2024 Air, Space & Cyber: Space Domain Awareness

The “Space Domain Awareness” panel at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference featured Murali Krishnan, vice president and general manager for the Payload and Ground Systems Division at Northrop Grumman Space Systems; Christopher Long, deputy general manager and vice president of space systems for the Space, Cyber, and Intelligence Systems line at General Dynamics Mission Systems; and Kay Sears, vice president and general manager of Space, Intelligence & Weapon Systems at Boeing Defense, Space & Security, with Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon, deputy chief of space operations for intelligence at the U.S. Space Force, serving as moderator. Watch the video below:

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon, Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Intelligence, U.S. Space Force:

With me today is your choice for industry vice presidents of the year. We have a vice president, vice president, vice president, and then they have very long titles after that. But from Boeing we have Kay, she’s the vice president for Space Systems, Intelligence and Weapons, and she’s left the Grand Tetons to join us here today. So, she was having a wonderful vacation last week. Murali Krishnan is from Northrop Grumman, and he comes from a long history in the United States Air Force and is joining us here today. And then Chris Long is coming from General Dynamics, and Chris Long has got an experience beyond multiple companies inside the defense industrial base and also kind of bridges a bunch of different product sectors.

So, we’ll start off with some comments from each of our panelists as they explain a little bit of their portfolio and how space domain awareness and their company interact. First, let’s start with Kay.

Kay Sears, VP and General Manager of Space, Intelligence & Weapon Systems, Boeing Defense, Space & Security:

Okay. Thank you so much, General, and thanks to the Air and Space Force for obviously organizing this and for including my esteemed colleagues. I think it’s going to be a great discussion.

What strikes me about your introduction, and maybe some of what you gleaned from those books, is how space domain awareness has changed. Like you said 10 years ago it was about how we could track objects, identify objects, and track them in the database and provide conjunction assessments as we do for the world. It’s very different now. And one of the perspectives that I have with my portfolio, which has expanded at Boeing to include things like weapons, autonomous systems, things like that, is just the perspective of the other domains, the other services on space and specifically space domain awareness. It’s a little bit of a given that we’re going to have all the systems in place to know all the objects, to track all the objects, to understand what they’re capable of and what their intentions are. I think there’s a big assumption out there, so we have a lot of work to do when we think about some of our competition in space.

I also think the SDA mission has been expanding dramatically, and it’s not just now about space domain awareness from space, but it’s actually in space as well. We have to have a critical understanding of all of that in real time. Something that keeps up with the decisions that we have to make at the pace of that war fighting. Our heritage just in this area probably started with the Space Based Space Surveillance, SBSS, that will sunset in a year or two. There also is a active network that’s behind that called the RedLand, that really is the collaborative tool that’s connecting these sensors to users using common formats in multiple security levels. We’ll focus on that a little bit more as we talk in future questions.

And then Boeing also runs the Maui and New Mexico optical sites. Again, very critical at the library, the objects library and creating some of that and tracking some of that. We also have a very active sensor development area, again, focusing on electro-optical as well as IR, and then some of the RF components that have to deliver all of that data. That’s an area right now, if you look at a lot of the OV-1s, especially multi-domain, there’s this little lightning strike and it assumes that there’s some way that we’re going to be able to get that data down and into cockpits and into our brethren’s in the Army and the Navy and the Air Force and the Marines. We need to make sure those lightning strikes actually exist, and I think that’s still a challenge. Boeing has been doing a lot of work in the algorithms and the processing area and specifically with missile warning, missile track and discrimination sensors and phenomenology.

So that’s a little bit about our background in this area and as we get into more of the discussion, I think you’ll hear some of the ways that we’re investing there. I think, to the General’s point, there’s a little bit of a chicken and egg problem there that we need to talk about in terms of future investment. But those are some of my opening comments.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

So now Murali for Northrop Grumman and some of your major projects, if you could do your opening remarks. And Kay, artfully listed a number of programs that all lead into the Unified Data Library, but we punt that over to you.

