the Army Space Journal

Winter/Spring 2003 A Professional Journal for Army Space Operators

Vol. 2, No 1 Published by U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command

The

d

Connected to Space
We want you to know This Journal’s for you

It just doesn’t seem right to send the ASJ to the printshop without some mention of Operation Iraqi

Freedom. All the articles assembled in this combined winter and spring edition revolve around one central

topic: Capabilities that Space operators bring to the warfight. Read the articles and take a look. In fact, it’s

a safe bet that every article printed in previous editions all tie back to that same thought.

There’s always a muddy boot bottomline. Right now, that's in Baghdad. Here’s an example. Bo

Dunaway, who leads our Spectral Operations Resource Center located in Colorado Springs, Colo., wrote

in the second edition of the ASJ about the Center’s ability to exploit

multi/hyper spectral imagery from satellites. Then, in the early days of

Operation Iraqi Freedom, U.S. Central Command’s spokesperson BG

Vincent Brooks shows a satellite image titled “Baghdad Oil Fires” during the

command’s daily press briefing in Qatar. 

“Another example of disregard for the conditions of Iraq and the Iraqi

people is the burning of oil trenches,” said Brooks. He then used a satellite

image of Baghdad taken the day before — March 31 — to point out some of

the 50 oil trenches on fire at the time in the “defensive array of Baghdad.”

Now, the story behind this story is that the forward deployed team of soldiers

and an airman from Dunaway’s center produced that image in Qatar. 

Here’s another example, told in a much more earthy way written by the

leader of our Army Space Support Team assigned with the 1st Marine

Expeditionary Force. MAJ Dan Cockerham writes first of himself, SSG

Gregory Singer and SPC Joshua Foye — the three team members assigned

with the 1st Marines’ main command post — in an email to his first sergeant.

“We live in small, two-person tents (or the back of a HMMWV) and have not had showers in over a

week. Our bodies and our clothes are dirty. On the other hand, the (1st Marines) are on the outskirts of

Baghdad, as is V Corps! We are all proud to be part of this effort.” He writes of his team: “We are getting

mail, email, and are in constant contact with the rest of (the team) at the 1st MEF rear CP — where they

are working hard on the future ops planning ... and coordinating with other SMDC elements ... .”

Before you begin reading our collection of articles we've put together in this edition, take a look at four

images we've printed to help you focus on the theme of the role of Space in Army Transformation. The

illustration on the front cover is our attempt to show that importance.

But also take a look at the satellite image of Baghdad which Brooks

spoke of — it is printed on the back cover. Now, look at Cockerham

getting his haircut in the photo above the night before he and his

team moved into Baghdad with the Marines. Finally, although you

won't recognize him for the spacesuit, but the photo to the right is

BG(r) Robert Stewart who is the Army's first astronaut in Space.

There's a connection. It's the pioneering spirit that is in the fabric of SMDC, represented not only by Stewart but by all the effort

going on in Space right now in Iraq.

Keep your eye out for our ASJ Special Edition to come out later

this year telling the story of not only these two brief stories I've told

here, but on the other aspects of SMDC's involvement in Operation

Iraqi Freedom — providing 24/7 support in force enhancement,

satellite communications, early missile warning, blue force tracking

and other space-based capabilities. 

—Managing Editor
Winter/Spring 

2003 Edition

Contents

Theme — “The Role of Space in Army Transformation”

Approval: The Commanding General, U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense

Command, has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the

transaction of the public business as

required by law. Use of funds for printing

this publication has been approved by the

Commanding General, January 2001, in

accordance with AR 25-30.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions

expressed in the Army Space Journal are

not necessarily those of the Department of

the Army, the U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command, or the U.S. Army Space

Command.

Mission: The Army Space Journal is published quarterly by the U.S. Army Space and

Missile Defense Command. The journal

provides a forum through which Space

Operations Officers can disseminate professional knowledge and furnish information within the U.S. Army. The purpose is

to increase the effectiveness of Space operations through a professional discussion of

events and lessons learned. It is also

intended to inform the Army warfighter on

Army Space initiatives.

Commanding General:

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

Deputy Commanding General for

Research, Development & Acquisition:

MG John M. Urias

Deputy Commanding General for

Operations:

BG Richard V. Geraci

SMDC Public Affairs Officer:

William Congo

Managing Editor:

Michael L. Howard

Contributing Editors:

Donald Montoya

MAJ Laura Kenney

Debra Valine

Richard Burks

Marilyn White

Jeff Welch

Brian Hermes

Graphics Editor:

Sharon L. Hartman

Comments, inquiries and manuscripts

should be sent to the Director, Force

Development and Integration Center

(FDIC), ATTN:

Richard Burks

1330 Inverness Dr., Suite 440

Colorado Springs, CO 80910

Telephone: 719-622-2902

Fax: 719-622-2951

richard.burks@arspace.army.mil

Distribution to Functional Area 40 officers

and associated military officers, civilians,

and contractors. Changes to addresses and

requests for this publication should be

made to the FDIC address listed above.

http://armyspace.army.mil/SpaceJournal

Cover: 

2

4

6

8

24

30

18

22

36

7

the Army Space Journal

28

CG Comments Space “key enabler” for Army Transformation

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr. 

DCG Comments Army Transformation War Game: 

Insights Concerning Space Operations

BG Richard V. Geraci

FDIC Comments The View From (Army) Space ...

How Space Contributes to Transformation

COL Glen C. Collins Jr.

Commentary: Be a bandwidth nibbler, not a Kobayashi

LTG Peter Cuviello

Yesterday’s Pioneer BG Robert Stewart, U.S. Army retired

MAJ Laura Kenney

A Word from the Chairman: Understanding Transformation

GEN Richard B. Myers

Theme The Role of Space in Army Transformation

Michael Howard

Don’t Forget “Access” Space Launch Critical for Military Transformation

Jeffrey Becker and Gary Trinkle

Space Operations in Support of the Objective Force

Dave Carrithers

Space Modernization Strategy

Karen Oliver

Homeland Security and Transformation

LTC Michael H. Postma

Seminar War Games

Terry Nelson

Global Engagement VI

COL Glen C. Collins and LTC Michael H. Postma

SMDC Moves Into Space Planning for Army Transformation

Bob Clarke

Tip of the ‘Sphere’ Army Space soldiers battle typhoon in Japan

SSG Franklin Barrett

Thanksgiving in Qatar brightened for Space soldiers by special visitor

MAJ Laura Kenney and CWO Vernon Dayton

Space unit likes its training ‘cubed’

SSG Franklin Barrett

Re-enlistment at 9/11 site ‘a profound experience’ for Space soldier

SFC Matthew Frias

Special Forces to test electronic battlefield reporting device during 

Robin Sage exercise

Debra Valine

Space soldier and His Wife Bring Warmth to Afghanistan

MAJ Robert Zaza

COMMAND in BRIEF

Contributions from around the command

40

38

16

12

26

25

14

32

33

42
he Army is and will remain the largest user among the

Services of Space-based capabilities. The Interim and

Legacy forces already leverage overhead constellations of

military and civilian Space platforms for intelligence, communications, attack warning, weather and position, timing,

and navigation. The Objective Force will exploit the full

potential of these systems. Operational simultaneity, situational understanding, precise and tactically responsive intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and assured communications are implicit in the Objective Force Operational

Concept, and will depend on successful mid- and far-term

development of overhead architectures, systems and platforms. The Objective Force will also rely heavily on the

Joint Force’s ability to assure our access to Space resources

while denying them to the enemy.

Space Enables Transformation 

Successful transformation to the Objective Force is key

to the Army’s battlefield dominance in the 21st century and

to providing the most efficient, lethal land forces to the Joint

Force Commander. Space is the Army’s key enabler for supporting those forces in any theater. 

The contributions that Space systems already make in

the near term will be continuously improved as the Army

transforms. Army Space equities are primarily represented

in two of the four Space mission areas: force enhancement

and Space control. Capabilities in these two areas, supported by the ground- and Space-based infrastructure of relays,

ground stations and satellite control facilities, directly support the transformation of our Army to the Objective

Force and enable Army operations in all phases of conflict

in support of the Joint Force Commander. 

Space and the Objective Force 

Force enhancement embodies the Warfighter’s use of

Space. It provides “value-added” to battlefield functions,

enabling the land force to accomplish its terrestrial mission.

As the Objective Force matures, the Army will ensure that

upgrades to force enhancement capabilities address

Objective Force requirements. Such capabilities include

beyond-line-of-sight satellite communications; intelligence,

surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR); position, navigation

and timing; weather, terrain, and environmental monitoring;

and missile warning.

Commanders require Space-based communications and

intelligence capabilities as they move from CONUS installations to a theater of operations. Arrival in theater only

increases the Joint Warfighter’s reliance on Space to facilitate

reachback for strategic command and control, logistics support, database query, precision strike support and ISR support for efficient use of in-theater Reconnaissance,

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition and deep

Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Space “key enabler” for

Army Transformation

T

By LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

CG Column

2

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano

Jr., Commanding General, 

United States Army

Space & Missile Defense

Command/Commanding

General United States

Army Space Command.

Before the war in Afghanistan, that area was low on the list of major planning contingencies. Yet, in a very short

time, we had to operate across the length and breadth of that remote nation, using every branch of the Armed

Forces. We must prepare for more such deployments by developing assets such as advanced remote sensing,

long-range precision strike capabilities, and transformed maneuver and expeditionary forces. This broad portfolio of military capabilities must also include the ability to defend the homeland, conduct information operations, ensure U.S. access to distant theaters, and protect critical U.S. infrastructure and assets in outer Space.

— National Security Strategy, Sep 2002
3

operations assets, among other things. 

The Objective Force will comprise lighter but highly

lethal, mobile and survivable formations that will arrive in

an area of operations ready to fight and fully synchronized

with other elements of the Joint Force. Objective Force

operations will require superior situational understanding

and a common operational picture to focus forces against

critical enemy capabilities, real-time imagery to detect and

locate identified decisive points, the real-time targeting data

necessary for attack, and responsive long haul communications for effective command and control. The physical

range and field-of-view limitations of surface-based command, control, communications and computer intelligence,

surveillance and reconnaissance systems mean that the

Objective Force will rely on enhanced mid- to far-term

capabilities provided by Space and overhead platforms. 

Pre-deployed and organic Space assets will also lighten

the load of deploying forces by allowing many of the traditional planning and logistical tasks of main and rear command posts to be accomplished from home station. As

forces deploy, Space systems integrated with computer network operations and Space negation capabilities will provide

complete real-time battlespace awareness, assured global

communications, en route mission planning and rehearsal

capabilities, and assist in countering adversary anti-access

strategies. 

Today and in the near term, global position, navigation

and timing capabilities provided by the Global Positioning

System (GPS) represent our sole method of providing

force-wide common location and timing essential for simultaneous, distributed operations (knowing where you are,

where your buddy is and where the adversary is). GPS provides the “common grid” for precision engagement and,

through systems such as Grenadier BRAT and its follow-on,

linked to the maneuver force via the Blue Force Tracking

Mission Management Center, it enables effective beyondline-of-sight blue force tracking of friendly land forces.

However, as GPS technology proliferates, so will the ability

to interfere with or disrupt the signal and receivers. Midand far-term upgrades of the GPS and blue force tracking

systems must include anti-jam and anti-spoof modes to

safeguard this capability.

The Defense Support Program satellites today, and the

mid-term fielding of the Space-Based Infra-Red System,

provide critical, time-sensitive early warning of missile

attack. Launch detection data provided by these satellites

allows the in-theater Joint Tactical Ground Station and its

follow-on, the Mobile Multi-Mission Processor, to calculate

missile launch points, trajectories and predicted impact

points and times, and selectively warn potentially affected

units and areas. In the far term, the Space-Based Radar will

provide moving target indications from Space to track

adversary vehicles, which when combined with highly accurate digital terrain elevation data will support precision

attack of critical targets and nodes. Direct downlink will

make timely, assured receipt of this and other information

available to the tactical commander where and when he

needs it.

As the Army grows more reliant on force enhancement

capabilities, our vulnerability also increases. Rapid growth in

commercial and international Space capabilities increases

potential adversaries’ ability to monitor U.S. forces and

potentially negate U.S. advantages in Space. Space control

takes on increased significance for land forces by ensuring

dominant access to Space capabilities. Space control —

whether accomplished through hardening of our own

assets, direct attack of enemy Space capabilities by kinetic or

directed energy weapons, electronic disruption or denial of

his use of Space systems, or by other means — is how

Space superiority will be gained and maintained ensuring

friendly forces the use of Space while denying it to the

enemy.

