Space-based environmental monitoring (SBEM) is an area “ripe” for a disaggregated architecture approach, according to a key Air Force general.
“Currently we use National Oceanic Atmospheric Association (NOAA) and NASA contributions (and) we (also) use international partner contributions and certain sensors that we would be the sole providers of,” Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Director of Requirements Maj. Gen. Martin Whelan told Defense Daily in a recent interview. “So what we’re looking at is ‘Can I hang those sensors on other government satellites, commercial satellites or international partner satellites so I can get a cheaper ride to space?’”
Whelan described disaggregated architecture as simply breaking sensors apart so that if the Air Force loses one due to a man-made disaster or space debris, it still has other sensors to provide data. Whelan said while disaggregated architectures have become a nice “buzz phrase,” using all the data is also critical.
“The good part of a disaggregated architecture is if I lose one sensor, I still have other sensors, so some data is better than no data,” Whelan said. “The bad side is I now need a more robust ground architecture to bring all these things together without data latency and things like that…We’re trying to find that sweet spot on where it is helpful and value-added.”
Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center (AFSMC) Nov. 16 posted a request for information (RFI) on Federal Business Opportunities focusing on SBEM sensors and capabilities. The service is specifically looking for information on payload rideshare opportunities, or viable opportunities and plausible business cases for SBEM sensors to be hosted on planned government or commercial spacecraft launches into relevant SBEM orbits.
The Air Force is also looking in the RFI for commercial and international partnership strategies that would utilize commercial and/or international vendors and agencies to deliver weather information products and data/data sets. These approaches could include joint ventures to procure space weather systems or innovative data-sharing agreements that could conceivable reduce the level of space-based weather collection required.
The RFI said an ongoing analysis of alternatives is focusing on addressing certain capabilities by the fiscal year 2025 timeframe and capabilities for ocean surface vector winds by FY 2015.
Whelan said the Air Force has also been in “real serious” conversations with industry over the last two months regarding space architectures and the last six months in general, but he’s been hesitant to put forward formal plans.
“I’ve been working with…some of the cross-cutting industry groups, been in dialogue with them for about six months, but real seriously in about the last two months,” Whelan said. “(To) sit down and have discussions on the architectures we’re honing in on and to get their feedback on those architectures. So we’re to the point that we’re about ready to go talk to industry, but what I didn’t want to do is put an architecture out there and change it in a month (or) change it in a week…because more frustrating than not knowing the architecture is chasing the ever-changing architecture.”
Whelan said one reason why the Air Force has been hesitant to release a formal space architecture is because of both budgetary and planning uncertainty as well as a conventional wisdom “rush” to disaggregated architectures.
“There is also this rush to disaggregated architectures are better than aggregated,” Whelan said. “We’re trying to find that sweet spot by mission area: Which ones lend themselves better to a disaggregated approach, which then gets you looking at small satellites or hosted payloads and which ones become more problematic.”
View the RFI here: http://1.usa.gov/SsO9qc