GPS World

Category: Defense

  • The Internet of Everything: It’s All in the Timing

    40th Annual NIST Time and Frequency Metrology Seminar

    There were four of us, mature males who all remember having a crush on Annette Funicello, were seated around a table avidly discussing deviant behavior with a sometimes rapt mixed-gender audience. The four of us, loudly discussing deviant, and only occasionally aberrant behavior, were doctors: David Allan the world renowned creator of Allan Deviation or variance fame, Judah Levine, world renowned nuclear physicist and Father Time of NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), Neil Ashby, former chair and currently Professor Emeritus of Physics at UC Boulder, also from NIST, along with yours truly representing GPS World magazine and the Institute for Defense Analyses. Our ever-changing audience was composed of the 40+ members from around the globe attending the 40th Annual NIST Time and Frequency (T&F) Metrology Seminar, held June 2-5 in stunningly beautiful Boulder, Colo.

    Of course, the numerous deviant behaviors under discussion had more to do with the sometimes-fickle performance of various atomic reference systems than they did anatomy. And we were speaking loudly because that is what most men of our age do. Dr. David Allan frequently threw in quotes and anecdotes from his recently published book on time, It’s About Time, about which you will read more later.

    The NIST T&F Metrology Seminar is truly one of a kind, easily the best in the world for time and frequency metrology. I have been fortunate enough to attend numerous times. I can truly say I have never found it repetitive or boring. There are so many exciting discoveries concerning time, which David Allan staunchly maintains is a purely human construct, and how time applies to our everyday lives, especially to GPS — all PNT systems actually — that it is impossible not to be constantly fascinated.

    NIST Mission

    NIST Boulder is all about research and development for timing standards, which is a benign way of saying NIST SMEs (subject matter experts) are the world’s foremost authorities on time and metrology. To wit, NIST has produced no less than four Nobel Prize winners in metrology, the last being awarded in 2012. The atmosphere at NIST and the University of Colorado Boulder campus is such that you can’t help but feel certain there are more Nobel Prizes for NIST on the horizon.

    David Howe (Ph.D.), my NIST host and group leader of the Time and Frequency Metrology Division, explained that his organization, which sponsors the seminar, is an operating unit of the Physical Measurement Laboratory of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The NIST T&F Division is located in Boulder at the NIST Boulder Laboratories, just across from the street from the University of Colorado. Many of the NIST researchers are also University of Colorado professors, adjuncts or graduate students.

    The NIST mission includes:

    • Maintaining the primary frequency standard for the United States
    • Developing and operating standards of time and frequency
    • Coordinating United States time and frequency standards with other world standards
    • Providing time and frequency services for United States clientele
    • Performing research in support of improved standards and services

    Precise time and frequency information is required by electric power companies, radio and television stations, telephone companies, air traffic control systems, participants in space exploration, computer networks, scientists monitoring data of all kinds, and navigators of many types. These users need to compare their own timing equipment to a reliable, internationally recognized standard. NIST provides this standard for the United States.

    Of course one of the largest distribution networks for timing data is through the Global Positioning System (GPS), which provides this data globally to more than 4+ billion users and millions of timing systems everyday, numerous times per day. The number of times GPS time is utilized per day is almost impossible to calculate, but most certainly resides in the trillions.

    The NIST Time and Frequency distribution system delivers NIST Internet time over the Internet at the rate of 8 billion requests per day from servers at 25 locations across the United States.

    The frequency stability provided by classic Cesium and Rubidium atomic reference systems onboard GPS payloads have historically been on the order of 1 x 10-14. While this is the stability provided by the GPS IIF rubidium clocks, currently the rubidium clocks being prepared for GPS III are achieving frequency stability on the order of 1 x 10-15 under laboratory conditions, an order of magnitude better than the current on-orbit clocks.

    This is actually an amazing feat. For those of you who don’t deal in scientific notation on a daily basis, this means — since it is on a logarithmic scale — that the frequency stability of GPS III’s atomic clocks have the potential to be 10 times as stable as the IIF clocks, which are currently the most stable and accurate GPS clocks on orbit to date.