Space operations and capabilities are inextricably linked

with and dependent upon supporting infrastructure. The

maintenance and upgrade of Space infrastructure includes

improvements to fixed site facilities such as permanent

satellite communications ground stations, the Blue Force

Tracking Mission Management Center and the Regional

Satellite Support Centers. This infrastructure also supports

Force enhancement embodies the Warfighter’s use of

Space. It provides “value-added” to battlefield functions,

enabling the land force to accomplish its terrestrial 

mission. As the Objective Force matures, the Army will

ensure that upgrades to force enhancement capabilities

address Objective Force requirements.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Key Enabler, page 44)
n April 2002, Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command

(SMDC) participated in the third Army Transformation War

Game (ATWG) at the Army War College. These wargames

have highlighted the importance of including “Space play”

so that commanders understand how Space enables their

ability to conduct full spectrum military operations. We

have demonstrated that it is increasingly important to have

Space-smart soldiers participating with fellow warfighters in

wargames such as the ATWG, as well as exercises and

experiments. Our participation in this wargame provided

valuable insights into the growing role of Space operations

across our transforming Army.

Insights from the ATWG indicate that transformation

cannot succeed without leveraging Space capabilities. The

Objective Force must see, understand, and act first — then

finish decisively. Space systems, as a part of the Joint

Information Architecture, will play a significant role in providing the requisite capabilities outlined in the battle command, precision fires, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, dominant maneuver, and sustainment concepts. 

LTC Dave Reese, SMDC Force Development and

Integration Center, and I wrote an article on the ATWG for

publication in the February 2003 issue of Army Magazine.

The insights in the Space operations arena are instructive

enough that I want you to know about them, especially in

light of our recent Army Space support to Operation Iraqi

Freedom. Our insights at the ATWG will form the basis

for investigating lessons learned. Below is an abbreviated

version of that article focusing on Space operations. I

encourage you to read the full article to understand the

insights into Integrated Missile Defense and Information

Operations.

Background

TRADOC designed ATWG to examine future global

conflict and assess the strategic value of land power in a

Joint, combined, and interagency context. ATWG also

looked closely at the strategic role of the Army’s postTransformation, or Objective Force, units in a Joint context.

In the game’s strategic setting, U.S. forces were extended

across a series of conflicts around the world, including the

U.S. homeland. The game’s scenario was set in the 2019-

2020 timeframe — a period when proliferation of and

access to Space technologies and capabilities among our

potential adversaries is inevitable. Accordingly, aspects of

these threats — and our ability to counter them — were

incorporated into the game’s design. 

Realizing Desired Objective Force

Characteristics

We want the Army’s Objective Force of the future to be

strategically responsive, deployable, agile, versatile, lethal,

survivable, and sustainable. Attaining these qualities

requires a thorough examination of the required technological, doctrinal, and organizational changes, as well as their

interdependencies and political impacts. ATWG looked

closely at these Objective Force concepts. Our conclusion

was that decision superiority, much of it Space-enabled, will

play a key role in realizing required Objective Force capabilities. Objective Force units will be smaller, lighter, and faster

than their legacy force counterparts. Such characteristics are

a prerequisite to a more deployable, agile, and sustainable

force. Further, timely access to key information can multiply the effectiveness of Objective Force units, enabling

them to become more lethal and survivable. For example,

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) information helps us to see, understand, and act first within the

battlespace. Reliable computer networks that process and

carry this information provide Objective Force units with a

remote processing and reachback capability that enables

smaller, more versatile forces that we can sustain more easily. Conversely, by denying enemy access to information and

sensors we significantly reduce his capabilities.

Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Army Transformation

War Game: 

Insights Concerning Space

Operations

I

By BG Richard V. Geraci

DCG Column

4

BG Richard V. Geraci,

Deputy Commanding

General for Operations,

United States Army

Space & Missile Defense

Command/Deputy

Commanding General,

United States Army

Space Command.
5

Space Operations and the Objective Force

The ATWG made clear that achieving Objective Force

characteristics is highly dependent on Space operations.

Space operations provide ISR, missile warning, position,

navigation, and timing services, as well as communications,

weather prediction, and Space control capabilities to the

Objective Force. Space-based ISR is often the primary

source of ISR information available during pre-hostility,

early entry, or transition phases of operations. Our missile

warning systems rely on Space-based sensors to detect

launches and provide information necessary for friendly

force warning and queuing radars of our air defense

weapon systems. The Global Positioning System (GPS)

provides information that enables accurate delivery of precision-guided munitions, tracking of friendly force locations, and a variety of other position, navigation, and timing-dependent capabilities. Satellite communications enable

direct communications to remote areas, wide area or

focused broadcast options, and a large capacity for message

traffic, all without the need for ground relays. Weather satellites provide information critical to operational planning.

Finally, Space control ensures our unimpeded access to

Space systems while we simultaneously maintain a capability to selectively deny our adversaries use of, and access to

Space.

ATWG Insights

Our Army cannot achieve the goals of Army

Transformation without understanding Space operations

and leveraging the capabilities they bring to the fight. Army

requirements must be identified and integrated into the

National Security Space priorities and receive appropriate

funding.

As we plan a multi-decade transformation effort, other

factors must be considered. First, our adversaries will eventually develop capabilities to counter or emulate many of

our Space systems. Technology continues to advance, making access to these systems (and ways to counter them)

more widely available. Commercial concerns today make a

wide variety of Space-based imagery and communication

services available to anyone able to pay for them. Second,

our projected investments in Space may not be sufficient to

enable the Objective Force portrayed in ATWG’s 2020 scenario. Current acquisition programs are being designed to

produce only a small number of Space control equipment

suites by 2020. 

Our experience at ATWG suggests that such constrained numbers will severely hamper our ability to conduct

simultaneous Space control operations across large geographic areas in support of multiple combatant commanders. Other insights of note follow.

Space-Based ISR

Space-based ISR is a prerequisite to domination of the

battlespace by the Objective Force. In many areas of the

world, Space-based ISR will serve as the primary “eyes and

ears” of future combatant commanders — particularly during early entry and other “transition” operations or periods.

Satellite constellations of the Objective Force era will provide commanders with the all-weather, 24/7 view of the

battlespace that commanders need to enhance situational

awareness and optimize our chances for success.

Employing Elements of National Power

Space capabilities are critical to effectively employing all

elements of national power. We’ve just discussed the

importance of Space-based ISR to our military. The advantages of being able to monitor activities of our adversaries,

particularly during pre-hostility periods, can be equally

important to our political leadership and State Department.

Similarly, our Commerce and Treasury Department officials

can make more informed decisions with the aid of Spacebased ISR related to crops, weather, port activity, or the staGiven that many of our adversaries will gain access to

similar capabilities over time, we must be forward 

thinking about the need to plan and invest adequately in

Army Space capabilities.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Army Transformation War Game, page 44)
ow many of us who were in the Army about 10 years ago

and are now reading this Army Space Journal would have

ever considered the theme “the Role of Space in the Army

Transformation” that marks this edition? 

Transformation is not new for the Army. Most of us

have experienced new equipment or new organizations.

The role of the reserve components has changed significantly. But the key element of this theme is how Space contributes to transformation and will play an even bigger role

than it does now in our great Army. 

How the Army can see first, understand first, act first,

and finish decisively are challenging requirements.

We need thoughts, ideas and most importantly, afteraction reports from the field. What works? What needs to

be lighter, smaller and more rigid? What will make the information and Space products easier to request and obtain? 

Your input is the key to developing the right Space

equipment and organizations to meet those requirements.

Units of Employment and Units of Action are being

designed with Space-based capabilities in mind. Army

Space Command will be activated as a table of organization

and elements (TOE) brigade with TOE battalions.

A Ground-based Missile Defense brigade is also standing up this year in U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command. Additional positions for Army Space

Operations Officers are being considered throughout the

Army. Army Space Support Teams are being modernized

and Space Support Elements are in planning the stages. The

Joint Tactical Ground Station will be replaced with MultiMission Mobile Processor. The Objective Force will be a

superb fighting force using Space to win quickly and decisively. Modernization is ongoing right now for the Army.

Sounds good doesn’t it? Well, it is to a great extent.

However, the path is long and uphill for us in the Army

Space field. We must all help educate and train the Army

and other Services in what we are capable of doing today.

Many Department of Defense personnel don’t know what

capabilities we have or are planning. Some don’t know we

have Space Operations Officers in all of the corps now. So

what are we doing to educate the community on Army

Space?

Let’s tell them about our efforts to institutionalize a

Space Planning Process in the Army that will capture all of

the Space programs, regardless of which proponent is doing

the work. This will enable the Army leadership to quickly

understand what future Space technologies the Army will

use to see, understand, act and finish decisively. 

We have a new combatant commander, Northern

Command, to support in homeland defense. Defending the

homeland is the Army’s top priority. Space support and

new technologies to detect weapons of mass destruction are

necessary. Space assets might be the answer to this overwhelming problem. Civilian agencies will certainly have better information and situational awareness with our Space

assistance. Another transformation activity where Army

Space is very important is U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command becoming the Army component to U.S.

Strategic Command. Don’t think that just because this new

mission is being finalized this year that the work is over!

This is an effort the Army must work on for years to come.

Global Strike and information operations are just two pieces

of this new mission area recently given to U.S. Strategic

Command where Army will play increasingly larger roles. If

this doesn’t get you excited enough, just reading the article

by Jeffrey Becker and Gary Trinkle will! 

Rail guns, slingatron, and Space elevators might seem a

little “Star Wars” but are serious ideas to future Space officers. Transformation includes new doctrine, organizations,

and facilities, as well as, materiel solutions. So the bottom

line ... send your great ideas, concepts and experience to us

in the Force Development Integration Center. Our

wargames are playing scenarios in 2015 and beyond.

Perhaps a slingatron will be key to success! Secure the High

Ground!

Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

The View From (Army)

Space ...

How Space Contributes to Transformation

H

By COL Glen C. Collins Jr.

FDIC Column

6
7

iven two options for eating hot dogs at lunch, we can

take the refined route and nibble on them one bite at a

time. Or, we can emulate Japanese professional speedeater Takeru “The Tsunami” Kobayashi, who crammed

50 hot dogs down his throat in 12 minutes at a competitive-eating contest last July at New York’s Coney

Island.

Kobayashi’s maneuver clearly repels us. And yet,

when it comes to stuffing huge amounts of data into

the e-mails we send, we’re imitating Kobayashi’s feat —

except that the 113-pound self-proclaimed “Tsunami”

kept his meal down. Our huge e-mail attachments so

upset the flow of available bandwidth, that our computer networks swiftly regurgitate them back at us as

undeliverable.

Bandwidth, of course, is just a fancy way of describing how fast information can be carried through a

phone line, cable line, satellite feed, and so on. When

we choke our bandwidth with the file equivalent of 50

hot dogs, we clog, and in some cases, obstruct, our systems. In contrast, we can easily swallow a bite of one

hot dog better than we can 50 barely chewed ones at

the same time.

This is no idle consideration. Soldiers deploying

today need every bit of bandwidth for their networkcentric operations. 

The old method of attaching large files to an e-mail

and broadcasting it via sequential chain-mail to entire

garrisons, major commands or the Army-wide work

force requires huge chunks of bandwidth and brings

networks and in-boxes to a crawl. Unless we do our

part to preserve the smooth operation of the Army’s

bandwidth, we will be putting our warfighters’ security

and success at risk.

Fortunately, there’s an easy fix, simply by restricting

what we send out as attachments to e-mail.

Instead of e-mailing large files, such as slide charts,

announcement flyers and video clips, among others, we

should simply upload them to a collaboration area on

Army Knowledge Online, the Army Portal located at

www.us.army.mil. 

Once posted on AKO, we can send out to all concerned a brief AKO message that contains a link to the

item. This way, instead of sending millions of bytes of

data, only a few thousand are sent.

This AKO method minimizes the burden on bandwidth, networks and in-boxes, and allows us to use limited bandwidth for those essential operational-mission

requirements. It also eliminates the need for thousands

of people to resend and/or store the same large files

on their computers’ hard drives or fileservers all over

the Army.