Murali Krishnan, VP and General Manager for the Payload & Ground Systems Division, Northrop Grumman Space Systems:

Thank you. I guess first of all, thank you all of you for joining us and thank you General Gagnon for inviting me. It’s a privilege to be up here with so many distinguished guests on the panel.

Just for context in terms of my background, at Northrop Grumman, my portfolio includes payload and ground systems, payloads whether it’s RF or EO, missile warning, missile track, really all payloads that feed into other systems. And then ground systems could be space to ground, ground to space or even ground to ground in support of space-based assets. And like he mentioned, I spent a fair amount of time in the Air Force flying F-15s, but I also spent some time at Raytheon and L3Harris before joining Northrop Grumman. So, I feel like I have an interesting perspective on things.

So back to your question about what specifically Northrop Grumman does in terms of space domain awareness. Northrop Grumman really contributes tremendous amount towards space domain awareness and really provides some fantastic capabilities, whether it’s via space-based systems or ground-based systems that actively or passively track objects space to keep track of the natural environment as well as providing potential courses of action as it relates to those different objects. I won’t go through the entire portfolio. One particular one that’s relevant here is the DARC system, the Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability system, which is a ground-based radar system that provides situational awareness all the way up to the GEO belt. In concert with partner nations, the United States, Australia and the UK are really getting a wealth of awareness even as high up as the GEO belt and then taking that information and feeding it directly into the Unified Data Library.

That’s important because not only are we able to take that information and put it into a central location, but other acts users with authorized access are able to get that same information and commingle it with their own information from systems and really allows a vast number of folks with authorized access to get information as it relates to the kind of things they need to make decisions about.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

And in that context, the number of authorized users to the Space Force SSC-developed Unified Data Library is over 4,500 users and those users come from 20 different countries. And it’s the critical piece of software that a young guardian or a young JASDF member of the Japanese Air Defense Force or a young member of the British Armed Services sits down to understand what’s going on in space.

So what you’ve heard already from just the first two steps of the panel was whether it’s Boeing using their sensor suites, which include things in orbit and things on the ground, or it’s DARC, the new major radar investments for the US government, that will land in Australia in 2027 operationally will be built in UK next and then the third site in the United States, all of that tracks back to the Unified Data Library. And from there, your space operators for the allied nations share data and in sharing data, they exploit the data to understand what’s going on in space to deliver a shared common picture for their commanders.

Now that sounds awesome. That actually sounds like a requirement. And that was probably written six years ago. But with that requirement, we’ve been able to stay on task with one focus, which is why we’ve been able to integrate by design with our allies.

So last with us today is Christopher Long from General Dynamics. He’s got background and ground, he’s got background not just from General Dynamics but also on orbit with Orbital ATK. And over to you, sir.

Christopher Long, Deputy General Manager & Vice President of Space Systems for the Space, Cyber & Intelligence Systems Line, General Dynamics Mission Systems:

Thank you, General. So I actually started on a program called STSS ATRR, Advanced Technology Risk Reduction, which was a LEO based platform that did space situational awareness and then moved to a program called GSSAP built by Orbital Sciences, and now being successfully built by Northrop Grumman. And I remember at the time when we couldn’t say GSSAP, it was sapped up program, and when you looked at it, everybody was really enamored at the capability. But the real question that came along, and I remember multiple generals asking the question, okay, but what’s next? What do we need to be doing? And I think that’s to your point, at some point it became not a novelty and a capability that we as the United States could demonstrate that we could do, but it started to become part of the operational imperative. That then started to be combined with how do you really put all this data together?

