Published Airpower Journal -
Summer 1995
DISTRIBUTION
A:
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Gen Michael P. C. Carns, USAF, Retired
Begin with the baseline. The Defense Department's functional expertise is national security. Its constitutional responsibility is providing for the common defense. Its customer is its citizenry. The Defense Department has delivered on its contract with the American people.
We -all services- have decisively won this nation's wars, hot and cold. And the American public has unstintingly supported its warriors and provided the necessary resources to do the job from World War right on through Desert Storm. We are now in the most significant watershed of this century. We are moving from the conventional confrontations of the bipolar world of two superpowers to the confused and unfocused world of no identifiable national security threat with the irritation and unpredictability of ambiguous regional threats. In such circumstances, one could easily lose focus and momentum, and in so doing, lose the wellspring of our support, the American people.
SPACECAST 2020 has set out to attack this very problem: to link existing and emerging space technologies in a coherent way to the national security mission of the nation. The Air Force undertook SPACECAST 2020, but it should not be seen as Air Force peculiar. This is a defense undertaking, with defensewide implications. With that in mind, what are the useful observations for the nation and for this audience?
First, the militaIy needs to appreciate that space is more and more a dual domain of military and civilian activity; we are far from alone in space. It is worth noting that of the 1,000 or so US space launches since 1959, the ratio of civilian to military launches has held at a rough 5:4 relationship. Interestingly, the forecast is for divergence of this ratio, favoring the commercial sector. Projects such as iridium and teledesic systems will total hundreds of launches should existing lifters be used.
My second observation would be that this increasing commercialization of space is bringing needed rigor to the economics of space launch and orbit. For decades, the US cost to reach space, in constant '93 dollars, has hovered around $8,000 to $12,000 per pound to orbit, both in low earth orbit (LEO) and geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO). US systems own the upper end of the scale; the French alternative tends to the lower band of the range. Suffice it to say that the pressure is clearly on to find cheaper and better ways to achieve orbit. It takes little vision to see that the market is clearly there.
A third observation is that despite the duality of space and its increasing commercialization, and despite the increased rigor and economic attractiveness of the space alternative, the military is seriously lagging in its operational understanding and appreciation for exploiting the opportunities of space to military advantage. This is a regrettable statement that requires further comment. At least two conditions have brought about this situation. First, although space has been the new frontier, it has been developed and shaped for some threeplus decades by functional specialties, not operators. For far too long, military space has been the dominant domain of nationallevel intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance, and warning. These are functional areas well known for secrecy and compartmentation, limited oversight, generous funding, restricted access, and narrow application. That must change and is changing. Second, the conditions that allowed this narrow development of space utilization also created a protection system a hard shell that has prevailed beyond its time, even beyond the end of the cold war. It took a warfighting event Desert Storm to crack the shell and force open the door. War fighters, suddenly in charge, were often amazed at what they discovered behind the door and at what was available for improved battlefield situational awareness, for innovative operational maneuver inside the enemyls decision loop, and for vastly improved targeting and damage assessment tools. In the words of an old saying: once they've been to the big city, it's tough to get them back on the farm. The operator is not going back!
That brings us to SPACECAST 2020, the conscious effort to improve the linkage between space technology and opportunity, and operational militarymission execution. What we have heard here for the past day and a half is the first cut at a very important redirection for the US Air Force and the military departments in general.
It is eminently clear that military exploitation of space desperately needs warfighter sponsorship and operational focus. The functional specialist's needs in space will continue to be met, but the driver and shaper of space must shift to the operator. So, this is the first task that the USAF must undertake: operational sponsorship of space, a formal commitment, not just a dialin such as this study but mainstreaming space with all of its aspects into the line Air Force. In space thought and doctrine development, the Air University is the right place. For space requirements, the Air Staff should drive them, but with far greater emphasis. As for space operations, a much more robust effort is due. More about that later.
The good news is that the operationalization of space doesnlt require extensive additional research and development. As we heard here, technologies are largely in hand to undertake leadingedge operational applications. The Black Horse concept illuminated by Maj Chris Daehnick and commented upon by Capt Mitch Clapp is a clear case in point.
Yet, despite this clear operational focus, one should harbor concerns about how SPACECAST 2020 will be handled. The study is a very competent technical review as well as an operational document. The study's recommendations in integrateddemand information architecture, high-performance computing, multi-functional space-based laser systems, and materials technology must not become the major focus. That has too often been the mode of the past "techie" takeovers. We must stalwartly lock onto and drive the operational message and vision. And so, putting this all together the important legacies and influences of space past, the transitional circumstances of space present, and the unique operational opportunities for space future--we should take away three thoughts from this session.