That’s because AKO’s Knowledge Collaboration

Center, or KCC, essentially is now your hard drive,

accessible to the whole Army, and with just one copy

on one server. 

The KCC areas can also be limited to just a few persons that you select yourself. AKO has a full set of

self-teaching tutorials, and we’ve backed it up with

round-the-clock help-desk support.

The Army has invested heavily in the AKO portal

and portal technology. We believe the KCC offers

everyone a smarter and better way to achieve the same

end results, while enabling all to be good stewards of

limited bandwidth resources.

So, do your part. Stop sending large enclosures via

e-mail and start using the AKO portal to the maximum.

Be a bandwidth nibbler, not a Kobayashi.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

G

Commentary: 

Be a bandwidth nibbler,

not a Kobayashi

By LTG Peter Cuviello

LTG Peter Cuviello is the Army’s Chief Information Officer/G-6. He

received his Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science from

Canisius College and his Master’s in Business Administration

(Operations Research and Systems Analysis) from the Florida

Institute of Technology.
rigadier General (retired) Robert Lee Stewart, astronaut

and Space pioneer famous for being one of the first

two men to walk untethered in Space, has a long list of

other achievements that also mark him as a pioneer,

most notably being the test pilot who assisted in bringing the Apache helicopter into the Army inventory.

Retired from the Army, he spoke to Army Space

Journal’s MAJ Laura Kenney at his home in Woodland

Park, Colo. He spoke about the role of Space in current

events, the tragedy of the Space Shuttle Columbia and

how Space will assist in Army Transformation. 

Transformation of any sort requires people who

aren’t afraid to step out, to take chances, who possess the pioneer spirit. Anyone who’s worn the title

of astronaut definitely fits that description. But

you’ve had some other job descriptions that mark

you as a pioneer, General. Test pilot, Vietnam veteran and combat helicopter pilot. Can you tell us

what first drew you to flight, first in the air and

then in Space?

Actually, I think the primary attraction for me has

always been, first and foremost, wanting to be a soldier.

Everything else came from that. My whole family had

been military, and my father was a private first class

during WWII, as an artilleryman. At the age of 11, I

was camping out with the National Guard during summer camp, serving as their mess boy.

Flying — well, that’s the way I worked my way

through college. I attended ROTC at the University of

Southern Mississippi. While there, I flew as a commercial pilot and as an instructor. About the only thing I

didn’t do was crop dusting. By the time I joined the

Army, I had over 2,000 hours of flying, and they STILL

branched me Air Defense Artillery. I didn’t get

branched Aviation until a year and a half later.

Flight was always something that appealed to me.

But even though I read science fiction as a kid, and still

enjoy a Star Wars movie, I see those as fantasy. There

are enough real things to do in Space to make it fascinating.

Of all the many hats you’ve worn, Vietnam pilot,

Air Defense Artilleryman, the test pilot who

brought the Apache into the Army inventory, astronaut, and general officer, which one was the most

personally rewarding, and why?

Hands down, my service in Vietnam was the most

personally satisfying. To be in combat with a bunch of

guys that you feel closer to than anyone else in the

world ... and then to lead those men into combat —

now THAT’S responsibility. I always joke that I had

more responsibility as a gun platoon leader/first lieutenant than I did as a general officer.

What was it like, to be testing a totally new piece of

equipment (the Apache) and are you proud of its

performance since it became the combat helicopter of choice?

I’d call my efforts with the Apache the most gratifying of my military experiences. Flying an awesome

machine like that before it was housebroken? The

Apache is the best-armed helicopter in the world —

nothing else even comes close.

8 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Yesterday’s Pioneer

BG Robert Stewart

U.S. Army retired

B

Space Pioneer
What drew you to Space and how and when did you

decide to become an astronaut?

That’s actually kind of funny. It wasn’t as if I’d been

planning and praying for it all my life. I just happened

to notice what was basically an advertisement seeking

astronauts on the bulletin board at Edwards Air Force

Base. That was back in 1977. I applied, and ... got the

job.

What role do you see Space playing in current

operations, such as war with Iraq?

I know that we’ve got some very sophisticated hardware, but I’m not privy to exactly what we have now. I

do know that we have excellent strategic level intelligence due to Space assets. Other Space-based or related products will improve our ability to move, shoot and

communicate, all critical functions of the Army. The

Global Positioning System is a phenomenal benefit to

be used in a multitude of ways, not least in helping us

make friendly fire casualties a thing of the past. In the

first Gulf War, we won a stunning tactical victory —

but not a war. I’d like to see us win the war, and Space

and the Army will play crucial roles in that.

And in the future? Are there boundaries? What

sort of future do you see for the Army’s role in

Space?

Well, in one sense, the old cliche’ of “the sky’s the

limit” is true, because the potential is enormous, but in

others, well, boundaries are set by what is realistically

possible. By that I mean, I can envision colonizing

Mars, building an underground outpost for civilization,

but doubt we’ll go past our own solar system, at least

not for hundreds of years, because the means to do so

have not yet been invented. It would require a fundamental breakthrough in physics. But bringing it in closer, Space has vast potential. Anything that helps the

Army move, shoot and communicate, as I said before,

is a good thing, and Space can aid us enormously there.

But do I see actual battles taking place in Space? No, I

(smiling) think that’s an Air Force vision. We live on

Earth, and that’s what matters to us as human beings.

And anything worth fighting for, no matter how sophisticated we get, requires boots on the ground, which is

where the Army comes in.

To narrow the focus of the last question, do you

envision a role for the enlisted soldier in Space?

You’ve worked with CW3 Tom Hennen, the first

warrant officer in Space ... when do you think the

first enlisted astronaut could “come on board?”

That was actually a vision of mine, to bring an

enlisted photo interpreter with us. I wanted to see an

enlisted man wearing astronaut wings — and it will

happen, but can’t give you a timeline.

Was your untethered walk the most exciting thing

you accomplished in Space? If not, why, and what

was?

I’d have to say the most exciting event in going to

Space is always the liftoff. Nothing beats that. But the

walk was definitely a thrill. Another astronaut, John

Young, who was, without a doubt, known throughout

his distinguished career as a daredevil almost without

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 9
10 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

peer, actually said to me “That (my untethered walk) was the

craziest and bravest thing I’ve ever seen.” I looked at it that, as

a test pilot, I was now flying higher and faster than I’d ever

flown before.

In your opinion, why hasn’t, to date, an Army astronaut

piloted the Shuttle?

Let’s just leave it at — politics. But I do think that NASA

got a kick out of asking me, “the helicopter pilot” as they called

me, to write the flight re-entry manual for the shuttle, instead of

any of the jet pilots. I was simply chosen because I was the test

pilot with the most experience.

And piggybacking on that last question ... as you know,

and serve as one of the many illustrious examples of, the

Army is very proud of its lineage as being “first in Space.”

Now, when most people hear the phrase, “Army Space,”

their first reaction is “Huh, the Army in Space? The Army

is about ‘ground’ warfare, what’s it doing in Space?” Does

this mean we’ve lost that edge, given it up to the Air Force,

or is this just a problem of perception, are we still as valid

now as we were when you took that historic trip outside the

Challenger in 1984?

“First in Space” is right. We have the lineage going all the

way back, as you know. But, I think we lost ‘ground’ in Space

during Vietnam. We were simply too busy. Congress has always

leaned toward the Air Force for the “high tech” aspect, and,

truthfully, we are “muddy boots.” But I’ll remind you that the

rocket that put men on the Moon was an Army rocket, and, if

not for political reasons, we, the Army, could have beaten the

Russians into Space. We were ready before Sputnik. We did

beat out both Navy and Air Force with a rocket that worked. 

As for today, of course we’re viable. The best “muddy

boots” in the world, made even faster and more efficient with

Space technology? Unbeatable. 

When people think about pioneers today, those pioneers

wear the faces of those lost on the Columbia. That must

have been a very hard day for you, as indeed it was for the

nation and world. We know you can’t speculate about possible causes of the disaster, although you’ve flown on two

shuttle missions yourself, with STS 41-B (Challenger) and

the STS-51J, Atlantis’ first flight, as well as having written

the manual for flight re-entry control procedures, but can

you tell us whether you foresee a future for the Space shuttle as it is configured today, and, overall, for a Space exploration program?

The Space shuttle needs to be retired. It’s done great things,

but it’s time to move on. NASA should be thinking about the

exploration of Space. We should already have something selfsustaining on the Moon, as practice for Mars. Replace the shuttle with something more sophisticated, such as a single stage, reusable orbiter, or even let that part of the program go commercial. 

What words would you say to young people considering a

future as an astronaut? Or any possible career involving

Space? We know your daughters taught at the U.S. Space

Camp, which issued a statement after the Columbia disaster to the effect that “the mission continues, the mission of

preparing the scientists, explorers and leaders of the

future.” Would you still recommend such a future to

today’s young person?

It’s funny, one of my daughters actually didn’t really know

much about my career until she heard about it in Space Camp.

In Houston, astronauts (smiling) were a dime a dozen, and I

guess we never went into it much at home. But, I think the

Space Camp has a great program. I would certainly encourage

young people to consider it, but, instead of targeting a career as

an astronaut, I would rather say that they should prepare themselves to be capable, so that if that day ever comes when you see

a notice on the bulletin board... you can play your part. There

isn’t enough interest in science or math today, which is sad. I’d

say the most important characteristic for anyone who has

dreams of Space is — to be a self-starter. Everything else would

follow from that. Again, the sky’s the limit.

Members of STS-41B, front, l-r, Vance D. Brand, Robert L.

Gibson, back row, l-r, Robert Stewart, Ronald McNair, a member

of the disastrous Challenger flight, and Bruce McCandless.
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 11

BG (Ret.) Robert Stewart during an

interview at his mountain home in

Colorado Springs, Colo. 

Photos by SFC Dennis Beebe

BELOW: Then LTC Robert Stewart makes his historic space walk during the 1984

Challenger space shuttle mission. Using the Manned Maneuvering Unit, he and

Navy CAPT Bruce McCandless II became the first two human beings to ‘walk’

untethered in Space. The MMU utilized small nitrogen-gas jets to maneuver,

enabling the astronauts to venture approximately 300 feet from the main ship.

Photo courtesy NASA
hen the bombs fell on Pearl Harbor in 1941, they shattered more than the silence of a peaceful Sunday morning; they destroyed the illusion that U.S. military forces

were safe at home. During the three and a half years

that followed, a world war transformed the U.S. armed

forces into a first-rate military. The urgency of fighting

a global conflict propelled the genius of Americans to

make this transformation a reality. 

In a similar manner, September 11th shattered the

illusion that Americans are safe at home. Today, we have

the same imperative to transform our military forces in

order to defeat the new threats of the 21st century and

protect our nation. Transformation cannot wait — it

must take place as we wage the War on Terrorism.

President Bush summed up this challenge: “It’s like

overhauling an engine while driving 80 miles per hour.

Yet we have no choice.”1

If the U.S. Armed Forces are to meet the President’s

expectations, those in uniform must have a common

understanding of what transformation is and what it is

not. Understanding transformation requires appreciating past transformation efforts and the current security

environment. This article does not replace the detailed

description of our approach to transform the Joint

Force found in the new Joint Vision. Instead, it offers

insight into the foundation of transformation and its

corresponding intellectual, cultural and technological

aspects. 

Insight from the Past

The history of the U.S. military is a history of the

nation’s Armed Forces evolving to meet new threats and

opportunities. During the Civil War, Generals Grant

and Lee exploited the telegraph for theaterwide information-sharing and the railroad network to give their

forces theaterwide mobility. During World War I,

General Pershing incorporated the airplane to benefit

U.S. ground maneuver units and gain information on

enemy formations and positions. 

A more contemporary example of transformation is

how President Eisenhower refocused the nation’s

defense establishment as the United States entered the

Cold War. He adopted the New Look strategy to meet

the dual risk of deterring nuclear war and containing

communist expansion. His administration fielded strategic nuclear forces to deter a Soviet nuclear attack on the

U.S. homeland. His administration also developed tactical nuclear forces, like the Army’s Honest John missile,

to counter the Warsaw Pact’s massive armies aimed at

the heart of Europe. For four decades, U.S. military

planning, organization and training focused on this dual

threat of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. As the

threat did not change much, the U.S. military’s mental

agility to anticipate other challenges remained underdeveloped. 