So one of the things that we have looked at at General Dynamics, in addition to some of the stuff that we work in this area is classified, but we’re also involved in the Space Development Agency’s operations and integration contract, bringing together all of the different satellites into the ground system, building out those ground systems, but also operating that network. One of the things that we’ve been looking at is how do you take all that data that’s coming in, unclassified for the most part, but you’re looking at telemetry data, you’re looking at sensor data, what other sensors would be able to be put on where you can start seeing a little additional pattern of life to understand what’s going on up there? The way we look at it is data now will come from many, many sources, not just the highly accurate and exquisite systems. But much like the collection that now goes on the ground or from space to the ground is changing with just the proliferation of systems. We look at that as really the opportunity when we look at where the next set of offerings will be.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

And just to share with you a little bit of the journey we’ve been on for about four and a half years. So for four and a half years we’ve moved from about two to three dozen sensors that observed outer space so that we could understand the space domain environment to now over 600 sensors or apertures around the world. And you may ask, how can the United States government actually move that fast? Maybe we can’t, but our commercial sector can. And we have leveraged our commercial sector, which is by far the world’s finest in space domain awareness. And we have leveraged those commercial sensors and apertures around the globe into our space domain awareness database known as the UDL. So today it’s hard to hide in outer space. Today at an unclassified level I can tell you that certain Chinese assets in GEO are conducting operations. I can track the SYs, those two satellites that they have up in GEO and what they’re doing.

In fact, I can talk to you about how one of their satellites went and grabbed an old defunct PNT satellite and then tossed it outside the GEO belt into the graveyard orbit. I can also tell you that it zipped back into position at over 40 meters per second. And just if you know, like Kay just went, ooh, if you’re into space, that’s like Indy racing. So, I can see all that and I can see all that because I’ve integrated sensors that now give me coverage of the GEO Belt and LEO in a way that we couldn’t do four and a half, five years ago.

So tremendous progress by integration of multiple sources of data at all classification levels to help those individual junior military members in those countries know what’s going on. So that’s just some of the progress. But that progress was integrated by design with allied partners, by using it together and then integrated with the commercial sector because our commercial sector runs fast. In fact, nobody runs faster than the US commercial sector. And I watch the Chinese commercial sector very closely.

All right, so over to you. And here’s one of the things I took out of the book. I watched the Chinese and the Chinese have focused on extending their weapons engagement zone. So that’s how far they can sense and shoot something and still hit it even if it’s moving. And Secretary Kendall started today by saying what? China, China, China, okay. He starts meetings like that. I’m not kidding. Okay. China, China, China, we need to be focused. That weapons engagement zone keeps getting further and further and further towards US territories in the Pacific. And one of their ways of doing that has been by integrating domains, by taking their space layer and connecting it with their air layer and their ground layer. And they’ve done that to be able to see further and also see mobile targets, but they’ve also done that to deliver resiliency inside that network.

Now Kay has contracts with all military services in the IC. So, although we’re divided by domain, you are not. What opportunities are we missing because of how we’re structured?

Kay Sears:

Yeah, I think you started with the problem in what the PRC is doing and it’s clearly designed to keep that carrier in port and keep that fighter on the ground. So, this idea of integrating sensors and capabilities, it’s really an expansion of some of the missions as we’ve defined them in the past. We can’t narrowly define them when we look at sensing and controlling the battle space. So, where Boeing has been focused… And you tend to go to your own platforms and capabilities first, even by no means is that where we need to stop. We need to have ways to do this across the portfolio. But the way that we’re organized right now from a DOD perspective doesn’t lend itself to that. So, Boeing is starting with some demonstrations that really leverage what we know already that we can control.

So, an example of that would be the recent FOO Fighter award that we have, which is really an AMTI type of mission, being able to track, discriminate moving targets. That would normally have been an airborne mission and has been an airborne mission for a long time. We need to keep that airborne layer, but now we need to integrate the space layer as well because as we move into further stages of the conflict, as we need those carriers and fighters to enter denied areas, we have got to combine that data of those two domains to deliver capability to the cockpit so that we can make smart decisions. And that would not have been a definition of AMTI in the past.

