|
If the Air Force follows
the advice of its top science advisors, it could move
swiftly toward a stronger position in space in the
opening years of the 21st Century.
About a year ago, Dr. Daniel E. Hastings, chief scientist
of the Air Force, sketched the options in a report
entitled "Doable Space." Building on that,
the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board in November
produced a detailed "Space Roadmap for the 21st
Century Aerospace Force."
The Hastings report identified four "doable" paths.
By 2012, it said, the Air Force can:
- Purchase most of its communications, imagery, and
launch services as commercial commodities;
- Demonstrate the ability to deliver militarily significant
amounts of laser energy through space to targets;
- Integrate its airborne and space-based assets to
provide truly comprehensive Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance; and
- Move ground-based surveillance functions into space,
where they command a far better view, and make satellites
more survivable against attack.
The Scientific Advisory Board study was led by Dr.
John M. Borky of TRW, vice chairman of the SAB and
a major author of the landmark "New World Vistas" study
in 1995. The roadmap generated no new operational requirements
for space systems. Instead, it concentrated on recommendations
to serve the needs laid out in such documents as the
Air Force vision statement, "Global Engagement," and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff "Joint Vision 2010."
Chart 1: Space Options
vs. Time
|
| Source:
USAF chief scientist |
|
| Mid
Term (2012) |
Long
Term (2020) |
| Easily
Doable |
|
Lower-cost
space launch.
More capable Global Positioning System.
Kinetic national missile defense.
Satellite attack warning.
Prompt global attack.
Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI)-Non-stealthy.
Hyperspectral imaging.
Data relay.
Space-based space surveillance.
Space maneuver vehicle. |
GMTI-Stealthy.
Air Moving Target Indicator (AMTI)-Non-stealthy.
Responsive launch, two-stage to orbit. |
| Doable
With Technology Push |
|
Global
energy delivery.
Integrated intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.
GMTI-Stealthy.
AMTI-Non-stealthy.
Responsive launch, two-stage to orbit. |
On-orbit
maintenance.
Responsive launch, single-stage to orbit.
AMTI-stealthy.
Global energy delivery (space-based laser). |
By 2002, the roadmap said, the Air Force can have
divested itself--at a considerable savings in cost--of
numerous functions that are not essential parts of
the Air Force mission and be well along with other
programs, such as a new constellation of sensors, including
a space-based radar, which might reach initial operational
capability around 2008.
However, the roadmap said, current technology is not
mature enough to support the demonstration of a space-based
laser as early as some advocates---including several
leading members of Congress--have urged.
"The study and the study team are not quarreling
with the operational utility of this kind of military
capability," Borky said. "We think it would
be enormous." But, since "we are probably
going to get one shot at doing it," it would be
a mistake to conduct the demonstration before technology
will permit "very high confidence" of success,
he said.
The Scientific Advisory Board also urged the Air Force
to preserve the option to eventually develop an Aerospace
Operations Vehicle.
"One possible outcome of our roadmap is a highly
operable vehicle for both space and atmospheric missions
at orbital speeds," the SAB said. "With the
appropriate payloads, the system would allow a photoreconnaissance
mission, delivery of a precision weapon, or other 'surgical'
effects delivery anywhere on Earth in something like
45 minutes from the 'go' order."
Lt. Gen. Roger G. DeKok, USAF deputy chief of staff
for plans and programs, said, "The studies produced
by Drs. Borky and Hastings reinforce our conviction
that integrating air and space will, in fact, yield
a far more capable instrument of national military
power, not just a more effective or efficient version
of today's Air Force."
Shift to Commercial Space
A major theme of both studies is that commercial space
will loom increasingly large in the Air Force space
program. There are three main reasons for this.
First, the overwhelming share of growth in space is
by the commercial sector. By 2010, Hastings says, military
launches will account for a mere 6 percent of the total.