    Where atomic reference systems are concerned, we routinely speak of frequency stability and not clock accuracy. It is the stability over measured epochs, short and long, that matters most. Indeed, it is the oft-misunderstood frequency stability uncertainty expressed as delta f/f = 1 x 10-16 that produces the clock accuracy to within one standard (SI) second in three hundred (yes, 300) million years — a statistic that is obviously not directly observable, but reasonably predictable. Hence, as Judah Levine often says, where stability is concerned you are an historian, but where accuracy is concerned you are a prophet. NIST defines an SI second as the duration of 9,192,631,770 cycles of the cesium hyperfine transition.

    Tom O’Brian, the current chief of the NIST Time and Frequency Division, explained that this level of precision is equivalent to measuring the distance from the Earth to the Sun, a distance of 150 million kilometers, to the uncertainty of 15 microns or 1/10 the thickness of a human hair. While that is impressive, the best is yet to come. NIST is currently working on research-grade optical clocks, which we could reasonably expect to see on orbit one day in future GPS payloads, with an optical frequency stability equivalent to delta f/f = 2 x 10-18 or accuracy equal to 1 second in 15 billion years. Again this is the equivalent of measuring the distance from the Earth to the Sun to an uncertainty of 0.3 micron or the size of a virus.

    So What?

    Many of you may be asking why, as a GPS user, or merely as a user of technology, you should care about accurate and stable time reference systems. Marc Weiss, a long-time acquaintance and noted researcher at NIST (now in semi-retirement), very eloquently put his thoughts about time in an introduction to a recent timing white paper*, which has been slightly edited for length, current trends and readability. [Ed. So as to not be accused of putting words or opinions in the authors’ mouths, we have provided a reference for the unedited paper at the end of the referenced section]. Marc and several other metrology luminaries express their feelings concerning the future of time and why we should all care:

    We stand at the advent of a revolutionary new economy fueled by the global Internet of Everything (IOE). The IOE is a combination of traditional telecom systems with a growing need for wireless technology, and the emerging Internet of Things (IOT) including Machine-to-Machine (M2M) technology. Several current technology providers predict there will be a trillion global endpoints connected to the Internet by 2022, with $14.4 trillion in value at stake.

    One fundamental enabler of this revolution is a marriage of timing signals and data that breaks through existing barriers. Currently, optimal use of data in computing and networking is anathema to optimal use of timing signals. Computer hardware, software and networking all isolate timing processes, allowing the data to be processed with maximum efficiency due in part to asynchrony. Yet, the coordination of processes, the time stamping of events, latency measurements and optimal use of precious spectrum are all enabled by ever more accurate and stable timing.

    Timing is critical for the future development of and improvements to several high-value applications. For example, in smart transportation systems the exchange of information between vehicles, highways, and civil authorities depends on a robust ubiquitous timing system to ensure the rapid, accurate synchronization and provenance of data. Similar requirements are found in the operation of power grids, especially now that wind farms, solar arrays and the like require different control strategies, which are a critical part of the system. Modern medical applications such as tele-surgery and real time integrative online medical conferences, as well as applications in financial systems are all important examples that require accurate and stable timing signals and may well affect us all.

    There are three different types of timing signals for dependable synchronization: frequency, phase, and time. Frequency can be supplied by an individual clock, such as a commercial (atomic) Cesium or Rubidium standard, though practicality drives the use of local oscillators that require calibration and active reference signals. [Ed. Many of these local reference systems and oscillators are routinely updated by GPS signals.] By contrast, phase and time synchronization always require the transport of timing signals plus data. Timing signals are physical, they occur on the physical layer of networks. Indeed the IoT has many devices and applications that require frequency, time and/or phase synchronization. Frequency, time and phase all need to cross layers, boundaries, and networks from their sources in accurate clocks. Requirements for these transfer systems include parameters that create different, perhaps orthogonal, demands on systems. Accuracy, stability, integrity and even non-repudiability requirements are realized with varying demands on different systems….

    To facilitate the massive growth of the IoE, data processing and networking require new designs at fundamental levels, allowing integration with precise and verifiable time, frequency and phase signals.

    Timing performance is fundamentally dependent upon an underlying oscillator, or ensemble of oscillators and the clocks constructed based on these oscillators.

    However, it is apparent to us that many of the researchers and developers of the various time aware systems operate independently of each other. They attend different conferences, read different literature, and in general do not interact sufficiently to achieve the breakthroughs needed. In our minds this calls for a dedicated and collaborative “across the stack” research collaboration focused on two or three comprehensive challenge problems.

    * Time-Aware Applications, Computers, and Communication Systems (TAACCS), A White Paper, Feb. 15, 2015. Available from http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/TechnicalNotes/NIST.TN.1867.pdf

    Fortunately, this is what researchers, scientists, analysts and metrology experts do at NIST and what we learned about during the T&F Metrology Seminar. The bottom line is many perturbations affect timing signals from atomic reference systems and even local quartz oscillators (clocks). The more these perturbations are understood, the easier they are mitigated and the more stable and accurate our timing signals will be and the faster technology — PNT (position, navigation and timing), clock and otherwise — advances.

    For many traditional timing applications and developing “post-timing” applications, stability is more important than accuracy; just as for most advanced technology applications, frequency is more important than time of day.

    NIST clearly states its Time and Frequency Metrology Group has the world’s most advanced measurement and calibration facilities for characterizing noise components in oscillators and frequency synthesizers. NIST engages in numerous research and development activities to determine the cause of various types of noise for the purpose of isolating and reducing it, leading to improved components, instruments, techniques and results that are often critical in modern applications. In other words, you have to thoroughly understand a clock issue before you can begin to mitigate issues affecting it. NIST, a synecdoche for understanding time, does that better than any other metrology laboratory in the world today when it comes to atomic reference systems.

    What Is Time and Why Does It Matter?

    Accurate timing and synchronization are a crucial part of the world’s critical national infrastructure and of modern technology in general, especially the timing signals from GPS satellites, which are used by billions of users continuously every day — although most users remain unaware of the importance and impact that accurate and stable timing has on their everyday lives.

    Tom O’Brian reminded us that even St. Augustine of Hippo wondered about time. In circa 400 he wrote:

    “What then is time? If no one asks me, I know.
    If someone asks me to explain, I know not.”

    Then, just 1500 years later in 1930, Albert Einstein had this to say about time:

    “Space and time are modes by which we think, not conditions under which we live.”

    Therefore, I agree with David Allan when he posits that time is a human invention with which only humans struggle. Be that as it may, it is still a condition we live under, and when you consider all the forces, minute to infinite, that affect atomic reference systems and clocks in general, it is amazing our clocks function as well as they do.

    Consider that atomic clocks, and even quartz clocks to some extent, are affected by the following elemental and environmental forces and more in the laboratory:

    • Motion
    • Acceleration
    • Gravity – Earth, Moon and planetary
    • Changes in elevation
    • ~23 different types of noise
    • Temperature
    • Magnetic fields
    • Earth’s Poles
    • Tides
    • Light (including lasers)
    • Electricity
    • General and Special Relativity
    • Radiation

    The United States Air Force then takes these delicate clocks, atomic (Rubidium and Cesium) as well as quartz VCXOs and OXOs, and launches them (with violent maneuvers) into space in a Medium Earth Orbit that regularly intersects the Van Allen radiation belt. Once on orbit, the clocks routinely experience every one of the listed forces and more on both a regular and changing basis. Of course, we expect the GPS clocks to operate at the same standards and with the same stability and accuracy they displayed in the laboratory. Not asking much are we?

    The amazing fact is that thanks to the dedicated scientists and physicists at NIST and other timing laboratories, the clocks work as advertised and continue to do so sometimes for more than 20 years. The current GPS III Rubidium clocks being tested and aged at NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) and other locations around the U.S .are posited to be the first 30-year Rubidium standards with nominal frequency stability of 1 x 10-15. This should provide GPS with another nanosecond of timing accuracy and another 12 inches of positioning accuracy. There will be three of these extremely stable Rubidium clocks on board each GPS III satellite — no Cesium clocks for this family of satellites. Horologists around the world are hoping it is truly a 30-year tube and that only one Rubidium will be required. Only time will tell.

    Little Known Factoid (LKF): The first family of GPS satellites on orbit made use of a General and Special Relativity switch that could be set in one of three positions: neutral, plus or minus, depending on whether the universe was relatively static, expanding or shrinking in size. Guess where the switch was set initially and (hint, hint) it could be changed via software from the ground. Drop me a line @ [email protected] and let me know what you think — posit or know, as the case may be.

    Thanks

    My thanks to David Howe, Judah Levine, Neil Ashby, David Allan (Ph.D.s all) and Danielle Lirette, who made my visit to NIST such a wonderful experience.

    It’s About Time

    Earlier I mentioned physicist David Allan’s wonderful book, published in 2014. It’s About Time: Science Harmonized with Religion. Allan is about science harmonized with religion and where we are in God’s time. I am halfway through the 402-page tour de force on time, and it is a fascinating read. It is a 50-year biography and history of atomic reference systems, since the first atomic clock only came about in 1949. You’ll be amazed how that happened. Based on what I have read so far, I highly recommend this scientific tome, which is very readable and understandable even for the lay reader. I promise a full review in a future column.

    Until then, Happy Navigating! I hope to see many of you at ION JNC (Institute of Navigation Joint Navigation Conference) in Orlando, Fla., June 21-26. There will be a classified day on Thursday, June 25,  and a Warfighters Panel as well. Hope you can join us. Remember, GPS is brought to you courtesy of the United States Air Force.

  • Device Tracks Soldiers’ Movements without GPS

    Device Tracks Soldiers’ Movements without GPS

    The Warfighter Integrated Navigation System, center, uses inertial systems to determine a Soldier's location in the absence of a GPS signal. On the left, a smaller version of WINS. On the right, the Defense Advanced GPS Receiver, which soldiers use now for position, navigation, and timing. All three devices were on display at the DOD Lab Day, May 14, at the Pentagon. (Photo: U.S. Army/C. Todd Lopez)
    The Warfighter Integrated Navigation System, center, uses inertial systems to determine a Soldier’s location in the absence of a GPS signal. On the left, a smaller version of WINS. On the right, the Defense Advanced GPS Receiver, which soldiers use now for position, navigation, and timing. All three devices were on display at the DOD Lab Day, May 14, at the Pentagon. (Photo: U.S. Army/C. Todd Lopez)

    When GPS satellites can’t be seen due to dense jungle canopy, or they are blocked due to enemy interference, soldiers will still be able to track their location digitally using the Warfighter Integrated Navigation System (WINS), a device now under development at the Communications Electronics Research Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC).

    During the U.S. Department of Defense Lab Day held May 14 at the Pentagon, CERDEC researcher Osie A. David explained how the technology behind WINS will one day be transitioned to an Army program manager to bring assured navigational capability to soldiers.

    The WINS is a device small enough to carry in a soldier’s cargo pocket, about half the size of a pack of cigarettes.

    “It’s got a number of inertial sensors, such as a pedometer and an accelerometer, things you will find on your cell phone but of a higher quality,” he said. “Even if the enemy is denying you GPS or the terrain is, you can still get known location on here so it will show up on your Nett Warrior device or your command and control system.” The Nett Warrior is an integrated dismounted situational awareness and mission command system for use by leaders during combat operations, using advanced navigation and information sharing capabilities to allow for faster and more accurate decisions during the tactical fight.

    The Nett Warrior
    The Nett Warrior

    Those inertial sensors will calculate an offset from the last-known location using footsteps taken, speed, acceleration and time, for instance. The device even has way to measure altitude. “It’s got a pressure reader so it knows if you are on the third floor or first floor of a building,” David said.

    The WINS isn’t perfect. As time goes by without a new GPS signal, its estimate of current location will degrade. But the device provides for the user an estimate of its own miscalculation. “After a time, it’ll show you a circle radius for the error range,” he said. “It’s still better than having no GPS at all.”

    David said knowing location is everything in combat, and the WINS, or a follow-on system that uses technology from WINS, will make sure that soldiers have that no matter what happens to GPS.

    “Say we go to Southeast Asia and I’m in the middle of the jungle. There are not a lot of good landmarks. I’m navigating around and I lose the GPS because with the triple-canopy jungle, the GPS can’t penetrate that. I don’t know where I am on the map, so I’m in a bad situation. If I want to know exactly where I am so I can call for reinforcements or resupply, WINS is going to give me my location on a map, no matter where I am.”