So, one of the trends we’re seeing is this idea that the mission as defined and the domain as defined is greatly changing. And where we get leverage and where we get resiliency and where we penetrate the bubble is when we combine those sensors across domains. So back to my AMTI example, we’re leveraging the E-7, which is a Boeing platform that does command and control and will deliver that tactical battle space information to cockpits. And we’re going to connect that to the FOO Fighter network and the MEO missile warning and track layer that we’re building. We want to demonstrate that capability. We want to show what kind of capability and operational picture we can deliver when we combine all those sensors.

So, I would say that is an example where we have to think multi-domain. When we talk about sensor integration, it’s not within the domain, it’s between the domains. I would include the maritime domain in that as well. We’re going to both be getting information, but we have to figure out a way to deliver that information to all of those domains. So that’s just an example.

Murali Krishnan:

Yeah, I was just going to add on to that, I agree 100% with everything you said, just from a slightly different perspective. And I go back to my experience back in the day as a previous supervisor used to tell me, back when I was cool. I was flying over bad guy land and there was many aircraft in the theater. We thought we were doing a good job when we were combining air and naval assets at the time. And there was an airborne surveillance platform that amongst the 50 or 60 aircraft talked to me directly and said, this particular surface-to-air missile site can see you. Which doesn’t really tell me anything until about 30 seconds later he said, you are being targeted. So, I looked over the rail and I saw the flash of a surface-to-air missile launch. So that particular bit of intelligence potentially could have saved my life. And if we were using space-based collections, I would’ve gotten that same information about seven or eight days later, which would not have been nearly as useful.

And so now as we think about, you mentioned it, the range of the threat, the speed of the threat is changing significantly. So purely airborne domain intelligence is not going to be there or that won’t actually get the job done. We need to think about over the horizon, we need to think about space-based to provide real-time or near real-time actionable information so that folks that need to know can actually do something about it.

Kay Sears:

And I think the JWC, the joint warfighting concept, is really trying to get at that. If you look at a lot of the, I would call them, requirements or gaps or needs, they don’t specifically state a domain. They’re like, give me this outcome, give me this capability.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

All right. Well, thank you for that. I think we hear that in the Department of Defense clearly. The services come in with requirements, they go up to a JROC that puts that joint stamp on the requirement so that we make sure it handles all the equities in the department. So, although we may field on the force in nine separate positions, when the ball is hit, we all run to the play. So, we have a mechanism to help make sure that all services are heard, but we are organized the way we’re organized.

Kay Sears:

Yeah. And we can’t let the acquisition set up how we buy, interrupt that kill chain or delivering that capability that SDA to who needs it. We can’t stop there.

Murali Krishnan:

And I think that last point is maybe the most critical if there’s an ask, I think that industry, I don’t want to speak for anybody else, but industry would ask of the uniform services or even just the government in general, you have a sensor that’s maybe operated by an organization. You have a dish on the ground that may be operated by a different organization. And maybe the pipe in between is operated by a third. And getting all three of those or all of those agencies to play together sometimes delays the transmission of actionable information.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

Okay. So, what we’ve talked about is requirements for multi-domain capabilities to ensure the success of the joint force. There’s also another dynamic in play here as I read through my books and its internal IRAD from the companies. Where do the companies eat their own cash to develop that capability that the department probably hasn’t even thought of yet? And I’d like to ask each of you in your companies how are IRAD decisions made? But more importantly, and this is where I’m trying to steal some intel from you because that’s what I do, in three to five years, what are the things that are going to be very doable that today don’t seem like they’re doable? Because if you asked me five years ago, if I could link 4,500 operators in 20 countries consuming data from over 600 apertures around the world, people would probably laugh at me.

Murali Krishnan:

Okay, well I guess I’ll go first with a non-answer. I’m not going to talk about specific technologies that our company is developing for all those people taking notes out there-

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

That’s what makes it the intel, I’m just saying.