With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of

the Berlin Wall, the U.S. military sought to redefine its

focus and strategy. The Base Force and Bottom-Up

Review of the early 1990s guided U.S. forces away from

the “Fulda Gap” mentality. Defense planning, however,

remained threat driven. U.S. military forces were organized, trained and equipped to handle the task of conducting two nearly simultaneous regional conflicts

against predetermined, conventional, predictable adversaries.

12 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

A Word from the Chairman:

Understanding

Transformation

W

By GEN Richard B. Myers, Chairman

Joint Chiefs of Staff
13

21st Century Security Environment

The 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)

marked a complete departure from Cold War planning.

In this document, the Defense Department articulated

a more sophisticated appreciation of the 21st century

strategic environment, the challenges to U.S. interests,

and what military capabilities are needed. Today, the

threats to U.S. interests go beyond Iraq and North

Korea. During the past decade, political, ethnic, social,

and historical factors have given rise to a range of conflict and crisis — from ethnic fighting to mass starvation to massacres. Disparities in economies, resources

and populations remain powerful motivators for future

intrastate and interstate strife. Likewise, religious and

cultural differences may arise that reflect ancient

hatreds and cause additional crises around the globe. 

Belligerents motivated by this wide array of influences now have access to modern conventional arms

markets, a sophisticated industrial production infrastructure, and advanced communications. Advanced

production capabilities also mean that hostile nations

and agents may have access to weapons of mass

destruction — chemical, biological, radiological, and

nuclear. In addition, the global $3 trillion communications network allows previously isolated groups to communicate instantly on a worldwide scale. It also gives

them access to a wide array of information and intelligence, at little relative cost. The past U.S. monopoly on

the latest and most sophisticated capabilities is gone. 

The current and future security environment is further complicated by the presence of non-state actors

who frequently transcend political borders. As such,

they confound conventional diplomacy. Some of these

non-state organizations are cooperative and sympathetic to U.S. security objectives — such as humanitarian aid

organizations. Others, such as al Qaida and terrorist

organizations, are hostile and directly threaten U.S.

interests. 

In the 2001 QDR, the Defense Department recognized that U.S. defense strategy must emphasize capabilities-based forces to meet such challenges. These

forces must be able to rapidly project forces, and sustain

them, over great distance into inhospitable and adverse

environments. U.S. forces must be capable of rapidly

developing intelligence on enemy capabilities, vulnerabilities, intentions, and centers of gravity. U.S. forces

must be capable of precision engagement. U.S. command-and-control networks must direct dispersed U.S.

and coalition forces to gain massed fires and effects. 

Secretary Rumsfeld summed up the task ahead when

he said the U.S. military must be prepared “to defend

our nation against the unknown, the uncertain, the

unseen, and the unexpected.”2 To meet this broad and

all-encompassing task, America’s Joint team must transform into a capabilities-based force. 

Transformation ... What It Is NOT

First, transformation is not just about technology.

It’s not about wheeled or tracked vehicles, stealthier aircraft, or the types of missiles on submarines. It’s not

about 20th century forces being renamed with 21st century titles. Such approaches risk reducing important

concepts into a budget drill. These mind-sets inspire

Service program managers to declare their program as

“transformational” and therefore safe in the budget

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Chairman, page 48)

Transformation is a process and a mind-set — not a product.

Adopting a transformational mind-set means applying 

current fielded capabilities — in the current environment —

to accomplish any assigned mission. In today’s fluid and

dynamic world, no Service’s core competencies can accomplish the mission alone. Transformation is about creating

Joint competencies from the separate Service capabilities. 
14 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

The Role of

Space in Army

Transformation

By Michael Howard,

Managing Editor

Theme Article
15

n the 21st century, the battlefield will extend vertically into the region of Space. Achieving Space

dominance will be critical to gaining and maintaining the information superiority required for

the advanced full-spectrum operations described

in the Army Objective Force Concept (TRADOC

Pamphlet 525-3-0). The Concept for Space

Operations in Support of the Objective Force

(TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-14) supports and

enables the Army’s vision described in the

Objective Force concept. The Space operational

concept is intended to focus the Army’s effort to

exploit the high ground of Space in its contribution to land forces and the Joint dominance of

this dimension.

Army Space operations will focus on five

essential tasks to ensure the Objective Force will

successfully achieve decisive victory. These

essential tasks are:

· Support increased deployability and reduced

theater footprint.

· Achieve situational understanding “Off the

Ramp” during entry operations.

· Support precision maneuver, fires, sustainment and information.

· Enable continuous information and decision superiority.

· Protect the force during all phases of the

operation.

Seamlessness will be the signature characteristic of well-integrated Space and land force operations. From the user perspective, Space support

must be reliable, timely and conducted with minimal operational friction. During operations at

the tactical or operational level, undue delays or

discontinuities will quickly make Space support

irrelevant. For this reason, the central thrust of

Army Space operations is to reduce technical and

procedural seams in the system of systems. In

effect, many of the actions outlined here will

bridge, bypass or remove seams that would otherwise lessen or nullify the effectiveness of Space

support to land force operations.

The Army has been, is and will continue to be

a prominent player on the Joint Space team.

Preparations are now under way to develop new

Army contributions to the Space surveillance and

negation functions of Space control operations.

Army forces will also provide support to Space

forces, such as those conducting Space satellite

control operations. Some of this support will be

tied to the Army’s role in homeland security with

an emphasis on global missile defense operations. 

This concept also touches on several advanced

Space operations for the short- to mid-term.

Space control capabilities to enhance information

operations will continue to be a high priority.

Procedures to enable direct tasking of satellites

by tactical commanders and expanded employment of direct downlinks from satellites to tactical users will remain an ongoing initiative. In the

long-term, this capability will be achieved

through the global information grid. 

The infusion of Functional Area 40 Space

Operations Officers into existing headquarters

will ensure that current and future Space force

enhancement tools and products are integrated

into Objective Force operations. Space awareness

and analysis provide a necessary combat multiplier to achieve information superiority. Whether at

home or abroad, short- or long-term, Army

Space operations will be consistent with the

Army’s responsibility to conduct prompt and sustained land combat to win the nation’s wars. 

As the Army moves forward in its transformation and achieves Objective Force qualities, we

must ensure, in all our mission areas, that we are

truly “transformational” and not just “reforming.” The words of J.F.C. Fuller, expressed in the

early 1930s, should serve as a constant reminder:

“Rather than refighting the last war, we should

instead ask, ‘Given an emerging technology, how

can we fight war more rationally?’”

I

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal
he Secretary of Defense has identified the strengthening

of Joint Warfighting capabilities and the transformation

of Joint forces as among his top priorities. United States

Joint Forces Command is dedicated to providing Joint

context for Service-developed capabilities and to exploring transformative military capabilities. Recently, Joint

Force Command’s Joint Experimentation Directorate (J9)

completed a study that is especially relevant to Space

operators in the Army and throughout the other Services.

This analysis, titled “Space Access as a Critical Enabler for

Future Joint Warfighting” examines Space lift requirements for the future Joint force and considers alternatives

to current chemical propulsion Space access strategies.

Project Alpha was established by Joint

Experimentation as a “rapid analysis” group designed to

scout the future and identify high-impact ideas in the area

of Joint force transformation. The ideas and technologies examined by the Project Alpha analysis team are

often unconventional and rarely mature; therefore, the

purpose of a Project Alpha rapid assessment process is to

endorse and refine an idea’s potential rather than to establish an acquisition program. 

This article will highlight the findings of Project

Alpha’s Space access report, including several potential

solutions to the challenging technical problem of placing

militarily significant payloads in orbit. The United States

relies so heavily on a wide range of Space capabilities that

access to the medium must be regarded as a “strategic

center of gravity.” Space planners must ensure that the

correct mix of investments is found so that this reliance

on Space capabilities does not become a vulnerability.

The six-month Project Alpha “Space Access” rapid

assessment process studied current and programmed

Space access capabilities and evaluated whether these

prospective Space lift capabilities will be sufficient to support future Joint operations.

A National Challenge

U.S. strategic-level guidance, including the Space

Commission report, describes Space as a “vital national

interest.” In light of this guidance, a large number of

concepts and technologies that rely on Space or exploit its

unique characteristics have been developed. However,

current launch technology is expensive, less responsive

than it could be, and is often prone to costly errors.

Compounding these drawbacks are unsuccessful reusable

launch vehicle efforts that have been thwarted by the difficulties inherent in mastering the required technologies

and a lack of programmatic and budgetary will. There is

a disconnect between our military’s need to access Space

and our ability to get there cheaply and reliably. Our need

for cheap and reliable access to Space and the lack of

diversity in our systems means that the United States runs

the risk of ceding asymmetric Space advantages by relying

on quarter-billion dollar disposable launch systems. We

do not sink our ships or crash our airplanes after each

mission, yet we regularly do just this with Space launch

vehicles.

Most military concepts of operations — both present

day and experimental — assume the availability of Space

for U.S. purposes. Communications, navigation, intelligence, and — increasingly — force enhancement and

projection capabilities are usually considered an “assumed

future reality” in planning and operations. Indeed, most

future-oriented concepts such as the Army’s Objective

Force “sensor to shooter” grids, “common relevant operational pictures” and “network-centric warfare” all rely on

these significant assumed Space capabilities to be success16 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Don’t Forget “Access”

Space Launch Critical for Military

Transformation

T

By Jeffrey Becker and 

Gary Trinkle

Winter/Spring Theme
17

ful. One cannot assume, however, that the assortment of

government and commercial launching mechanisms

planned to be available in the 2015-2020 timeframe will be

vastly more affordable, reliable, and responsive than those

available today. The Space access report found that

planned Space launch capabilities will rely heavily on the

“evolved expendable launch vehicle” series of boosters

to provide incremental improvements over today’s capabilities. However, many concepts for Space force

enhancement, Space control, and Space force application

often rely on assumptions of vastly better Space access

capabilities than the expendable launch vehicle program

can provide. 

Growing U.S. reliance on reliable access to Space must

be squared with the fact that, in many ways, the current

model for staged, disposable chemical propulsion rockets

(such as the evolved expendable launch vehicle) has

reached near-peak efficiencies. The Project Alpha Space

access study found that current U.S. orbital access strategies should better accommodate the examination and

development of alternatives to chemical rockets as the

single method to reach orbit and that alternative Space

launch capabilities should be given larger prominence in

developmental efforts and experimentation venues.

To illustrate the wide range of alternative Space access

capabilities, the rapid assessment process looked at five

representative scientific initiatives in this area. The five

alternatives were designed not as prescriptive recommendations, but rather to exemplify the varying stages of

maturity and scientific complexity of ideas that exist outside of the current launch paradigm. Some of these ideas

make claims so radical and revolutionary as to require

extraordinary evidence if they are to be implemented.

Advocates of transformative military change, however,

are not doing their jobs if radical, yet plausible ideas

remain unexamined. Indeed, today’s unlikely capability

may be tomorrow’s assumed reality. The Project Alpha

Space access report began the process of examining some

of the revolutionary orbital access concepts that are

under consideration in advanced technology labs around

the world.

Alternative Space Access Capabilities

Reusable Exo-atmospheric Deployment

Future warfighting concepts, including the Army’s

Objective Force, emphasize small, highly dispersed, yet

interconnected units to minimize vulnerability, increase

flexibility, and respond rapidly to unpredictable and

changing situations. Current Space architectures, however, often rely on large, expensive single boosters to loft

satellites. These large expendables may never allow the

United States to achieve the responsive launch capabilities

that future military operations will require. One solution

to this issue is to rely on larger numbers of mini-satellites,

micro-satellites, and other smaller satellites launched from

specialized aircraft capable of exo-atmospheric flight.

The use of advanced reusable aircraft is a relatively

straightforward method to achieve more responsive Space

access by a hybridization of reusable and expendable

vehicles designed to achieve orbit for small, yet highly

capable payloads. 

As depicted in Figure 1, one Defense Advanced

Research Projects Agency technology initiative being

studied is the efficiencies gained in cost to orbit when a

very high-speed aircraft “zooms” to exo-atmospheric altitudes, then releases a small rocket and payload that burns

as a second stage to place the small payload in orbit. A

(See Don’t Forget “Access”, page 45)

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

Figure 1
he Army’s Objective Force is designed from the ground up

to be part of the Joint, interagency and multi-national team

in support of rapid deployment and operations against a

range of threats, including defense of the homeland. The

Objective Force concept and design is nested within the

strategic guidance outlined in the current National Security

Strategy, National Military Strategy, Defense Planning

Guidance, Joint Vision. It supports the larger Department

of Defense Transformation efforts that include the six 2001

quadrennial defense operational goals, the four transformational pillars and the emerging Joint capstone concept of

full spectrum dominance.