First, SPACECAST 2020 is an important beginning. We are thinking again, thinking operationally about space. This study provides focus, vision, and a beginning road map for sustained action. We have a start on the problem. We've defined the terrain and identified a number of fruitful paths to pursue. This beginning must now be converted from a batch task to a streamlined effort. Work it every day, week, month, and year. The Air University has an unprecedented opportunity to recover its leadership and heritage, recapturing the legacy and leadership of the Air Corps Tactical School of the 1930s that developed the concepts of war, which shaped the air war doctrine of World War II and the Air Force of today. The challenge is to shape the USAF space force of tomorrow.
The second footstomping message of this symposium is to get on with operationalization of space NOW! This former exclusive domain of the specialist must now give way to operational leadership. The core mission must assume daily responsibility for space operations and activity. Unless and until this genuinely happens that is, space moves to main street we will continue to mark time and to lose ground. Many are of the mistaken belief that we "operationalized" space when the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force was reassigned from Air Combat Command (ACC) to Air Force Space Command (AFSPACECOM). Wrong. The ICBM force is not a space force. It does not operate in space; it only transits space a happenstance of ballistics as we fire longrange weaponry over long distances.
Today, space operations are in the hands of the research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) communities military and civilian (National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA). In the Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) and contractors do all our space launches and have been doing so for decades. Never in the history of US military operations have we left such activity in the hands of developers and testers for so long. The inevitable result is a testing mindset in space undertakings every launch unique, long padprep times, heavy contractor reliance, extremely long recycle times, and extremely costly charges. As for NASA, despite an honored heritage of leadingedge work in aerospace technology development, it has opted for routine space operations for two decades. That should be our domain; NASA should be concentrating on rolling back aerospace frontiers. Bottom lines: Transfer space launch and control promptly over to operations with AFSPACECOM in charge NOW. Routinize and standardize the function bluesuit it. Reappraise shuttle operations. The goal should be to transfer launch, space operations, and recovery responsibility to the USAF. NASA would retain responsibility for the shuttle back end when R&D is the purpose and would also get on with other R&D such as the space station.
Third, it is time to rethink how we do specialized functions in space. There is huge leverage here with great benefits to all participants, commercial and military. The emerging commercialization of space for specialized tasks is shifting the dominance of development and innovation to that sector. The military needs to consider having the commercial sector to perform every task that doesn't require unique military control and handling. This thought, not likely to be popular, particularly in military communications sectors, is an absolute necessity. We need to force interoperability, standardization, and functional transparency into military communications and data transfer. Nothing will move this process faster than a requirement to conform to civilian standards when no compelling military requirement can be proven. Today, the Defense Switching Network (DSN) is the Defense Information System Agency's (DISA) responsibility but is operated by AT&T under contract. Why should space communications be any different conceptually?
Obviously, we need to get the word out to inform, to build dialogue, and to stimulate debate. Space needs to be an ongoing issue in all of its aspects--its vision, its utilization, its road map, its military value, its operational uses, its commercial tieins, and its resource share. We all have a role to play here. Get the SPACECAST message out to your people. Task Air University to help you. Gen Jay Kelley tells me he's prepared to send teams out, upon request, to brief military organizations as well as civilian corporations. Take advantage of this special opportunity.
In sum, we should be grateful to the Air University and its 2020 team as well as to NSIA for this important symposium. This is only a beginning. The effort must gather much more momentum and become the persuasive instrument of change that mainlines space with operations in charge. Everyone has a part to play, from Air University to Headquarters USAF to industry.
The test of success will be whether we come together in a year or so to assess progress, revise goals, reset the vision, and set up a new action plan - momentum and movement. What is at stake here is nothing short of sound national policy planning for the next century. Space is no longer just a place; it is now the medium for performing core warfighting tasks. We must convert this powerful vision into mainstream reality with clarity of focus, detenmination of purpose, and commitment of substantial resources.
We are in charge of our destiny. We need only get on with the task.
*Commissioned by the Air Force chief of staff in May 1993, Air University's SPACECAST 2020 project compiled a year's research into white papers that represent a huge paradigm shift in the Air Force approach to forming longrange concepts. In these comments to the National Security Industrial Association (NSIA) symposium, 10 November 1994, Gen Michael P. C. Carns, USAF, Retired, former Air Force vicechief of staff, captures the thrust of SPACECAST 2020 and advocates for the Air Force's future in space.
Gen Michael P. C. Carns, USAF, Retired (USAFA; MA, Harvard University) served as Air Force vice-chief of staff from 1991 until his retirement in 1994. He flew 200 combat missions over Southeast Asia in the F-4E. During Desert Shield/Desert Storm, he served as the director of the Joint Staff. Other assignments during his distinguished Air Force career included deputy commander in chief and chief of staff, US Pacific Command; commander, Thirteenth Air Force; deputy chief of staff for plans and later deputy chief of staff for operations and intelligence, Headquarters PACAF; director of operations, J-3, Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force; commander, 57th Fighter Weapons Wing, Nellis AFB, Nevada, and the 354th Tactical Fighter Wing at Myrtle Beach AFB, South Carolina. General Carns also served as special assistant to the chief of staff, Supreme Allied Commander, Europe.
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.
[ Back Issues | Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor ]