2C signal set “healthy” and L5 set “unhealthy” until sufficient monitoring capability is established).
With CNAV now on the air, civil users should take advantage of it. My challenge to commercial receiver companies and innovators is to incorporate the modernized signals in future receivers and continue to improve user experience and GPS performance. Currently 14 L2C-broadcasting satellites are in the constellation, and by early 2016 we expect to have 19 on-orbit and transmitting L2C (7 GPS IIR-Ms and 12 GPS IIFs). GPS modernization is well on its way from a signal-in-space perspective; receiver manufacturers and innovators must bring new, improved products and solutions to users.
Less visible but real progress modernizing the GPS Enterprise is underway with the next generation of GPS satellites, ground control, and user equipment segments. The first GPS III satellite and the newly developed navigation payload have been delayed approximately two years from the original planned delivery of the completed GPS III satellite of October 2014. But in September of this year, the GPS III navigation payload was shipped from Exelis (the payload subcontractor) in Clifton, New Jersey, to Lockheed Martin’s (GPS III prime contractor) facility in Waterton, Colorado. There, it completed the payload-level thermal vacuum testing at the end of October, a key step toward payload and eventually satellite vehicle delivery. The first GPS III satellite is now 87% complete and the program is making solid progress.
The GPS Next-Generation Operational Control System (OCX), with Raytheon as the prime contractor, experienced significant challenges in development but can also claim measurable progress this year. Complex cyber-security requirements and their implementation drove a significant number of these challenges, but are essential to provide civil and military GPS users with a secure and resilient command and control system. These and other challenges resulted in significant cost and schedule overruns and a two-year delay to the program, which drove an update to the development plan. The revised OCX plan reflects the complexity of implementing these unique cyber requirements and accounts for planned improvements to Raytheon’s systems engineering and software development approach. The plan establishes a schedule meeting GPS III’s projected first-launch date.
Despite its challenges, OCX development completed four end-to-end space-to-ground launch readiness exercises with GPS III, as well as entered the formal integration and test phase. The new monitoring station receivers are entering qualification test, and the first production receiver is on track to be delivered in spring of 2015. OCX is on track to provide robust PNT services, improvements in URE accuracy, enable access to new military and civil signals, and provide cyber security for the GPS ground control.
Our development of Military GPS User Equipment (MGUE) is another area where we have made important strides this past year. We started the year by developing a commercial market-based acquisition approach that will accelerate delivery of MGUE systems by years. In this effort, we want to establish a race to a certified marketplace where the U.S. government serves as the race official while our industry partners set their own pace to deliver capability. Our goal is to increase speed of delivery to the warfighter while capitalizing on industry’s ability to innovate.
Our MGUE team of government and industry partners (Rockwell Collins, Raytheon, and L3) successfully completed major system design reviews demonstrating a readiness to define the process of security and compatibility certification. Additionally, the team participated in the GYPSY Juliett multi-service, multi-nation PNT demonstration hosted by the U.S. Strategic Command this past summer. While we battled the elements through two hurricanes, the team successfully demonstrated the capability of M-Code receiver cards in an operational demonstration. Our goal is to enable full operational testing with four lead platforms in summer 2016.
While many risks and challenges to GPS modernization still lie ahead of us, the persistent effort by the GPS team has produced important progress in 2014 across the space, ground, and user equipment segments.
A civilian GPS user recently thanked me for providing the incredibly useful utility free to everyone around the globe. Although my impulsive response was to say simply, “You’re welcome,” I’d like to provide a more thoughtful and thorough reply that recognizes those responsible for GPS.
There are two key groups to thank for GPS: the first is the men and women across the United States government and industry who develop, field, and operate the GPS Enterprise. Among this group are satellite factory technicians, software engineers improving the ground segment, receiver designers, program office engineers, and satellite operators continuously monitoring the constellation, updating each GPS satellite’s clock correction and ephemeris data 24/7. This team works with an unwavering passion for this mission that inspires me every day.