The Army will fight in the future operational environment as part of the nation’s Joint military forces. To maintain supremacy in this future environment, the Army must

be more strategically responsive, deployable, agile, versatile,

lethal, survivable and sustainable across the full spectrum of

conflict. These seven characteristics, outlined in the Army

Vision, are the foundation for the development and evolution of Army organizations, its operational concepts,

required capabilities and missions.

The Army must have the ability to generate overmatching combat power by leveraging the synergy of maneuver,

firepower and protection in combination with mentally and

physically prepared leadership that is empowered by superior situational understanding. At the same time, Army forces

must contribute directly to the Joint force capabilities for

dominant maneuver, precision engagement, full dimensional protection and focused logistics. 

The Objective Force will conduct sustained combined

arms air-Space-ground operations within the Joint campaign to establish land force dominance, wrest the initiative

from the enemy, force him to the defensive and defeat him

in detail. Objective Force units achieve their power through

the ability to see first, understand first, act first and finish

decisively at the strategic, operational and tactical levels of

war. Superior situational understanding, based on networked command, control, communication and computer

intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities at

all levels, enables ground commanders to operate on their

terms, at the time, place, and method of their choosing.

The ability to see and understand first must be enabled by

reliable, redundant, networked, jam-resistant, high bandwidth communications; user-friendly information displays;

and advanced tactical decisions.

The Objective Force operating environment is more

complex than today’s environment. There is a growing

requirement for information superiority across battlefield

functional areas. Because the enemy will be less predictable,

operations will be conducted in a distributed manner, in a

360-degree radius, and over non-contiguous uncontrolled

terrain. This complex terrain will place a premium on integrated Space, air and ground sensors, and communications.

Threat forces are knowledgeable of how U.S. forces use

and rely on Space capabilities to support precision engagement and situational awareness and understanding.

Degradation of these Space-based capabilities serve to level

the playing field by degrading situational awareness and

understanding, thereby weakening the system of systems

synergy and slowing the pace of “see first, understand first

and act first.”

Today, the enemy also occupies the high ground and has

access to Space-based capabilities. 

The wide use and increased capability provided by com18 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Space Operations in

Support of the Objective

Force

T

By Dave Carrithers

Winter/Spring Theme
19

mercial Space systems have altered the definition of the

Space environment. Commercial capabilities provide

unique challenges for U.S. forces and represent an alternative for leveling the playing field by the enemy.

As a Space-empowered force, units of employment and

units of action will routinely exploit the overhead constellation of military and civilian Space platforms for intelligence;

focused surveillance; area reconnaissance; long-haul communications; early warning; position, velocity, time, navigation (PVNT); missile defense; weather/terrain/environmental monitoring; and access to the global information

grid. The layered redundancy and improved capabilities

provided through Space will sharply improve development

of situational awareness at all levels, help resolve many current operational challenges (e.g., fleeting target engagement

or limits on range and mobility of terrestrial communications) and strengthen the commander’s confidence in the

knowledge backbone that supports him. The deployed

capability to cross-cue intelligence and nonintelligence platforms will lead to more responsive and comprehensive targeting information. Space enhancement will extend from

national to tactical level (Space to mud) and prove particularly indispensable in immature theaters where existing

communications infrastructure (e.g. absence of fiberoptic

cable networks) may be insufficient or unreliable. Overall,

Space-based capabilities are critical enablers for implementation of the fundamental principles of the unit of employment concept, particularly with respect to achieving information superiority, creating situational awareness and operating within the high tempo, non-contiguous, simultaneous

framework of distributed operations.

Superior knowledge will enable all phases of the land

campaign, beginning with the reliable identification of key

enemy forces and capabilities, and permit the unit of

employment and its subordinate elements to:

· Differentiate and prioritize enemy forces, capabilities

and targets for attack, enabling the unit of employment to

conduct dominant, precision maneuver against those objectives that will have the most overpowering effects on the

enemy’s forces, capabilities and integrity.

· Conduct precise, continuous battle damage assessment.

· Sequence, weight and apportion supporting assets

more effectively with respect to fires/effects, maneuver support and maneuver sustainment.

· Conduct highly synchronized, precise sustaining operations.

· Identify threats and means that must be neutralized to

support operational maneuver by ground or air.

· Fully synchronize dominant maneuver with organic

and external precision fires.

· Enhance force protection at all levels.

The medium of Space is the “high ground” for the

Objective Force. As such, our Joint Space forces must seize

this ground if we are to dominate the terrestrial battlespace.

Army Space operations will focus on five essential tasks to

ensure that the Objective Force successfully achieves decisive victory. Unless achieved, Objective Forces will be

impaired or possibly unsuccessful. These five essential tasks

are:

· Support increased deployability and reduced theater

footprint.

· Enable situational understanding “off the ramp” during entry operations.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal
20 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

· Support precision maneuver, fires, sustainment and information.

· Enable continuous information and

decision superiority.

· Protect the force during all phases of

the operation.

Support increased deployability

and reduced in-theater footprint

Space provides many resources that support increased deployability and which

reduce in-theater footprint. Some of those

resources include Space-based communications that provide global access and Spacebased intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance that enhances situational awareness. Space control capabilities ensure our

freedom of action in Space while denying an

adversary the same capability. Global reach

to the home station operations center and

home station support nodes is critical when

conducting operational maneuver from

strategic distances. 

Enable situational 

understanding “off the ramp”

Understanding all aspects of the battlespace environment becomes increasingly difficult when the threat has the “home-court”

advantage. The threat’s intimate knowledge

of urban areas, infrastructure, cultural and

political areas, and complex terrain are critical enablers to threat operations. These

operations may be further enhanced by the

effects of weather on the physical environment, forces and sensors.

Continuous situational understanding of

the battlespace is the key enabler to offset

the enemy’s home-court advantage. The

information supporting this understanding

must be available in real-time, actionable and

tailorable to meet the unique needs of commanders at all echelons, and create the level

of understanding to enable the Objective

Force to gain the information initiative.

Dynamic re-tasking and direct downlink

capabilities must be coordinated with the

Joint provider to ensure immediate access to

information.

Enable information and 

decision superiority

A CONUS-based Army must have theater access to project combat power.

Deployments may be into areas with poor

infrastructure, limited ports of entry and little host-nation support. Entry operations

will create “gray space” in which Objective

Force commanders will be able to maneuver

freely to fully develop multiple PODs (Points

of debarkation). Threat forces will attempt

to deny access by applying a wide range of

anti-access strategies to include indirect

attacks by asymmetric means and direct

attacks using special purpose and terrorist

forces. Threat forces will attempt to determine what forces will be deployed and when

and where they will enter.

Superior situational understanding of the

battlespace environment prior to deployment enables Objective Force commanders

to deploy the right force mix to establish

multiple entry points. The employment of

Space control systems will enable us to preclude the adversary from determining these

points of entry. Space control systems will

ensure that the deploying force can be protected from space observation from the time

it prepares for deployment until the time it

arrives in theater. Once the force arrives in

theater, mobile Space control systems will

continue to ensure that the adversary is

denied information on friendly force operations from enemy Space assets.

Support precision maneuver,

fires, sustainment and 

information

Adversarial forces will be more difficult

to target as they conduct dispersed operations and use asymmetric responses to

achieve operational objectives. They will also

migrate to urban and complex terrain for

hiding and shielding, disrupting command

and control, and reducing the impact of

Objective Force standoff situational awareness.

To increase friendly force advantage, the

Objective Force commander must be able to

leverage intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and PVNT resources to maneuver

decisively and bring effective fires to bear on

threat forces. Timely and continuous, jamresistant PVNT is key to providing precision

The Objective Force will conduct operations to, from, in and through

Space in support of national interests. This trend will continue; not

only will commanders of Objective Force units be able to better

maneuver in the vertical dimension, but they will also leverage other

Joint combat capabilities hundreds of miles above the Earth.
munitions on target. One-meter accuracy is

the accuracy requirement. Combat identification and timely, accurate and responsive

information are required to ensure that sustainment operations during every operational phase are conducted at the correct

time and place.

Protect the force during all

phases of the operation

Space capabilities play key roles in protecting the force during all operational phases. By attacking the adversary’s Space systems, we deny him the information needed

to detect and attack our forces. Satellite

warning systems will cue

missile defense systems

with the location of

missile launch and trigger passive and active

defense reactions.

In summary, Space is

a medium in the same

way as the air, land or

sea. The Objective

Force will conduct operations to, from, in and

through Space in support of national interests. This trend will

continue; not only will

commanders of

Objective Force units be

able to better maneuver

in the vertical dimension, but they will also leverage other Joint

combat capabilities hundreds of miles above

the Earth.

The Objective Force will be equipped

and trained to routinely exploit Joint Spacebased capabilities. A responsive, integrated

and interoperable command, control, communications and computer intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance system —

C4ISR — that collects, processes and disseminates information in a timely manner is

critical to the development of situational

understanding and awareness on the future

battlefield. 

In short, the Objective Force will be in

position to exploit Space-based capabilities,

while at the same time developing and executing protective measures for Space systems

as well as avoiding absolute dependency on

them. 

Seamlessness will be the signature characteristic of well-integrated air-Spaceground force operations. From the user perspective, Space support must be reliable,

timely and conducted with minimal operational friction. During operations at the tactical or operational level, undue delays or discontinuities will quickly make Space support

irrelevant. For this reason, the central thrust

of Army Space operations is to eliminate

technical and procedural seams in the system

of systems to reduce friction and enhance

information exchange. 

In the far term, this capability will be

achieved through the global information

grid. Space battlespace awareness and Space

analysis provide a combat multiplier required

for achieving information superiority.

Whether at home or abroad, near or far

term, Army Space operations will be consistent with the Army’s responsibility to execute

prompt response, mobilize the Army, conduct forced entry and conduct prompt and

sustained land combat to win the nation’s

wars. 

Procedures to enable direct tasking of

satellites by tactical commanders and

expanded employment of direct downlinks

from satellites to tactical users will remain an

ongoing initiative. Initiatives are under way

to develop new Army contributions to the

Space surveillance and negation functions of

Space control operations. Army forces will

also provide support to Space forces, such as

those conducting satellite control operations.

Some of this support will be tied to the

Army’s role in homeland security with an

emphasis on Army national missile defense

operations. 

The overall contribution of Space control capabilities cannot

be overemphasized.

U.S. dominance in

Space is not guaranteed. Adversaries may

probe our Space systems and segments for

vulnerabilities or they

might alter the Space

environment to disrupt or deny our Space

operations. Space control, a mission shared

by all Services, ensures

freedom of action for

the Objective Force

units and, when directed, denies an adversary

freedom of action in

using Space-based systems and products. 

Finally, Space-based intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities will

often be the first “eyes on target.” The

Army has been, is and will continue to be a

prominent player on the Joint Space team to

“secure the high ground.”

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 21

David Carrithers currently serves as the U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command Liaison to

Training and Doctrine Command. He retired from

the U.S. Army in 1992 after serving in a number of

command and staff positions in the continental U.S.,

Germany, Republic of South Korea, and Republic of

Vietnam. After retirement, he provided support to the

U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command,

Department of the Army, and the National Ground

Intelligence Center in a contractor capacity.
n the Army Space community, several of the stakeholders

such as the signal, intelligence and engineer communities

work their own separate set of priorities. When these priorities reach the Joint community, they arrive piecemeal and

without a single voice that says this is the priority for the

Army in Space. The development of a Space

Modernization Strategy grew out of this need for the Army

Space community to clearly articulate Army priorities for

Space capabilities and how these capabilities will enhance

the ability of the Objective Force across the full spectrum

of future conflicts. The goal of the Space Modernization

Strategy is to identify and prioritize current and future Space

capabilities that will support Objective Force requirements

and provide critical Space support to the Warfighter. The

Objective Force will not only exploit current, planned and

programmed Space systems, but evolving Objective Force

requirements will also help shape the design of future Space

systems and their architectures. 