    David said CERDEC is still working on issues like where soldiers should wear the device. He also said that he expects the engineering specifications for WINS to be transferred to Program Executive Office, Intelligence and Electronic Warfare & Sensors by 2017. It will be inside an Army program manager’s office, not an Army lab, that WINS or the technology it contains will be made available to soldiers.

    The Soldier Power Manager sits on top of a conformal battery. Allowing multiple devices to be connected to a battery, it reports battery usage, power remaining, and power usage by connected devices. (Photo: U.S. Army/C. Todd Lopez)
    The Soldier Power Manager sits on top of a conformal battery. Allowing multiple devices to be connected to a battery, it reports battery usage, power remaining, and power usage by connected devices. (Photo: U.S. Army/C. Todd Lopez)

    David also had with him a device he called the Soldier Power Manager. The power manager was connected to a “conformal battery,” which was also developed at CERDEC in conjunction with industry. The conformal battery is flexible and slips easily into a soldier’s tactical vest without being uncomfortable due to stiffness. It wraps around a soldier’s torso.

    The power manager allows multiple devices to connect to a battery, and provides a display saying how much power is left in the battery, what devices are connected to the battery, and how much power each device is using.

    “It lets you know how much energy is left and what is plugged in,” David said. He said one advancement the lab has made on the system is to transfer the user interface to a Nett Warrior device, so soldiers can see it on that screen.

    “It lets you see the total power left on the device and how much energy each device is pulling, so you can make a decision about what device to pull — when energy gets low — to make sure you have enough power to meet mission needs. We have sort of integrated the energy component with the information to make better choices in the battlefield in terms of operational energy.”

  • Navigation Scientist Reddy Named to Top Position in India

    Navigation Scientist Reddy Named to Top Position in India

    G. Satheesh Reddy
    G. Satheesh Reddy

    G. Satheesh Reddy, a scientist with the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) of India, has been appointed as the scientific advisor to the defense minister of India, a secretary-level appointment with the government of India. The DRDO is an agency of the Republic of India responsible for the development of technology for use by the military, headquartered in New Delhi.

    Reddy is an expert in navigation technologies. He joined DRDO in 1986 and led the conceptualization, design, development and production of inertial sensors, navigation schemes, algorithms and systems, calibration methodologies, sensor models and simulation, along with development of satellite navigation receivers and hybrid navigation systems. Under his leadership, advanced products and varieties of avionics systems have been produced and successfully flight tested in strategic programs of India.

    As project director, Reddy led the design and development of ring laser gyro-based INS System, MEMS-based INS systems, the sea-guard reference system and the ship navigation system, strengthening the country’s self reliance in high-accuracy and long-range navigation. He also helped develop a 1000-kg class guided bomb.

    Reddy graduated in electronics and communication engineering from JNTU, Anantapur, and received his master of science and doctorate from Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. He is a Fellow of Indian National Academy of Engineering (FNAE), the Royal Institute of Navigation London (FRIN), and the Royal Aeronautical Society London (FRAeS). He has been awarded Full Member Diploma and inducted as a Foreign Member of the Academy of Navigation & Motion Control, Russia, and is an Associate Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics (AFAIAA) of the United States.

  • GPS ‘Unreliable Event’ Scheduled for Friday at Holloman AFB

    The 746th Test Squadron will perform a Global Positioning System unreliable event, scheduled at Holloman Air Force Base, June 5, 12:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. A GPS unreliable event is an interruption to all GPS signals. The interruption will affect any and all electronic devices in the area that use GPS, such as cell phones, running devices, laptops, computers, tablets, cars with navigation and a number of other electric devices. 

    Details are available here.

    This information is from an announcement posted on the White Sands Missile Range Public Affairs Facebook page. It is unknown whether this test is related to the U.S. Air Force’s new “gold standard” Truth Reference System, based on Locata technology, which is reportedly now operational at the White Sands Missile Range, although no official announcement has been made.

    https://www.facebook.com/WSMRPublicAffairs/posts/10153091494058052

  • Exelis, UrsaNav to Demo eLoran with Homeland Security, Coast Guard

    Exelis, UrsaNav, the Department of Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate (DHS S&T), and the U.S. Coast Guard have entered into a cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) for testing and demonstration at former Loran-C sites.

