Kratos Vice President Stuart Daughtridge told Satellite News that the evolution of both commercial and military infrastructure systems has brought a considerable amount of business to the company.

   “Situational network awareness is one of the areas where we see a lot of growth potential,” said Daughtridge. “Right now, satellite communications systems are generally very ‘stovepipe’ in the way they’re set up. So, by integrating the different systems, you can get end-to-end visibility from terrestrial user to terrestrial user, even if it goes through a satellite network. We’re seeing a lot of activity in this area, both on the commercial side and the government side. Integrating more of our customers’ operations and breaking down traditional stovepipes are hot topics right now.”

   One of the trends that Kratos management has identified in working with its military customers, specifically the U.S. Air Force Space Command, is that a lot of its requirements are being driven by policy. Kratos Senior Vice President Bob Wright told Satellite News that his company’s recent provision of a single, integrated command and control system to fly various Air Force satellites in the communications space was driven by the U.S. National Space Security Strategy and U.S. National Space Policy that were enacted last year.

   “Some of the trends we identified include a focus on globalization,” said Wright. “Specifically, the sixth of the Air Force’s Wideband Global Satellites (WGS) is partially funded by the Australian governments. We also know that the Europeans will fund future WGS satellites, as the Air Force just signed a memorandum of understanding that includes New Zealand and European partnerships. We also have Canadian partnerships in the works as well. That hits on affordability and globalization aspects that were outlined in the U.S. government’s space strategies.”

   Both Daughtridge and Wright also highlight the importance of the government’s focus on resiliency and affordability in those space strategies, specifically when it comes to predicting the health of the hosted payload market. Daughtridge said the Air Force is looking for hosted payloads with the ability to have back-up capabilities. “The Air Force Space Command is looking at hosted payloads as a way to reduce costs, but the resiliency aspect of the Air Force’s needs will see a whole acquisition process targeting smaller, cheaper and disaggregated satellite systems so that they stop the emphasis on huge, very expensive monolithic satellites. By building individual pieces on hosted payloads, the Air Force can put those systems together and fly them into orbit much cheaper.”

   Hosted payloads have received a lot of attention in the past few years, but the concept is anything but new to the Air Force. The military’s GPS satellite system, for example, features nuclear detection sensors that function like hosted payloads.

   Wright also highlighted the Air Force’s demonstration project on the CHIRP payload that is hosted on SES-2. “I’m sure we’ll see a second one of those demonstration projects as well,” said Wright. “The trend toward hosted payloads is being driven by affordability and the impending budget cuts.”

   The Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center Acquisition Office in Los Angeles is so invested in hosted payloads that it actually set up a hosted payload program office to help interact with the commercial industry. Wright said the effort was a promising development, but added that the Air Force will never move fast enough for the commercial satellite industry.

   “The commercial side is still held hostage to the slow-moving military budgeting cycle,” said Wright. “We cannot react with the agility that the commercial industry can truly provide. When something like a hosted payload is proposed and gets some attention and traction with the military, it takes years for the Air Force acquisition cycle to react. So, we find ourselves still building systems that were designed five to 10 years ago. Hosted payloads will have their place in the future for making affordability more accessible for the military, but it’s going to take some time.”

   When asked if the establishment of a contract acquisition vehicle similar to DISA and GSA’s Schedule 70 could help speed up the hosted payload utilization process, Wright said that the fix was more of a technical issue.

   “What is to happen is that satellite buses, specific payloads, launch vehicles, launch slots and a host of other issues have to be identified and be placed in synchronization with the current schedules that are out there,” said Wright. “We need to launch current systems that are in the pipeline. It is entirely possible to identify satellite buses and slots that are already manifested or identify certain military payloads that have excess capacity and stick a payload on them.”

   Daughtridge added that other technical issues such as how a commercial payload hosted on a government satellite would interact with the rest of the satellite need to be solved before hosted payloads see wider utilization. “We have to know how we implement a hosted payload’s ground segment if it needs to be a separate infrastructure for that payload,” he said. “The payload has to interact with the mission and it has to have a concept of operations for transmitting the data back down to Earth. If bringing that data down is going to require a separate infrastructure from the original, than that issue needs to be considered, as well.”

   Daughtridge knows that launching hosted payloads is not as simple as bolting hardware onto a satellite and sending it into orbit, but he commended the Air Force leadership for working with commercial providers in forming a better understanding of the core issues. “While I don’t think the acquisition process will ever be as fast as the commercial community wants, I think the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center and its current administration, specifically [Lt. Gen.] Ellen Pawlikowski have been very proactive on the effort of improving efficiency,” he said.