The Space Modernization Strategy is based on an integrated approach that reflects the commonality of Space

interests and efforts found among Training and Doctrine

Command (TRADOC) proponent schools and centers, and

the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command

(SMDC). The role of SMDC, as the Army’s proponent for

Space, is to integrate research, development and acquisition

efforts, modernization strategies and master plans into a single Army strategy that eliminates duplication of effort in

leveraging Space capabilities and allows the Army Space

community to speak with one voice within the Army as well

as in Joint and national forums.

The foundation of the integrated strategy is constructed

of documents such as the 2002 Army Modernization Plan,

Army Space Master Plan, Objective Force concepts and

goals, Objective Force unit of action, Objective Force unit

of employment, the former CINCSPACE Integrated

Priority List, Defense Planning Guidance, Quadrennial

Defense Review, Army Transformation and TRADOC

seminar wargames, lessons learned and proponent modernization plans. The Space Modernization Strategy was developed through an analysis of key documents that included

the March 2002 draft TRADOC Objective Force

Capabilities, November 2001 CINCSPACE Integrated

Priority List, August 2001 Defense Planning Guidance and

the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review. After analyzing

these documents from a standard mission approach, we

identified the specified and implied Space tasks from each

document and compared them with the Space capabilities

that were projected to reach maturity within the next 10

years. The results were placed into seven Space operational

areas: satellite communications; intelligence, surveillance

and reconnaissance; blue force tracking; missile warning;

Space control: position, navigation and timing; and weather,

terrain and environmental monitoring. 

Space operation areas were then prioritized on the basis

of their support of Joint Space priorities, how they reflected the Space priorities identified in the key documents

named above, and the frequency with which they satisfied

draft TRADOC Objective Force Capabilities. Figure 1 displays how each of the principal inputs to the strategy

addressed the seven Space operation areas. For example,

satellite communications was a high priority in the

Integrated Priority List, Quadrennial Defense Review and

22 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Space Modernization

Strategy

I

By Karen Oliver

Winter/Spring Theme
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 23

Defense Planning Guidance, and satisfied the most draft

TRADOC Objective Force Capabilities. Another example

was the weather, terrain and environmental monitoring

capabilities that enable many of those but were neither

among the then CINCSPACE priorities nor even discussed

in the Quadrennial Review and Defense Planning Guidance.

Figure 1 shows the priorities that resulted from the analysis

were: satellite communications; Space control; intelligence,

surveillance and reconnaissance; missile warning; position,

navigation and timing; blue force tracking; and weather, terrain and environmental monitoring. This part of the analysis gave us the overall priorities for Space. However, in each

one of those mission areas there are several programs under

development. The need to identify what the priority should

be in each of those separate mission areas drove us to conduct a second phase.

The second phase of the analysis involved linking current and projected Space systems or capabilities within each

of the Space operation areas to each of the specified and

implied Space tasks. By applying the same methodology

that was used in the first part of the analysis, the systems

that supported the greatest number of tasks received a higher priority over one that only supported a few tasks.

Detailed analysis charts were developed for each Space

operation area as shown in Figure 2. The charts depict at a

glance the current shortfalls in capabilities, the priority of

each key enabling Space system or capability, the support

they provide to the Objective Force and the considerations

that must be addressed in order to deliver a particular capability to the Objective Force. Because of the number of

stakeholders in the Space community, the recommended

priority is only a suggested listing of enabling systems or

capabilities based upon the SMDC underlying analysis. The

prioritization within any domain is the responsibility of the

individual proponent for that particular domain. 

The results of the analysis for the Space Modernization

Strategy were staffed to other SMDC major subordinate elements; the Army staff G2, G3 and G6; I Corps; and

TRADOC schools and centers. The final results were presented in June 2002 to the TRADOC and SMDC cochaired Space and Missile Defense three-star Senior

Advisory Group, which approved the Space priorities. As

the Army Space community conceives and develops capabilities to support the Interim, Objective and Legacy forces,

the Space Modernization Strategy, through this prioritization process, helps to focus efforts and resources on the

areas that will best enable the transitioning force. The Space

Modernization Strategy is an evolving process that is linked

in change to the annual revisions of its foundation documents. SMDC will continue to ensure that the strategy corresponds to the individual proponent’s requirements and

master plans as well as supporting Joint priorities. SMDC

will update the Space Modernization Strategy in 2003 using

a Space planning process currently under development.

Bob Clarke’s article, “SMDC Moves into Space Planning for

Army Transformation” will discuss this new process. 

Figure 1

FIGURE 2

Karen Oliver currently serves in the U.S. Army Space and

Missile Defense Command, Force Development and Integration

Center in Arlington, Va., managing the training program for the

Multi-Mission Mobile Processor. Her professional experience

includes 22 years at the Army Air Defense Artillery School developing and managing training for Command, Control, Computers,

Communications, and Intelligence systems and Short Range Air

Defense systems.
KINAWA, JAPAN —Have you ever watched

trees torn to shreds by the wind? Or, listened as

the eerily somber voice of the tempest beats down

on buildings without remorse? Look toward the shoreline! Those massive waves assaulting the beaches and

seawalls — their brethren have killed many ...

Give your sympathy to the island of Okinawa, Japan,

for this is its fate. The sub-tropical climate so coveted by homesteading soldiers and airmen grants no

mercy, and can turn from paradise to vicious in

a heart’s breadth. The summer months and

part of autumn bring forth the infamy

and wrath of the western Pacific — the

typhoon.

Bearing the name of a deity in

Micronesian legends,

Typhoon Sinlaku hammered Okinawa from

September 4-6, 2002.

The brunt of the

storm reached

winds in

excess of

120mph. The

impact on both the

military and civilian

communities was terrible.

Dozens of civilian homes

were destroyed. A great deal of

damage was dealt to the island’s

land-based vegetation, as well as coral

reefs just offshore. 

At E Company, 1st Satellite Control

Battalion, the damage was considerable. The

soldiers on duty during the typhoon coined the

affectionate phrase, “the darkest days of BOC,” in

reference to the complete loss of power experienced at

the Buckner Operations Center. Never before had such a

challenge been faced, but the efforts of the soldiers and

leaders of E Co. to stand up to Mother Nature at her raging worst reflected great credit upon the unit, the 1st SATCON and the U.S. Army.

When Sinlaku challenged the resolve of the soldiers

and the mission at the Fort Buckner Defense Satellite

Communications System Operations Center, the soldiers

stood defiantly as they expended every resource available

to combat her fury. 

The first sign of trouble was the loss of commercial

power. Fortunately, the host installation provides infrastructure support, including power, so standby generators were brought online to provide the DSCSOC

Operations Building with its lifeline. 

Unfortunately, the power feeders for the building

eventually failed completely, rendering it useless,

and severing the building’s power input. The

next step was to operate off the

Uninterruptible Power Supply’s Backup

Batteries, which are designed to run for

very short periods of time, less than

30-45 minutes. 

The collected efforts of the

Operations NCO, SSG

Thomas Jefferson, the

Maintenance NCO,

SGT Joshua

Lowell, and the

Operations

Analyst, Frank

Hughes, enabled

the site to extend the

life of the batteries to

more than 11 hours. Any

power-savvy engineer would

marvel at such an accomplishment.

The last joules of energy were consumed by a single piece of equipment.

The Smart Multi-Circuit Terminal (SMCT)

is a unique system designed to provide

Teletype connectivity for Operations Centers,

Earth Terminals and other SATCOM facilities.

Once the DC Bus voltage of the UPS reached its threshold, the soldiers on duty had only their flashlights and

Meals Ready to Eat. The BOC was dark and silent.

During the typhoon, one soldier teamed up with

Lowell to hand crank the 38-foot antenna utilized by the

BOC Auxiliary Satellite Control Terminal, an AN/GSC39B Medium Satellite Terminal. 

SPC Robert Adanitsch volunteered for the unpleasant

chore. Hand-cranking is no easy task. Normally, elec24 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Army Space soldiers battle typhoon in Japan

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

O

By SSG Franklin Barrett, Unit Reporter
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 25

tronic drive motors in the antenna maintain the antenna’s

azimuth and elevation tracking of the satellite, but under

emergency conditions, tracking has to be maintained by

hand-cranking the antenna. Fortunately, he only had to

hand-crank for less than an hour. 

Lowell commented on the teamwork evident throughout the long night. “Everyone was trying to do something,

their part, without getting in anyone else’s way during a

critical moment. Adanitsch really rose to the occasion,

very eager to learn and to help,” he said.

Hughes and Lowell’s focus was on the site itself, restoring power, with Jefferson leading operations under emergency conditions. Without the well-calculated efforts

of these three key personnel, the typhoon would have hindered operations far longer than it did. 

The following day, the powerhouse team coordinated

with a Marine Corps unit on the adjacent base, Camp

Foster, and a 200-kilowatt mobile generator was provided

to get the site back up. Jefferson’s efforts directly contributed to this unique emergency support, and BOC came

back to life. However, it wasn’t until the main feeders were

repaired, and normal power operations restored, that business started returning to normal.

The effects of the typhoon were felt for almost a week

after the typhoon had passed.

Dealing with the challenges of typhoons and the effects

on operations was no new thing for Jefferson. Typhoon

Sinlaku was his third. He lauded the Herculean efforts of

the “typhoon shift,” saying “Good teamwork the whole

time. Everything just clicked.” 

“The soldiers had their heads and hearts in the game,”

he concluded.

For their efforts during those few days of overwhelming

challenges, the soldiers and civilians most closely involved

with the restoration of site power were awarded for their

dedication with letters of achievement and Army

Achievement and Commendation medals.

All personnel involved agreed that the effort was collective, and without the steadfast determination of each

soldier on duty during the typhoon, operations restoration

would not have been as swift.

The mission and operations have long since returned to

normal. Typhoon Sinlaku hit hard, pushing the envelope

of the resources of the unit. But E Co. drives on, and continues to support its fellow DSCSOCs and warfighters

from the front lines to garrison. 

E Co. extends the challenge to Mother Nature: bring

your worst, and we will persevere. 

AMP AS SAYLIYAH, Doha, Qatar — What makes

the Thanksgiving season special? Besides the food that

is ... Often it’s the company you keep, and, for soldiers

of the Joint Tactical Ground Station, Army Space

Command, deployed here from Fort Bliss, Texas — the guest

list definitely made Thanksgiving 2002 one to remember.

Chief of Staff of the Army, GEN Erik K. Shinseki,

topped the list of special persons who came here to share

holiday time with soldiers and sailors. 

Three JTAGS soldiers shared a pre-Thanksgiving lunch

with the general and other soldiers and sailors. But one

JTAGS soldier really hit the jackpot, and was administered

the oath of re-enlistment by the Army’s top general.

SSG Steven Adams, Engagement Control Team Leader,

raised his right hand and repeated the time-honored words to

the stern but friendly face of the man with four stars on his

desert pattern BDU cap.

“I do solemnly swear, that I will support and defend the

Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign

and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the

Thanksgiving in Qatar

brightened for Space 

soldiers by special

visitor

C

(See Thanksgiving, page 47)

By MAJ Laura Kenney, Army Space Command 

and CWO Vernon Dayton, Unit Reporter

Chief of Staff of the Army GEN Eric K. Shinseki, left, administered

the oath of re-enlistment to SSG Steven Adams from the Joint

Tactical Ground Station Central Command. The once-in-a-lifetime

event took place in Qatar, where Adams was deployed and served

as the Engagement Control Team leader. Photo by SFC Robert Wall
KINAWA — Training recently took on a third

dimension for E Company, 1st Satellite Control

Battalion, Army Space Command. It was not

just another routine few hours at the rifle range.

Instead, these soldiers spent a hard-charging day firing, testing on Common Tasks, and, the perennial soldiers’ favorite ... getting “gassed” in the CS chamber.

The unit conducted the action-packed training and

testing day recently, with 27 soldiers participating in

the three-part range. The range, conducted on Camp

Hansen here, qualified soldiers on their assigned

weapons, the M16A2 and tested them in this year’s

Common Tasks. The third “dimension” showed up as

soldiers endured and survived mask-confidence training, an annual requirement for all soldiers.

The planning and coordination effort for the scheduled training involved every aspect of the unit. The

unit’s Training NCO, SGT Robert Nelson, was the

centerpiece for conception and planning. To accomplish the same objectives in the past, the unit would

have had to conduct several large ranges throughout

the year. 