    The team will evaluate eLoran as a potential complementary system to GPS. The capabilities and potential utilization methods of eLoran will be explored in depth to identify all strengths, capacities, and potential vulnerabilities of the technology.

    The sites are the legacy ground-based radio navigation infrastructure of the decommissioned Loran-C service that could be retained and upgraded to provide eLoran low frequency service.

    Under the CRADA, Exelis will use the former Loran-C assets to put eLoran signals in space for research, test and demonstration of the ability of eLoran to meet precise positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) requirements of government and privately-owned critical infrastructure. The first station Exelis will broadcast from is located in Wildwood, N.J. The broadcast will provide a usable signal at a range up to 1,000 miles.

    “eLoran is an ideal technology to complement GPS for critical, resilient and assured PNT,” said Ed Sayadian, vice president of Civil & Aerospace Systems for Exelis. “eLoran is a difficult to disrupt technology that offers PNT and wide area broadcast data capabilities indoors, in underground locations and other GPS-denied environments.”

    “A preponderance of government, academic, and industry reports have concluded that eLoran is the best independent, multi-modal solution to provide assured PNT as a complement to GPS,” said Chuck Schue, president and CEO of UrsaNav.

    Exelis and UrsaNav have entered into this CRADA because they believe that low frequency signals, such as eLORAN, operate independently of GPS signals and can provide alternative timing, either standalone, or as a component of a PNT service. Exelis also believes that as a result of its wealth of experience in its PNT portfolio, that there are many civil and defense applications that require precise time and/or position in GPS-denied environments. Examples include radio frequency interference, both intentional and unintentional; signal attenuation from heavy forest canopy, terrain or buildings; and indoor and underground locations.

  • 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.

  • Sky-Watch Partners with General Dynamics on UAVs for Defense

    Sky-Watch Partners with General Dynamics on UAVs for Defense

    Artist's concept of the proposed Airborne Swarm Protection Shield by GDELS and Sky-Watch.
    Artist’s concept of the proposed Airborne Swarm Protection Shield over a GDELS armored vehicle (image courtesy of Sky-Watch).

    General Dynamics European Land Systems (GDELS) has signed a Memorandum of Interest (MOI) with Danish UAV company Sky-Watch in Støvring, which allows the two companies to explore potential areas of cooperation within next-generation applications of UAV technology in the battlefield.

    “Sky-Watch is constantly striving to be at the forefront of the rapidly developing UAV technology,” said Michael Messerschmidt, Sky-Watch chief business development officer. “We offer our vast accumulated know-how within sensor fusion to our partners, in the pursuit of finding new ways to solve tomorrow’s challenges. We constantly rethink and redefine the value proposition, of our own as well as our partners’ ideas and concepts and I believe that we can identify some very exiting avenues of cooperation with General Dynamics European Land Systems.”

    Sky-Watch offers the Huginn X1 multi-purpose Quadrotor UAV deployed all over the world and is developing the Muninn X1, a next-generation fixed-Wing VTOL UAV. The future of UAVs in the battlefield will be explored by Sky-Watch Labs, the research and development arm of Sky-Watch, in cooperation with partners such as the Technical University of Denmark on a variety of projects.

    With regard to the acquisition of new Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) for the Danish Army, General Dynamics European Land Systems is prepared to take its partnerships with Danish industry to the next level and explore business in adjacent markets like the one of Sky-Watch. GDELS has signed Industry Cooperation agreements with 40 Danish companies of all sizes across the country, and has already defined projects in excess of 3,7  billion  kroner covering all of the technology areas defined in the Danish Government’s Defence industry strategy.

    “Throughout the past 20 years, GDELS Industry Cooperation program has been one of the catalysts for the development of the Danish defence industry. We have executed projects of almost 1,7 billion kroner with the industry, which has helped to contribute to the development of new products and technologies in a variety of companies. By engaging with an innovative and creative company such as Sky-Watch, we help plant the seed for the future of the Danish defence industry,” said Jens Bauer, GDELS Senior Director International Business & Services, responsible for Industrial Participation.