The second group responsible for GPS is the American taxpayer who, through Congress, funds the GPS Enterprise every year.The U.S. financial commitment to GPS is not just for U.S. security or the well documented positive impact GPS has on the American economy, but for the benefit of the entire world as a global utility. GPS is the gold standard for PNT because American taxpayers continuously provide fiscal support so the GPS Enterprise’s men and women can design, produce, field, and maintain the global utility that we all have come to depend on.
Thank you for supporting this enterprise, and know that the GPS team works hard to ensure those resources are spent wisely to provide continuously improving, predictable, and dependable performance from the Global Positioning System.
Colonel William T. Cooley is director, Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Air Force Space Command, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California.
Col. William Cooley, Director, U.S.A.F. Global Positioning Systems Directorate.
Colonel William “Wild Bill” Cooley, director of the GPS Directorate at Space and Missile Systems Center, discusses CNAV signals, GPS IIF launches, and the OCX with Defense Editor Don Jewell.
There is probably no busier United States Air Force officer than Colonel William “Wild Bill” Cooley, Ph.D., the director of the GPS Directorate at Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Air Force Space Command (AFSPC), Los Angeles AFB, California. He is the driving force for all things dealing with acquisition and development for GPS. Currently, he is juggling so many objects, it is amazing that he is not totally overwhelmed. Consider the issues with the Next-Generation Operational Control System (OCX), GPS IIF, GPS III, and military government user equipment (MGUE), plus a plethora of classified endeavors we can’t even discuss here. He is one busy man, but even with all that, he found time to sit down and answer a few questions in an effort to bring us all up to speed on GPS and PNT.
Don Jewell (DJ): One of the hot topics at all the symposia lately, here and abroad, has been the broadcasting of additional civilian navigation signals and messages. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) originally objected and sent a strongly worded and probably unadvisable letter to General Shelton (AFSPC/CC) on the matter, but sanity prevailed, and the GPS navigation signals on L2C- and L5C-capable satellites began broadcasting with full navigation messages on April 28. However, we understand DOT still insists some restrictions be put in place for the L5C signal. Can you provide us with an update and a status on that program? Plus, what can users expect in the way of improved accuracy and signal availability?
Colonel “Wild Bill” William Cooley (WBC): As of April 28, the civil navigation message (CNAV) broadcast was implemented on all operational GPS satellites capable of transmitting the L2C and L5 signals. Currently, seven GPS IIR-M satellites broadcast L2C, and six GPS IIF satellites broadcast L2C and L5. On average, users may expect at least one L2C-broadcasting satellite to be in view at all times.
The CNAV message content now includes the minimum message set needed to support the positioning, navigation, and timing mission, namely Broadcast Message Types (MT) 10, 11, 30, and 33, which contain information about the satellites’ position, clock, health, and corrections, in lieu of the previously transmitted MT-0 placeholder or default message.
The Air Force intends to broadcast L2C messages with the health bit set healthy and L5 messages with the health bits set unhealthy until sufficient monitoring capabilities are available for the L5 signal. We expect the accuracy to be slightly less than the Legacy Navigation Message (LNAV) because we are only updating the satellites two times each week. The accuracy should improve to be slightly better than LNAV beginning this December, when we begin updating the CNAV message on each satellite daily.
DJ: The M-code (military code) and MNAV (military navigation) signals are also being broadcast on M-code-capable satellites. So, the same questions apply: what can our warfighters and government users expect as far as M-code availability and accuracy? What can you say about the multiple messaging capabilities both on the civilian and military (CNAV and MNAV) signals?
WBC: Like the civil CNAV message, the modernized military-data message MNAV will enable military users to take advantage of all of the performance improvements offered by a modernized military signal. We can expect continued accuracy improvements as newer satellites replace aging satellites.
MNAV broadcast testing will continue occasionally in support of developmental test events for the next-generation military GPS receiver cards.