Murali Krishnan:

But I will say that generically speaking, one area that I think is going to have huge leaps and bounds, especially over the next three to five years is artificial intelligence. And if you just think about the feasibility of how we use it, take some sort of AI reading through resumes to find the right candidate or artificial intelligence helping software developers code much faster, you take that aside. As we apply it to space domain awareness or even sensors providing information, if we’re able to use artificial intelligence to take the ones and zeros that a sensor provides and identify, understand, characterize exactly what it is that is being looked at or being collected, that will then save time again for providing information to the folks that need it most. And so that’s an area that I think I hazard a guess probably everyone is spending a lot of time and energy and that will grow tremendously in the next few years.

Christopher Long:

Yeah, I would add, I think you’re spot on. I think the other thing that goes on with artificial intelligence is what is the process and capability at the edge? And in this particular case, I mean at some point you need to have enough processing at the edge that you can make the decision rapidly rather than say, well, if I had this, I can collect all this data. So, it’s not just that the sensor has to be precise enough, but the processing has to be rapid enough. And then what don’t you process? Because we take so much data off of some of these systems, you really start having to have that predictive, what is important and what will tip you to say this is something that I need to take care of now.

Kay Sears:

I guess I would add to that quantum. Boeing’s focused on quantum, we just released a press announcement about a new satellite that will both sense and process in quantum. And so that can help solve, I think the point that Chris is making there a little bit. What I would ask back to the military is what are you going to do about your V&V process. When it comes to artificial intelligence, when it comes to the output of a computer telling you what the right answer is, are you going to trust it? Are you still going to apply the same V&V rules? Because that’s going to put a handbrake on all of that very quickly.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

So, I would tell, Kay, without going too far into the meetings that that discussion has begun. So, some of it is where will we certify algorithms that help deliver those reports? And the other thing is issuing reports that clearly state that this was machine-translated. So that if it’s part of something that is the kill chain for the US and taking human life, you would know that you’d probably want to put some human thought on that. So that thought is occurring at the senior levels and we’re trying to figure out a process to do that. Because you want to gain the speed and the advantage but continue with the ethics and morality of our country.

Kay Sears:

Yeah. Another area of investment, just really quickly, is we think about sensor technology evolving and we need to keep doing that obviously, and we’re investing there, focal planes, lasers, whatever. But when we talk about the fight, it’s not that far away. How much new tech are we going to be able to operationalize between now and then? So, we’re focused at Boeing a little bit on producibility and affordability, the types of investments we can make to actually speed production, to simple simplify standard work, to really hit with volume of capability versus that IRAD investment that might take it to the next level that won’t make the fight we expect in time. Does that make sense?

Christopher Long:

Yep, it does. I would say that’s something where everybody has to worry about at this point with the supply chain post COVID, it’s all about DTUPC, but also making sure you’re working with your supply chain appropriately so that they’re ready to… We have a thing that we say, can we do one to many? But that’s not like we’re trying to just do one thing and reuse it over and over again. It’s can we have the basic building blocks in place with a supply chain that understands what we’re trying to do so that they can lean forward and get past some of those issues that I think the whole industry has seen post COVID.

Kay Sears:

We talked a lot about World War II in some of our senior leader meetings. How do we get to that sense of urgency where you’re using what you have, where you have just the production space to meet the demand. We’re not a country that has that same sense of urgency.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

Yes. That comes clear in the books you read. But the other thing that comes clear in the books you read is the nation was incredibly uncertain in the 1930s, even in the late 1930s. But when we study World War II, it seems like it was always decided that we would enter, that we would always be sharing things with the British. But when you read the historical record, there is tremendous debate in the country.

I want to pivot just a little bit. So, in my job I kind of do three things. First thing in the morning I play intel officer, and I read traffic so that I can share what I think is going to happen next. About midday I play human resource officer, and I deal with people’s assignments and things like that. And at the end of the day, I play investment banker. In that investment banker role, I look at what we’re spending and what’s giving good ROI, but I also try to build a team of like teammates who are spending money so that I can pool money.