Second, the technology surge in space is being led
by the commercial world, which develops new capabilities
far better and faster than the government could hope
to do on its own. And third, the Air Force can save
a great deal of money by relying on the commercial
market for many of its needs, including most space
launch needs.
The SAB said that commercial space services "will
have an aggregate capacity early in the next century
that is about 1,000 times that of even the most ambitious
MILSATCOM structure," and it urged that the Air
Force phase out, as early as it can, "non-core" military
satellite communications in favor of commercial services
and interoperable user terminals.
The roadmap went considerably further on privatization,
though. It recommended that the Air Force divest itself
of the Eastern and Western Ranges, which could be operated
on a commercial contract and overseen by a suitable
civilian agency, such as a National Space Port Authority.
At present, Air Force funding--which covers 90 percent
of all launch costs at the two ranges--constitutes
a subsidy for all users. In the near future, government
launches will account for only 6 percent of total launches,
Hastings said. If the Air Force was a customer and
tenant rather than operator of the ranges, it could
not only concentrate better on its core mission but
also save considerable money.
Eventually, the Air Force should rely primarily on
commercial launchers for putting payloads into space. "In
the long term," the roadmap said, "one or
more of the several advanced launch technologies under
consideration is likely to make access to space very
cheap, perhaps one-tenth to one-hundredth the cost
of today's operations."
New Constellation of Sensors
Today, the SAB said, "Intelligence satellites
and airborne platforms provide localized and generally
discontinuous sensing, often impeded by weather, terrain,
and hostile countermeasures." These systems cannot
provide the kind of global awareness prescribed by "Joint
Vision 2010."
The roadmap said that the Air Force should commit
to a new sensor satellite constellation to complement
existing Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance
platforms in air and space. This constellation would
be able to track moving targets on the ground. The
primary payload would be a space-based radar, with
initial operational capability in about 2008 and full
operational capability between 2010 and 2012.
"Joint force commanders, especially in deployed
operations, are going to need all-condition, responsive,
high quality sensing with the results delivered sensor-to-decider-to-shooter
in near real time," Borky said. "A space-based
radar system designed primarily for direct support
to theater operations could do that, and would be a
powerful complement to other sources, such as air-breathing
platforms, national intelligence systems, and commercial
imagery, each of which has limitations on what it can
do directly for a warfighter."
An additional sensor in the constellation would perform
hyperspectral imaging, reading the light reflected
by objects and seeing thousands of different colors.
That capability will be particularly effective in detecting
use of chemical or biological agents and in countering
camouflage, concealment, and deception tactics.
"You can, for example, find objects hidden under
trees," Hastings said. "If sunlight can get
through the leaves, you can tell the difference between
a leaf and a tank under [the] tree because the light
reflected looks different from a hyperspectral image,
[although] to us it may not look different."
As the surveillance of space improves, it will become
possible to develop what the roadmap called a "recognized
space picture." Today, the Intelligence Community
produces a "Common Operating Picture," consisting
of air, maritime, and ground elements. It gives theater
commanders information about what is happening in the
theater battlespace in a detailed and current package.
Similar information from space is not included, Borky
said, because we do not have the capability to surveil
space with "the same timeliness and completeness
and fidelity as we surveil the air, ground, and sea."
A large part of the surveillance of space is presently
done by aging sensors on the ground. There is some
merit in updating these ground stations, but the roadmap
said the Air Force "should migrate selected space
surveillance functions to space."
An early move might be to modify the low constellation
of the Space-Based Infrared System, enabling it to
look up and track objects in high orbits as well as
carry out its primary mission of missile launch warning,
in which SBIRS looks downward.
The roadmap also recommended that the Air Force pursue
improvements in the position, navigation, and timing
information provided by the Global Positioning System.
Since its introduction in the Gulf War, the popularity
of GPS has spread like wildfire. It is now used by
fishermen and rescue squads in addition to the original
military users. Even so, because of the importance
of GPS, the Air Force should retain control of it on
behalf of the Department of Defense, the roadmap said,
but it added that funding contributions from other
agencies and sources would be "appropriate."