DJ: I know we can get in sensitive territory here in a hurry, but since we are discussing the military signals, can you give us an update on the long-running MGUE and M-code program? When can government users expect to see an actual signal and a receiver with M-code chips and/or modules that utilize the military only signals? Plus — and here’s where we have to be careful — what can you say about the security, availability, and accuracy of the military signal?
WBC: The M-code-capable military receiver (MGUE) modules in development have successfully acquired and tracked M-code during live-sky tests, and we have many more tests scheduled. MGUE is expected to begin fielding by 2017, at which point at least 18 M-code-capable GPS satellites are expected to be on orbit, providing global four-in-view coverage of full M-code capabilities.
In the meantime, the most recent GPS IIF satellite launches have raised the total number of M-code-capable modernized GPS spacecraft to 14 (seven GPS IIR-M and seven GPS IIF). This provides four or more M-code satellites in view globally at least 50 percent of the time, and at least one M-code satellite in view continuously. This increasing M-code satellite signal coverage will enable effective, realistic, developmental and operational testing of MGUE receivers.
The new GPS III block of satellites will provide an M-code signal with greater security, and higher power, comparable availability, and accuracy when compared with the GPS IIF satellites, allowing users to operate closer to jammers and under trees, as well as with greater resistance to jamming and spoofing. Also OCX will offer significantly improved crypto protection and cyber security.
DJ: Recently, the U.S. Air Force successfully launched the fifth, sixth, and seventh SVs in the GPS IIF family of satellites in less than seven months. Quite a feat! Congratulations are in order for that milestone. However, in the past, the checkout times averaged approximately 30 days. In fact, speed in initializing the IIF SVs and declaring them operational seemed to be an unofficial goal. On GPS IIF-5, however, the rapid checkout timelines have been extended considerably. Can you enlighten us concerning the checkout program and what the government hopes to achieve?
WBC: There are three key dates with regard to checkout timelines: completion of on-orbit checkout, the transfer of Satellite Control Authority (SCA), and the Operational Acceptance of the vehicle. Measured from launch, the nominal on-orbit checkout timeline is 21 days. The nominal checkout for SCA transfer is 28 days. For the IIF-5 mission, the on-orbit checkout occurred in six days and the SCA in 11 days, a record for the IIF program!
The operational acceptance was completed 60 days later, following an on-orbit observation validating a requirement to see if the vehicle works as expected without receiving any commands from the ground segment in that time period.
This may explain the perceived extended checkout, which is in reality a delayed operational acceptance.
The average time to SCA transfer for the first four vehicles is 42 days. The average is inflated due to a long checkout of the first GPS IIF space vehicle, which took 88 days. From IIF-2 to the present, the average SCA transfer time has been 21 days.
Using SCA transfer time makes the most sense, because that is the time it took the SPO to go through the entire process (to include meetings and documentation) to hand over the vehicle.
DJ: Can you give us a status update on the entire GPS IIF family of satellites? How are the SVs faring in orbit, and are the clocks proving to be as stable and accurate as forecast?
WBC: The first seven of 12 GPS IIF satellites are currently on-orbit and meeting all mission requirements. Of the remaining satellites, one is being prepared for launch in October 2014, one is being prepared for shipment to Cape Canaveral AFS, two are in storage, and one is completing production. The oldest satellite is now four years old. The legacy GPS satellites have remained operational well past their design lives, demonstrating the high-quality engineering and mission-assurance practices used on this program. The clocks are improving the overall accuracy of the constellation with the best-ever day (measured in Signal-in-Space User Range Error) in June 2013 of 46.6 centimeters and the best week in April 2014 of 64.6 centimeters.
DJ: What exactly do the IIFs mean to the GPS modernization program, for the average user and for the GPS constellation and program as a whole?