    GDELS’s Industry Cooperation plan for the APC program is based on 20 years of experience and partnership with Danish industry. The program expands relationships beyond production and sustainment contracts to also include research & development projects, which will lay the foundation for growth in the Danish Defence industry for decades to come.

  • Kairos Unveils UGV Tech for Heavy Equipment at AUVSI 2015

    Kairos Unveils UGV Tech for Heavy Equipment at AUVSI 2015

    Kairos Autonomi produces solutions that can be retrofitted or "strapped-on" to any existing optionally unmanned vehicle or vessel.
    Kairos Autonomi produces solutions that can be retrofitted or “strapped-on” to any existing optionally unmanned vehicle or vessel.

    Kairos Autonomi is displaying its latest autonomous technology designed for use with heavy equipment and machinery. Kairos’ robotic applique kits are add-on vehicle autonomy systems that provide unmanned capabilities to current manned vehicles, rendering them optionally unmanned.

    Equipped with larger gear faces, stronger actuators than its predecessors and a pathing upgrade, the Pronto4 Heavy delivers the increased torque needed to control the traction, braking, throttle and implements in heavy vehicles and equipment, as well as smarter robotic functions such as GPS path following and supervised autonomous behaviors.

    The Pronto4 Heavy Planar Robotic Applique Kit For Heavy Equipment.(PRNewsFoto/Kairos Autonomi)
    The Pronto4 Heavy Planar Robotic Applique Kit For Heavy Equipment. (PRNewsFoto/Kairos Autonomi)

    The robotic applique kit is platform independent, meaning it can be installed in any heavy vehicle or machine, rendering that vehicle optionally unmanned, which means the equipment can still operate manually as needed.

    Kairos Autonomi is exhibiting at the AUVSI Unmanned Systems 2015 show being held May 4-7 in Atlanta, Ga. (booth #1437).

    The Pronto4 Robotic Applique Kit manufactured by Kairos is used throughout the world to convert existing man-operable ground vehicles and surface vessels into unmanned systems. Applications include government or academic research and development; military training and test and evaluation; range clearance; mining; and tactical military applications.

  • KVH Receives $1.5M Order for TACNAV Systems

    KVH Receives $1.5M Order for TACNAV Systems

    Credit: U.S. Armed Services.
    Credit: U.S. Armed Services.

    KVH Industries Inc. has received a $1.5 million contract for the delivery of tactical navigation systems for use by an international military customer in an armored vehicle application. A variant of KVH’s TACNAV TLS and TACNAV Light, the system is designed to help military vehicle crews maintain 100% situational awareness. The hardware shipments for this order are expected to be made in 2015. Program management and engineering services will be provided as part of this order.

    “KVH’s TACNAV navigation solution is an important tool for U.S. and allied warfighters, providing precision navigation as well as coordination of vehicles in critical situations,” said Dan Conway, executive vice president of KVH’s guidance and stabilization group. “The system serves as a crucial resource for navigation and battle management, keeping soldiers safe and out of harm’s way wherever they travel. This new order reaffirms the value of KVH’s TACNAV products for international militaries, and adds to our backlog for the year.”

    The TACNAV TLS by KVH Industries.
    The TACNAV TLS by KVH Industries.

    All of KVH’s TACNAV military vehicle navigation systems provide unjammable precision navigation, heading, and pointing data for vehicle drivers, crews and commanders, KVH Industries said. TACNAV can also serve as a heading and position source for situational awareness.

    The TACNAV system ordered combines characteristics of TACNAV TLS and TACNAV Light, and features a compact design, continuous heading and pointing data output, and a flexible architecture that allows it to function as either a standalone navigation module or as the heart of an expanded, multifunctional TACNAV system. The system is designed to integrate with battle management systems and is a vital component for effective battlefield management, KVH Industries said.

    TACNAV systems are in use by the U.S. Army and Marine Corps, as well as many allied customers including Canada, Sweden, Great Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Egypt, Botswana, Australia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Romania, Poland, Turkey, Malaysia, Switzerland, South Korea, Singapore, Brazil and Italy.

  • VectorNav Unveils Updates to VN-300 GPS/INS at AUVSI Show

    VectorNav TechnologiesPhoto: VectorNav has released a surface mount version of its VN-300 dual-antenna GPS-aided inertial navigation system (GPS/INS). It will be on display at booth 942 at AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems show, held May 5-7 in Atlanta.