“By having large ranges, there were a lot of soldiers

who were having to wait for their firing line — complaining about how most of their day was spent that

way when they could have been training,” said Nelson.

He thought grouping the ranges would largely eliminate that aspect of the training. With cooperation and

participation from the other NCOs in the unit, Nelson

was able to coordinate the combination of the three

events. 

NCOs from the first sergeant to team leaders

worked together in planning and execution. 

The unit’s Supply NCO, SGT Victor Glaze, handled

all of the logistical needs. SFC Brian Groves,

Operations Platoon Sergeant, and SGT Erica Schaffer,

the unit’s Nuclear, Biological and Chemical NCO,

made it happen at the mask-confidence training. SGT

Michael Stansbury and Groves worked together as

Range Safeties to ensure the success of the M16

Qualification Range, while SFC Brian LaMay oversaw

the event as the NCOIC and Range Safety Officer.

The unit armorers, SGT Christopher Golden and SPC

Daniel Fagan, teamed up to ensure weapons and

ammunition were a “go.”

Vehicle load plans developed by LaMay and his

Support Platoon enabled the advanced party to move

out from Fort Buckner, the unit’s installation, in a

26 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

O

Space unit likes its training ‘cubed’

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

Above, SFC Brian LaMay fires his

assigned weapon, the M16A2, in the

prone-unsupported position; right, SGT

Erica Schaffer inspects soldiers protecting themselves against Nuclear,

Biological and Chemical (NBC) attack;

below, SFC Brian Groves directs SPC

Shamikka Fenstermaker and SPC

John Ames in the Gas Chamber. Photos

by SSG Franklin Barrett

By SSG Franklin Barrett, Unit Reporter
27

timely manner on the morning of November

21, 2002. The soldiers being trained and tested

fell in for accountability and inspection at 5 a.m.

With the bus warmed up, and gear in store, bus

driver SPC Mitchell James began the long drive

to Camp Hansen at 5:35 a.m.

The plan for the day was to integrate all three

of the tasks, weapons

qualification, CTT and

mask confidence. While

the teams of soldiers prepared their land navigation task, each heading

out to a different point

for further testing,

LaMay and his

range cadre set

up Range 15

for the

weapons qualification of everyone present. Meanwhile,

Groves prepared the NBC

chamber with a stout

treatment of CS gas,

and Schaffer and

SGT John

Castine prepared for the

NBC common task

testing (CTT) tasks.

Three checkpoints

were plotted for land navigation, one at the weapons

range, one at the NBC chamber

and one in between. 

At the weapons range, Nelson

tested the soldiers on the Claymore

and communicating in a secure net,

as well as verifying the soldier’s land

navigation checkpoints. 

At the NBC Chamber, Schaffer

and Castine tested soldiers on the

NBC Common Tasks in conjunction

with Groves’ mask confidence training. 

At the third checkpoint, SSG

Daniel Bleifield, the unit’s Personnel

Sergeant, tested soldiers on first-aid

tasks.

In the NBC chamber, always a

‘hot-spot’ for drama, range cadre observed soldiers in mask-confidence training. 

One soldier, SPC Christopher Smithson,

went beyond the call of duty by singing the

Army Song, unmasked, in the CS chamber.

After this unique exhibition of his pride in the

Army, Smithson spent more than 10 minutes

clearing his uniform and

his body of the unpleasantly potent CS gas. 

While the M16 Range

was being prepared, the

gas chamber remained

hot, and this added to the

simultaneous completion

of both. As a result,

“Everyone was in and out

of the chamber, and tested on the CTT tasks,

within the three-hour scheduled time frame,”

Groves said.

By 10:30 a.m., the weapons range was ready

to go “hot,” and the first firing order prepared

for zeroing their weapons. 

On Okinawa, the only ranges available for

Army units are 25 meters, with stationary paper

targets, rather than the familiar 300-meter popup ranges. With the first firing order zeroed,

qualification began. When the smoke cleared

later in the afternoon, four soldiers achieved the

coveted “Expert” qualification. Fourteen soldiers achieved sharpshooter, and five made it as

Marksman. 

“There was a 100-percent first time ‘go’ overall, which is an accomplishment itself,” said

SFC Lester Blandin, the unit’s Operations

Trainer.

With all the soldiers tested in CTT, and

cleared in mask confidence, the last group of

firers completed the range by mid-afternoon. 

For larger units, the combination of these

three events into a one-day range may not seem

like much, but for smaller units like E Co., it

takes a large amount of cooperation and coordination to ensure the success of such a feat. 

“Leadership, especially that of the junior

non-coms, was key to the success of this type of

range,” said Schaffer, with understandable

pride.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

BLAST FROM THE PAST

In February 1984, then LTC Robert Stewart

along with Navy CAPT Bruce McCandless II,

participated in two extravehicular activities

(EVA’s) to conduct first flight evaluations of

the Manned Maneuvering Units during the

STS-41B Challenger mission. These EVA’s 

represented man’s first untethered operations

from a Spacecraft in flight.

See story on page 8.
ORT MEADE, Md. — For a soldier, re-enlisting is

a milestone in his or her career. A soldier has the

option to ask when and where he or she would like

to re-enlist; and if possible, the company will try to coordinate arrangements to make it happen. 

SGT Raul Sheran, who hails from Brooklyn, New

York, asked if he could re-enlist in New York City at the

World Trade Center (WTC) Ground Zero. Since he is

from New York City, the events that occurred on Sept. 11,

2001 touched him and his family personally. He wanted

to dedicate his re-enlistment to the memories of what

happened on that day. He wanted observers to ponder

the reasons why those of us who re-enlist do it — “to

defend these United States against all enemies

foreign or domestic.”

And to protect our loved ones.

On Oct. 18, 2002, Sheran’s wish to re-enlist at Ground

Zero in New York City became a reality. After a great

deal of coordination and planning, 21 Black Dragon soldiers of B Company, 1st Satellite Control Battalion

departed home base, not on a mundane bus, but instead

on two Black Hawk helicopters. The helicopter trip was

made possible with the assistance of Chief Warrant

Officer David Rosser from the Military District of

Washington. Chief Rosser had heard about Sheran’s reenlistment through his stepson, SPC Kenneth Smith,

from our unit.

For many soldiers, this was their first time on a Black

Hawk helicopter. “I would never have thought to be flying in a Black Hawk in my military career,” said SPC

28 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Re-enlistment at 9/11 site ‘a profound 

experience’ for Space soldier

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

F

SGT Raul Sheran, B company, 1st SATCON, is administered the oath of re-enlistment by his company commander, CPT. Thaddeus

Underwood, at a place seared in his heart, as it is in the hearts of all Americans. Sheran took the oath to renew his dedication to country and service at Ground Zero, World Trade Center, New York City, with his fellow soldiers as witnesses. U.S. Army photos

By SFC Mathew Frias, Unit Reporter
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 29

Taito Taylor. For most soldiers, just riding in a Black

Hawk helicopter made the day. But there was more to

come.

For the flight, just going over the landscape from a

height of a couple thousand feet was amazing. But coming into New York City, the view was extraordinary.

Going by the Statue of Liberty and seeing the Manhattan

skyline — for many of us something we’d only seen in

films — was breathtaking. 

We ended up landing at Manhattan Wall Street

Southside Helipad. We had to wait until the FBI director

Louis Freeh departed before we could land. 

“Things happen,” said one of the Black Hawk pilots. 

After disembarking, we proceeded to walk to WTC

Ground Zero. This only took about 10 minutes.

Walking through downtown Manhattan around

the Wall Street area, and seeing the people

around looking at us, the soldiers of B

Company, made us proud to be in the

U.S. Army. 

People left and right were

offering uplifting comments

and asking us where we

came from. We even had

some funny remarks,

such as, “Is that a

bazooka you’re

carrying?” 

We then told

the questioner that

it was the U.S. flag

and our unit flag in a

carrying case — and we

were going to use them for a

re-enlistment ceremony at

Ground Zero.

After arriving at Ground Zero, we

met up with LT Quentin DeMarco of the

Port Authority Police of New York and New

Jersey, who showed us around and gave us an

enlightened briefing about what happened on

Sept. 11, 2001. Most of us were awestruck about what

had happened, even so many months after the terrible

events, especially after seeing the aftermath. 

DeMarco lost some of his comrades during the Sept.

11, 2001 events, and he offers these briefs in their memory. 

After the briefing, DeMarco showed us the temporary

memorial that was set up while the construction to

rebuild was ongoing. 

Sheran re-enlisted near the memorial around 11 a.m. It

was a solemn ceremony, and rightly so.

“I re-enlisted here for the family and friends directly

affected on this day.” 

After the re-enlistment, we had to wait for the helicopters to refuel and to return to the heliport. All of us ended

up going somewhere for lunch. “Where’s the famous

New York City pizza?” asked SSG (P) Richard Gilbert.

We tried looking around but most of us went to a Chinese

fast food restaurant and some went next door to an Irish

restaurant. For the soldiers that went to the Chinese fast

food restaurant, “It was pretty cheap and not bad,”

said SPC Kevin Feimster, “especially for downtown

New York City.” 

After eating lunch, we went walking. Some

of us saw Battery Park and the Statute of

Liberty from the shore and the Wall

Street Bull. Feimster said one of the

street performers was singing a

song, “I’m Gonna tell GOD

when I get home,” which

stuck to our group

through the rest of the

day. Some of us

got to pose on a

New York

City fire

truck. We

even tasted the

hospitality of New

York City showed

when one of the street

vendors — a proud veteran

— gave us a New York City

souvenir for free. 

We returned to home station, having had both a very moving experience,

and a good time afterward. As to my personal feelings about this day...

This is something I will remember all my

life. I was devastated, as all Americans were, by this

attack on our country. To actually go to one of the

sites, and then to be a witness and participant while one

of my fellow soldiers re-dedicated his life to the service of

our nation — it was a profound and moving experience

that will serve as a major highlight of my military career.
30 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

oldiers used to carry notebooks and pens that

they used to record everything around them while

in the field — where they were, the location of

other friendly or enemy forces, type and number of aircraft or ground vehicles, and which way the group was

heading. When the soldiers returned to where the unit

was set up, the information they recorded was transferred up the chain of command.

The modern warfighter may soon carry a

personal digital assistant (PDA) that will

allow him to instantly transmit information such as where he is and what he

sees at his location to a base unit

— the Dismounted Intelligence

Situational Mapboard software on the Low Earth

Orbit Position and Reporting

Device (LEOPARD) coupled

with the Advanced Warfare

Environment (AWarE) software. The

LEOPARD system was developed by the

U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Battle

Lab. The DISM software was developed by

Trident Technology in Fairfax, Va.

This integration of software and hardware was

requested by the Special Operations Command Battle

Lab at Fort Bragg, N.C., as a sensor-to-shooter tool that

will allow warfighters to communicate electronically. It

was tested during the Robin Sage training exercise at

Fort Bragg in late February.

“Robin Sage is the world’s largest unconventional

warfighting exercise,” said MAJ Scott Stearns of the

John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at

Fort Bragg. “It is the culminating event in the Special

Forces qualification course. It’s spread out through

central North Carolina encompassing 14 counties and

7,500 square miles. The students work in an unconventional scenario where they are training to fight and win

a battle.” The exercise has been held quarterly since

1952.

Instructors at the school tested the LEOPARD

device during the conduct of the exercise, allowing students to focus on their mission.

“We are looking at what is going to be the validation

of near-real-time situational awareness within the

unconventional warfare environment,” said LTC

William Banker, chief of the Army Special Operations

Digital Environment Center at Fort Bragg.

“Traditionally our communications have

not been digital unless it was a text message,”

Banker said. “Now we have a digital map

which means it has icons on it that are

placed there for near real-time reporting via a satellite link. We are looking at what that increased

awareness brought about by

near real-time display and

reporting capabilities

can do in terms of increasing combat effectiveness in

the unconventional context.”

The instructors will provide their

impressions of the device after the

exercise concludes. 

“We will use the lessons learned provided

by the instructors to generate the next generation of the system,” Banker said. “We do not

believe the LEOPARD is ready for production. We

are looking at refining the system and improving the

board design.”

LEOPARD is a product of the Battle Lab’s Army

Space Exploitation Demonstration Program which

identifies, tests, experiments, assesses and transitions

emerging Space-based capabilities to the warfighter.