WBC: The 12 Boeing-built GPS IIF satellites will provide improved signals that will enhance the precise global positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) services supporting both the warfighter and the growing civilian needs of our global economy. The next-generation satellites will provide improved accuracy through advanced atomic clocks, a longer design life than previous GPS satellites, and a new operational third civil signal (L5) that benefits commercial aviation and safety-of-life applications. It will also continue to deploy the modernized capabilities that began with the modernized GPS IIR satellites, including a more robust military signal.
The anomalies that we have seen on orbit have been resolved either through rework at the factory or through modifications in flight software.
GPS IIF Launch. The seventh of the follow-on generation, rising August 1.
DJ: Bill, that’s comforting, but what about the clocks on the IIF SVs? There were serious problems with the Cesium clocks on the first couple of launches. Are the operators now able to utilize or activate either the Rubidium or the Cesium atomic reference systems?
WBC: Don, the answer is yes. The system has triple redundancy with two Rubidium frequency standard clocks and one Cesium frequency standard.
DJ: What about signal strength and stability on the IIF birds?
WBC: In addition to an increased number of signals, GPS IIF provides more than the legacy power levels, and all signals on GPS IIF meet stability requirements. For reference, the GPS IIR-M series introduced one new L1 and two new L2 signals, while GPS IIF introduced the new L5 signal. All of these signals are part of the GPS IIF navigation payload and provide information including GPS date and time, satellite health, satellite ephemeris (for individual satellite positioning), and almanac information (for information on other satellites in the constellation).
The L1 frequency carries the L1 C/A code for civil users, and the L1 P (Y) code and L1 M-code for military users. The L2 frequency carries the first modernized civil signal, L2C, and the L2 P (Y) code and L2 M-code for military users. Finally, the L5 frequency carries the newest modernized civil signal.
Modernized GPS civil signals provide dual-frequency signals to all GPS users, enabling ionospheric corrections that greatly improve the accuracy. The new L5 signal will be used for safety-of-life applications, including aviation. In addition to an increased number of signals, GPS IIF provides more than the legacy power levels, and all signals on GPS IIF meet stability requirements.
DJ: Let’s move to the ground segment. OCX, the next-generation GPS Command and Control (C2) system, has literally moved to the right on the schedule timeline for every month it has been in existence since it was awarded in 2010. The end date just keeps getting farther and farther away. OCX is also currently exceeding the original contract budget by a large margin.
What’s the problem? Is OCX more difficult or complicated than originally planned? Is there any good news to report to users on OCX? What can users expect in the future?
Just so our readers know, just what is it that OCX brings to the GPS arena that cannot be provided by the current Architecture Evolution Plan (AEP) C2 system? Why do we need OCX? And in your opinion is it still a viable option? Are there contingency plans?
My apologies — that is about eight questions in one, but hopefully you can bring us up to speed on OCX.
WBC: Actually, the primary drivers of schedule delays for OCX are related to:
issues with the integration and testing of Block 0 on the cyber-hardened infrastructure; and
the concurrent systems engineering approach for Block 1 and Block 2, which drove a high rate of rework and inefficient staffing.
The OCX program is a pathfinder for many of the U.S. Air Force’s and Department of Defense’s most rigorous Information Assurance (IA) and Cyber Security requirements, which have turned out to be more complex to implement than anticipated.
OCX is a challenged program, but there is progress to report. Raytheon completed a hardware compatibility and integration test with the non-flight test bed of the Lockheed Martin GPS III space vehicle. This test validated the network infrastructure’s ability to communicate between the Lockheed Martin Launch and Checkout Capability and the Raytheon Launch and Checkout System, sending commands to the full-sized, functional satellite prototype test bed.
In addition, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin completed the third of five planned launch and early orbit exercises to demonstrate launch readiness. This exercise used new installments of the Raytheon OCX software and network infrastructure to demonstrate space-ground communications for initial acquisition, orbit-raising maneuver planning and execution, and basic anomaly detection and resolution.
Another recent accomplishment was the merging of the Cyber Security hardware and software baseline with the Block 0, Launch and Checkout System, mission applications. The completion of this merge allowed the program to enter formal integration and test activities, which are ongoing.