    Surface Mount Device

    The VN-300 surface mount device (SMD) is a miniature MEMS-based inertial navigation module that includes both inertial navigation and GPS-compassing capabilities, which together provide high-accuracy position and velocity in both stationary and moving conditions. With the release of the surface mount version, VectorNav is also announcing the addition of GNSS capability to the full VN-300 product line. The VN-300 SMD completes VectorNav’s line of industrial grade inertial sensors, joining the VN-100 IMU/AHRS and VN-200 GPS/INS surface mount and Rugged modules.

    Incorporating the latest MEMS sensor technology, the VN-300 combines 3-axis accelerometers, 3-axis gyros, 3-axis magnetometers, a barometric pressure sensor, two GPS receivers, and a low-power microprocessor into a rugged aluminum enclosure about the size of a matchbox. When in motion, the VN-300 couples the position and velocity measurements from the onboard GPS receivers with measurements from the onboard inertial sensors to provide position, velocity, and attitude estimates of higher accuracies and with better dynamic performance than a standalone GPS receiver or Attitude Heading Reference System (AHRS).

    With the release of the surface mount version of the VN-300 the company says its own Rugged is surpassed as the smallest and lightest dual-antenna GPS/INS on the market. The surface mount VN-300 shares the same footprint and form factor with VectorNav’s surface mount VN-100 IMU/AHRS and VN-200 GPS/INS.

    “The VN-300 surface mount chip is an achievement that combines the best of our expertise in inertial navigation algorithms and our innovative approach to miniaturizing embedded navigation sensors. There simply is no other product like it on the market,” said ohn Brashear, VectorNav’s president. “The VN-300 SMD completes our Industrial Series of inertial navigation sensors and paves the way for the expansion of our product lines into new markets and applications.”

    The VN-300 is ideal for industrial and military applications that are size, weight, power and cost (SWAP-C) constrained, or that require an inertial navigation solution under both static and dynamic operating conditions, especially in environments with unreliable magnetic heading such as fixed-wing and multirotor UAVs, aerostats and other tethered UAVs, gimbaled camera systems onboard helicopters and multirotors, antenna systems onboard ground vehicles and marine vessels, weapons training and warfare simulation, and direct surveying.

    New GNSS Capability

    With the release of the surface mount version, VectorNav is also announcing the addition of GNSS capability to the full VN-300 product line.

    The addition of GNSS capability now enables the VN-300 product line to include measurements from satellites in the GLONASS constellation in addition to GPS. These additional measurements provide greater tracking reliability and improved VN-300 performance in urban canyons and reduced visibility conditions.

    Firmware Update

    VectorNav is also announcing the release of a new firmware update for the VN-300 that improves the overall accuracy and time to acquisition of the GPS-compass feature. The new firmware also includes logic that enables the VN-300 to intelligently and seamlessly transition between magnetic heading (AHRS) mode, to INS operation in dynamic conditions and GPS-compass in static conditions, without requiring input from the user.

  • GPS Glitch Two Years Older than First Stated

    On Wednesday, the GPS Directorate said further data analysis shows that a technical error affecting some Boeing GPS IIF satellites first appeared in 2011, two years earlier than originally stated, according to a Reuters report.

    The error first appeared one year after the GPS IIF satellites became operational. The error affects the way the ground control system builds and uploads messages transmitted by the satellites, but does not affect the accuracy of GPS signals. It involves the ground-based software used to index messages.

    Lockheed Martin runs the GPS ground control segment, which enables Air Force officials to operate all GPS satellites, including the IIF satellites built by Boeing.

  • Air Force to Award Additional GPS III Satellite Contracts

    The U.S. Air Force plans to award multiple contracts for companies to demonstrate their ability to build GPS III satellites, according to a report by Mike Gruss of Space News.

    The Air Force expects to award the contracts — worth up to $6 million — during this calendar year. Lockheed Martin Space Systems of Denver is the current GPS III satellite contractor, building the first eight GPS III satellites. The first satellite is expected to launch in 2017.

    The GPS III program is nearly two years behind schedule.