Space domain awareness was one of the places I first attacked, and I built a classified Excel sheet on the high side, and I asked all executive branch members what they were spending on space domain awareness contracts. So that’s how we worked through the application of tens of millions of dollars to help us use those 600 plus apertures around the world in a way that was beneficial to the US government.

But in my study of that, I realized that I think the federal government is the primary driver and purchaser of space domain awareness, and it’s because we generate a free good that we allow as an output, which is the space catalog. That’s called a monopsony when there’s one primary buyer. How do we ensure that advancements continue in such a market? And I’m sharing this story because I think some people from the Hill are here. I want them to really internalize that. I think, and I think I’m right, that the primary driver for consumption of space domain sensor technology and data is the federal government.

Okay. So, my question to you is what are the other niche products and services where you can generate a value stream that maybe I don’t see because of where I sit? Or is it exactly like I think it is?

Christopher Long:

Well, I would say that currently I think you’re correct. The question then becomes, as proliferation continues, both US based, international, at some point you can almost see where there’s got to be some level of sensing beyond what the US government is going to provide to everybody. And so, I think those are the kind of things that it’s hard to look forward, but if you start talking about the number of satellites that are going to be out there. Maybe it’s some additional ground, ground-based radar systems, I know there’s companies that are out there doing that, certainly not at the accuracy that the US systems are. So, I think there can be some capabilities similar to what we do with airborne platforms where not everything has to be a US government-based system. But I think it’s going to take time. But that’s a function of this proliferation of systems.

Kay Sears:

I would go one step further to say that about 99.9% of your commercial users of space are reliant, dependent and expecting the DOD to tell them everything they need to know about space domain and conjunction and security, maybe even to the point of protecting their assets should they be attacked. So, you have done too good of a job providing all of that for free. It’s going to be hard to put that genie back in the bottle.

Now, I think the commercial operators are very willing to carry sensors and contribute to the data side of that. But are they concerned about what might be around them? They have a commercial model they’re focused on serving their customers with communications and things like that. They’re really going to rely on, I would say that globally, they’re going to rely on the United States to provide them the data they need.

Murali Krishnan:

And I’ll just echo Kay’s point, and I’ll just use the DARC system as an example. DARC is a system that can detect, identify, characterize, track objects in space 22,000 miles above the surface of the Earth. It’s being conducted by the US with the Australians and the folks in the UK as well. So, it really creates a seamless view of surface to GEO. And there’s no hiding, DARC is always watching, and there’s other systems as well that are always watching. And so, it really prevents any sort of operational surprise. And to her point, if that’s already being done, what else would the commercial folks need it for other than as more and more systems are being put into space, objects are being put into space on the commercial side, there may be more of a need to understand is my system, is my object, is my whatever, in danger of a collision, in danger of how is it able to operate? And so that awareness I think is going to be even more important, not just for the commercial company, but for everybody to prevent any sort of collisions or interference.

The other side maybe the commercial side could help is as again, more and more launches are taking place, whether it’s a rideshare or a hosted payload of some sort, where there is still benefit, even though it may not solely be the sole purpose of the commercial entity is putting it in there.

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

Okay. Well, Chris, do you have any parting comments that you would like to make as we close out in our last minute or so here?

Christopher Long:

Well, I guess I would just say, I think as we move forward, it’s going to come down to speed and timeliness of how we get the data and be able to make more rapid decisions, I think is going to be the critical part. Great companies are going to be working on better sensors and more proliferated sensors, but then how do we really get that data that’s needed at the right time, at the right place?

Panel Moderator: Maj. Gen. Gregory Gagnon:

All right.

---

This transcript was auto-generated, and may not be 100 percent accurate. The source audio and video can be accessed above.