Chart 2: Growth of Commercial
Space Worldwide
|
| Source: Space
Roadmap |
 |
Lasers Through Space.
The global projection of energy through space to targets
was one of the four main thrusts of the Doable Space
study, but Hastings stopped short of forecasting a
space-based laser. Both his study and the roadmap spoke
instead of projecting laser energy from or through space,
meaning that some or all of the weapons might be located
on the ground.
The issue is complicated by the fact that deployment
of a space-based laser, a prime use of which would
be ballistic missile defense, is presently prohibited
by the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. On the other
hand, there is strong support in Congress for the space-based
laser, and last year's defense bill called for on-orbit
testing of a "readiness demonstrator" by
2005 or very soon thereafter.
The roadmap said that the current technology, a chemical
laser system designed in the 1970s, is not mature enough
to support such a demonstration and that "fixes" to
the existing system will not bring it up to snuff.
More work is needed in system engineering and integration,
beam and fire control, and other areas. Alternatives
to chemical lasers--including electrically powered
solid state lasers--should be explored.
The SAB recommended that the Air Force not proceed
with the readiness demonstrator test "at this
time." The roadmap said technology should be pursued "aggressively" and
that it would be advisable to first conduct a ground
demonstration program of the laser and decide, around
2003, whether to commit to an on-orbit test.
Borky emphasized that the SAB's reservations are about
the current technology, not about the desirability
of the system. The roadmap agreed with previous studies
that "directed energy from space, whether generated
in space or relayed from the air or ground, will be
a major weapon capability in the next millennium."
Possibilities of such a system go beyond shooting
down ballistic missiles with a laser beam from space.
"A high-energy force projection system could
contribute to a wide range of missions, including counterair,
space control, and missile defense," the roadmap
said. "It could also deliver a range of effects-from
active optical sensing modes to disruption of optical
systems-to the Earth's surface with exquisite precision."
In December, F. Whitten Peters, acting Secretary of
the Air Force, told the Defense Writers Group that
the Air Force will not rush the space-based laser program. "Many
on the Hill believe that a space-based laser is a piece
of cake and that the costs are fairly low," he
said. "Our view is that it is a very difficult
technical challenge." The deployment of large
optics in space "is a technology that just isn't
here yet. It is one that is coming, that several different
groups are working on." The Air Force believes
that it "could reasonably try to deploy something
in the 2010 time frame, and we are working on that
plan."
Chart 3: Air
Force Technology Funding
|
 |
The Air Force
plans to double the share of science and
technology funding allocated to space, hold
the share constant for technologies that
apply to both air and space, and reduce the
percentage for R&D unique to air. Total
for the three categories in 1999 is about
$1.3 billion. |
The Aerospace Operations Vehicle
The SAB said the Air Force should "preserve the
option" to develop an Aerospace Operations Vehicle
which could be launched from Earth, fly through space
at hypersonic speeds, and perform its mission either
from space or by re-entering the atmosphere.
This is a continuation of the concept that has been
known variously over the years by such names as "aerospace
plane" and "transatmospheric vehicle." These
proposals generated a great deal of excitement but
fell away because of technology and funding problems.
In some versions, the vehicle would have taken off
from Earth under its own power, but the main concept
presented in the roadmap is a two-stage-to-orbit system "with
a family of upper stages, each compatible with a variety
of expendable boosters and with a relatively low-speed
reusable first stage."
The Air Force continues to work with NASA to explore
a space operations vehicle. NASA has been working on
reusable boosters, while the Air Force has concentrated
on a several kinds of upper stages, including a "Space
Maneuvering Vehicle" for operations on orbit and
a "Common Aero Vehicle" for delivery of payloads
in the atmosphere.
The AOV concept, the roadmap said, "is one way
to achieve highly responsive launch (defined in this
study as less than 24 hours to integrate, prepare,
and launch a vehicle and payload), creating the possibility
for the first time of spacecraft operations with a
sortie rate analogous to that of heavy aircraft, depending
on the requirements placed on the first stage of a
two-stage system."