The full capabilities of OCX provide more than a dozen new capabilities for the GPS mission. OCX enables the full capabilities of the modernized navigation signals: adding L2C and L5 for civil users, M-code secure signal for military users, an internationally compatible L1C, as well as worldwide monitoring of these modern signals for quality and integrity.
OCX enables operation of the new GPS III satellites. As we discussed previously, OCX will provide the USAF’s most rigorous cyber-security capabilities, built in from the OCX foundation.
Raytheon just completed implementation of a program re-plan, which implemented lessons learned to date to correct many of the development challenges encountered, and created a lower risk schedule for delivery. With these changes, the program remains a viable and important component of the modernized GPS enterprise.
DJ: With that in mind, when do you currently plan on having the first GPS III OCX-controlled launch? Original schedules called for a late 2014 date, then it was 2015, and now we are hearing 2016 or as late as 2018 for OCX. Are there viable alternatives, and if so, can you tell us what they are and if they are being pursued?
WBC: OCX and GPS III are synchronized to support launch of the first vehicle in the second half of 2016, conditioned upon launch manifest availability. Contingency plans are being developed, but will only be implemented if warranted by the risk.
DJ: Now, Bill, I am not asking you to blow your own horn here, but frankly we have heard nothing but good reports from SMC and the GPS Directorate since you arrived about 14 months ago. That is a short period of time, but evidently you have made your presence felt and have had a major impact on the GPS program overall. What have you done differently that seems to work so well? To what do you ascribe your success so far?
WBC: Thank you, Don. I’m very happy to hear the reports are positive, but the credit goes to the men and women of the GPS Directorate, our federally funded Research and Development Center personnel, and our contractors. My job is to continually assess the challenges and barriers that slow modernization. I help resolve the challenges or get additional resources if needed to enable the team to accomplish their important mission.
I am incredibly fortunate in that the GPS team is passionate about our mission to maintain the Gold Standard for position, navigation, and timing (PNT) for the world. The entire directorate understands the critical role we play for civilian and military users worldwide, and that knowledge motivates and energizes us every day!
I’m the luckiest colonel in the Air Force because I get to work alongside this terrific team of government and contractor professionals on one of the most important missions in the U.S. Air Force.
DJ: Obviously you are proud of your team, and you know what it means to be a great leader. In closing, do you have any final comments?
WBC: Don, just that the GPS Directorate and our contractor team, along with our partners at the 2nd Space Operations Squadron (2SOPS) who fly the GPS constellation 24/7, take our job seriously and understand the important mission we have: to provide reliable and precise position, navigation, and timing services for America’s warfighters, our allies, and civilian users around the globe. GPS is the Gold Standard for space-based PNT today, and we are modernizing to ensure GPS is the Gold Standard for the future.
The U.S. Air Force is directing transmission of continuous CNAV message-populated L2C and L5 signals starting in April 2014. The move is designed to help development of user equipment compatible with the civil signals. Full text of the CNAV memo appears below.
MEMORANDUM FOR THE NATIONAL COORDINATION OFFICE FOR SPACE BASED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION AND TIMING
ATTENTION: DR. JAN BRECHT-CLARK
FROM: AFSPC/CC
Peterson AFB CO
SUBJECT: Early Civil Navigation (CNAV) Message-Populated L2C and L5 Signals
I have directed transmission of continuous CNAV message-populated L2C and L5 signals prior to fielding the Next Generation Operational Control Segment. This provision of populated signals will facilitate development of compatible user equipment and a CNAV Operations Concept.
The message-populated broadcast is projected to begin April 2014. Users should expect initial CNAV signal accuracy to be less than the legacy signals. Upon full implementation in December 2014, CNAV signal accuracy should meet or exceed the legacy signals.
Air Force Space Command is committed to ensuring GPS remains the world’s gold standard for PNT services. The user community can anticipate additional information on CNAV message implementation in the months preceding the initial April broadcast.