Both cost and technology point toward expendable launch
systems, but the roadmap did not rule out single-stage-to-orbit
concepts. The AOV would have to fly about once a week
to spread the costs over enough launches to make the
expense of a reusable launch vehicle competitive with
expendable launchers.
The SAB said the Air Force should continue with its
Space Maneuvering Vehicle demonstration, which costs
about $35 million a year, to keep its options open. "If
the results of technology demonstration and operational
analysis are favorable at a decision milestone in about
2002, [the Air Force should] start a follow-on program
leading to a first demonstration flight in about 2009
and an operational AOV in about 2015."
How to Fund It?
Depending on what is included in the calculation,
the present cost of the Air Force space program is
about $7 billion a year (out of an annual budget of
about $75 billion). Of that, about $4.1 billion is
for "investment" accounts-new systems and
procurement-with the rest going for operations and
maintenance of existing systems. The roadmap focused
on investment spending and projected the current budget
level forward for 20 years, adjusted for 2.2 percent
projected annual inflation.
The shortfalls in that projection begin almost immediately.
The funding in 2001 and beyond does not even cover
the present baseline program, much less the initiatives
and improvements proposed in the roadmap.
To some extent, though, the roadmap is self-funding.
The SAB said that "conservative savings" (roughly
$2 billion to $3 billion per year) can be achieved
by implementing recommendations in areas of launch
and tracking ranges, communications, and satellite
operations. The study expressed "high confidence
that our recommendations will produce at least this
level of cost reduction."
"Aggressive cost reductions" might reduce
still more the baseline of the present program, projected
out to 2020 and adjusted for inflation, bringing the
topline of the space program--the new programs and
initiatives as well as the existing program--"back
into rough balance with the current top line."
Even those measures do not fund everything in the
roadmap, though, and if annual inflation exceeds 2.2
percent, the shortfall gets worse.
"We recognize that most of the economy measures
will have substantial organizational impacts and will
meet with resistance," the roadmap said. "In
the aggregate, actions such as outsourcing launch and
satellite control operations, winding down a number
of MILSATCOM systems, and phasing out legacy tracking
systems will affect thousands of manpower positions
and large fractions of the current budgets of the affected
units."
Noting that "the Air Force faces huge budget
problems in space (and almost everywhere else) whether
this study's recommendations are acted on or not," the
SAB said that "there is no way out of this dilemma
that does not involve both changing fiscal priorities
and divesting large pieces of today's Air Force mission
and infrastructure." The SAB said, for example,
that "thousands of military manpower authorizations
that are now dedicated to support activities in space
system and launch operations can be replaced with a
far smaller workforce, largely contracted out," and
the personnel can be "moved to fill urgent needs
elsewhere. This would be consistent with the development
of a corps of aerospace warfighters, skilled in all
the dimensions of applying spaceborne and airborne
instruments of national power."
Reality may mean "breaking the mindset that each
program area in the Air Force budget has a 'fair share'
percentage which cannot be changed by other than trivial
amounts," the roadmap warned. "Total Obligation
Authority (TOA) will probably have to be moved into
the space area from other programs, at least in some
years of high space activity."
Chart 4: The
Yield From "Aggressive Savings"
|
 |
| The space investment
account is about $4.1 billion a year. Projected
into the next century and adjusted for inflation,
that amount would double by 2020. That level,
however, will not be enough to fund baseline
programs, much less any of the new ones proposed. "Aggressive
savings," achieved by implementing strong
recommendations proposed by the roadmap,
might lower the cost of the baseline programs
to about $5 billion in 2020, some $3 billion
below the projection without such savings.
In many years-and in every year through 2008-there
is still a shortfall. If the inflation rate
is higher than 2.2 percent, the shortfall
gets worse. |
Copyright Air Force Association. All rights reserved.
|