LEOPARD’s target audience is dismounted units whose

mission set causes them to operate beyond the coverage

of typical tactical communications networks, for example, Special Operations Forces, scouts, forward

observers, long-range detachments, etc.)

“LEOPARD provides global, two-way, on-the-move

voice and data communications,” said Jeff Faunce,

chief of the Experiments Division of the Space and

Missile Defense Battle Lab. “It is a lightweight and

rugged, user friendly portable device that also gives the

Special Forces to test electronic battlefield

reporting device during Robin Sage exercise 

S

By Debra Valine, Editor, The Eagle
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 31

soldier the ability to send free text messaging up to 200

characters.” 

LEOPARD provides the ability to track deployed

soldiers, as well as receive real-time information from

the forward battlespace. It consists of two devices: a

hand-held unit carried by soldiers in the field — maybe

one per team — and a base

unit in the tactical operations center. Integrated

into the hand-held unit,

which looks like a PDA

and weighs about 7

pounds, is a global positioning system and an

Iridium satellite telephone. 

“The global positioning system gives the position and when the soldier

makes a call back to the

base station, the base station updates the map it

has of the battlefield,”

said CPT Tim Tubergen

of the SMD Battle Lab —

West in Colorado Springs,

Colo. “The base station

not only records the soldier’s position, it also

records any other information the soldier provides such as enemy location, friendly forces location, obstacles on the ground, etc.”

Another component of LEOPARD, the Viper Laser

Range Finder — similar to binoculars — allows soldiers

using LEOPARD to transmit targeting data. The laser

measures the distance from the soldier to the item being

targeted and the GPS system incorporates those coordinates with the coordinates of the soldier’s location to

transmit accurate information on the target.

“The Laser Range Finder is an integral part of how

Special Forces will use the capability to mark targets or

other items of interest to the mission,” Faunce said.

“We have incorporated a transfer of information

from the base station to the AWarE software,” Tubergen

said. “Anything the soldier has entered is transferred

from the field to the base station. The person monitoring the AWarE will automatically see what the soldier

sees.”

AWarE is a suite of configurable capabilities that

supports the needs of today’s warfighter. These capabilities range from basic administrative functions using

Microsoft Office tools to intelligence preparation of the

battlefield (IPB). Some of the AWarE applications include Force Operations,

Situational Awareness,

Time Sensitive Targeting,

Missile Warning, IPD,

C4ISR (Command, Control,

Communications,

Computers, Intelligence,

Surveillance and Reconnaissance) Management

and Engagement Operations.

“AWarE supports

mission planning and provides unprecedented situational awareness that is

achieved through the

combination of stove

piped data streams into an

integrated three-dimensional display,” said

Michael Leech, of

SMDC’s Battle Lab. “This

state-of-the-art 3D situational awareness improves

decision making within a

tactical operations center,

significantly reduces multiple data entry and in-theater

footprint by merging capabilities into a multifunctional

‘plug and play’ architecture.”

“If I can report or update situational awareness

without opening my mouth and talking on a radio, that

is good stuff,” said COL Kevin Buckner, deputy director

of the SMD Battle Lab in Huntsville, Ala. “As the system evolves, it can only get better for the warfighter.

The enemy may know there are electrons floating

around in cyberspace, but it’s difficult for them to know

what those electrons are doing.”

Above, SGT David Watts, SSG Jesse English, and Capt. Tim Tubergen

of SMD Battle Lab-West and Larry Ravenscraft, SMDC Battle Lab in

Huntsville, view information recorded in the field and transmitted electronically to a base unit that will be part of the tactical operations center

in Exercise Robin Sage at Fort Bragg, N.C., in February. The team was

in Huntsville, Ala., Jan. 9 testing the integration of the Dismounted

Intelligence Situational Mapboard (DISM), software on the Low Earth

Orbit Position and Reporting Device (LEOPARD), and the Advanced

Warfare Environment (AWarE) software. 

Opposite Page, Kirk Davis, a contractor with ARINC in Colorado

Springs, Colo., relays information back to the base station during a

recent test of software being integrated into a system that will instantly

update the battlefield situation map.

Debra Valine is a public affairs specialist in the U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command and functions as the editor of The Eagle. She retired

from the Army in 1997 after a tour as the chief of Army newspapers at the

Pentagon. Following retirement, she worked for three years as the editor of

the only weekly newspaper in NASA before accepting her current position in

SMDC.
Tip of the ‘Sphere’

32 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

AGRAM AIR BASE, Afghanistan — Army Space

Support Teams normally provide Space products

and expertise to Corps commanders and staffs.

That’s the extremely important job that Army Space

Support Team 4 is deployed here currently to do, as participants in the global war on terrorism. 

Recently, though, a

member of that team,

mobilized reservist 1LT

Shawn Price, gave a bit

more than even the 100-

percent all soldiers are

expected to give, when he

spearheaded a humanitarian relief effort with

the assistance of his wife

Marie.

A project to provide

blankets and winter

clothing to destitute

Afghans began in

November 2002 with

Marie Price’s idea to do

something for the

American soldiers in

Afghanistan. Marie said, “I wanted to send supplies to

the soldiers, just extra stuff. I contacted my husband and

we discussed the idea.” Price felt that the need for adequate clothing among the Afghans was so great that they

should gather clothing and blankets for them instead. He

told Marie, “We have it made, compared to the local people.” Now they knew exactly what they had to do.

Marie’s church, the 1st Baptist Church of Kettering,

Ohio, rallied together to collect 22 large boxes of winter

clothing. A childcare center, La Petite Academy, and

Marie’s apartment complex also donated clothing. The

Family Support Office at Wright Patterson Air Force

Base, near Dayton, Ohio helped immensely by shipping

the boxes, which otherwise would have been cost prohibitive.

On Jan. 12, 2003, Price joined a group of soldiers from

the 450th Civil Affairs Battalion, a unit from Riverdale,

Md., on a mission to distribute the boxes to people in the

Bagram Valley, in the shadow of the Hindu Kush

Mountains. The 450th conducted the mission on a

Sunday, a day normally reserved for “down time.”

Price reported that the distribution got out of control

after a while, because the Afghans were so desperate.

The 450th made arrangements with the local “Mullah” to

leave the remaining

items with the village

elders, who distributed

the items by need to villagers following evening

prayer. The boxes consisted of a variety of

winter apparel, adult

pants and shirts, infantand toddler-wear, and

blankets.

After the mission,

Price wrote in an email

to Marie, “I can’t

describe the desperation

of these people — how

badly they need help.

We ran into some problems giving out the

clothes because the crowd got slightly out of control, so

we had to end it early. They weren’t being malicious, just

overcome with the need to get what they could — sisters

fighting brothers, parents pushing their children aside. I

don’t think I’ve ever seen the look on a child’s face that I

saw when they were clawing at us for clothes. It wasn’t

panic; it was survival. It was the look that you would see

on the face of a grown adult fighting for his or her life.

Everything here is about ‘survival of the fittest’.”

He added, “On the good side, they were grateful to

see us. The people at your church need to know that The

Lord allowed them to do a great thing — possibly the

greatest thing that any civilian can do as part of the effort

in Afghanistan.” 

In a spirit of faith and goodwill, American soldiers

and civilians gave potentially life-saving clothing to the

people who needed it the most.

B

1LT Shawn Price, a mobilized reservist with Army Space Support Team 4, distributes desperately needed clothing to children and adults in Afghanistan, where he

is presently deployed. His wife Marie, with the aid of her church and other local citizens, collected the clothing and blankets once her husband told her of the need.

Army Space photo.

Space Soldier and His Wife Bring 

Warmth to Afghanistan

By MAJRobert Zaza
Army Space teams deploy

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — Three

Army Space Support Teams deployed recently to

Southwest Asia. The deployments are part of the normal rotation schedule, but, with the uncertain, currently volatile nature

of that area, the

goodbyes said at a

ceremony Jan. 23 held

an extra poignancy.

Team 1 deployed

to support V Corps.

The team completed

certification training

in September, supported Exercise

Victory Strike in

Poland in October,

deployed to Kuwait to

support V Corps during Exercise Internal

Look in November,

and returned home

just before Christmas.

Their scheduled current deployment is

planned to end in six

months.

Team 3 journeyed to support U.S. Army Forces,

U.S. Central Command, Combined Force Land

Component Command. The team also had deployed

to Kuwait in early November for Exercise Internal

Look, and had returned home just before Christmas.

Team 5 left to support Marine Expeditionary

Force 1, in a move called “a unique opportunity for us

to support our sister Service” by 1st Space Battalion

commander, LTC Scott Netherland. This team

recently returned from a deployment to Southwest

Asia, where they were part of the global war on terrorism. They also participated in Internal Look, and

returned home before Christmas.

COL Kurt Story, Army Space Command Chief of

Staff, led the farewells to each team, saying, “In the

normal run of things, these soldiers do a great job

with scheduled deployments, bringing Space products to the commanders in the field. They’ve been

especially critical as part of the global war on terrorism, and many of the people you see here today in

desert battle dress

are on their second

or third deployment for that purpose. But, with

world events being

what they are

today, and the

country at war with

Iraq, there is a

great possibility

that these soldiers

will remain in theater for an indefinite period of time.

So, in essence, this

is a deployment

with many more

potential levels and

responsibilities

than ones that have

gone before.” 

A member of

Team 1, SSG Jessica Adams, agreed that the pace of

deployments has been hectic, and that this particular

one has people a bit more anxious.

“I can’t say you get used to it, but ... deploying is

what we do. This one, I’ll have to admit has me a bit

more nervous, but at the same time excited. Whatever

the circumstances, we’ll continue to do our job,” she

said.

Her husband, 1SG Travis Adams, Headquarters

and Headquarters Company, 1st Satellite Control

Battalion first sergeant, attended the farewell ceremony, in his woodland battle dress a colorful contrast to

his wife in her deserts.

“Yeah, I’m left behind again,” he joked. But he

COMMAND in BRIEF

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 33

SGT Gregory Singer, left, and SPC Joshua Foye from the Army Space Support

Company’s Team 5, prepare items for their recently deployment. 

Photo by Sharon L. Hartman
34 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

quickly became serious, and talked about his pride in

his wife, and described how they handled the deployments.

“It might be easier on us because we’re both military, and understand the system, and how to cope.

But of course I worry about her and miss her, and

part of me wishes I was going. But, we each have a

mission.”

Netherland led the standing-room-only crowd

gathered to see the teams off in a crescendo of

applause.

“Know that our hearts and prayers are with you, as

we know that you will continue to do superbly your

mission of supporting the

warfighter with the very best

Army Space has to offer.”

By MAJ Laura Kenney

New Sheriff Visits

Army Space

Command, explores

future 

working relationship

PETERSON Air Force Base,

Colo. — What interest do areas

such as satellite imagery, nonline of sight tracking and a

reach-back capability have to

local law enforcement?

Plenty, according to the

newly elected El Paso County

Sheriff, Terry Maketa. 

Maketa was invited to U.S.

Army Space Command Jan. 8

to receive a briefing on the

Command’s capabilities, a tour

and the opportunity to meet

some of the people who provide Space-based products to the warfighter. 

“I was extremely impressed with what I saw,” said

the 15-year veteran of the El Paso County Sheriff ’s

Office. 

Recently, local governments and law enforcement

have moved toward incorporating high technology in

their day-to-day operations, such as the use of

TASERs in the Sheriff’s Office. The city of Colorado

Springs has also proposed use of a Global Positioning

Satellite-based Automatic Vehicle Locator system to

assist emergency vehicles. 

Seeing what may one day have commercial and

law enforcement applications, especially to his

department, was of great interest to Maketa.

One of the many products of Army Space

Comands that caught his attention was the field of

satellite imagery.

Maketa said this type of tool would be of great use in

areas such as fires, floods and intelligence for narcotics interdiction.

Army Space was a key player in last summer’s Colorado

wild fire fighting efforts when

it was asked to provide specially enhanced satellite images of

the affected areas.

“The whole satellite imaging arena and what you are able

to do with the images once

available would be of great use

to our department,” he said.

He also pointed to the realtime capabilities Army Space is

utilizing with Blue Force

Tracking, and the comprehensive reach-back ability that is

found in the Army Space

Operations Center, which

would help his own department’s daily operations.

“The biggy is knowing

where your resources are at any

given time,” said Maketa.

“El Paso County is almost

2,160 square miles. We have

people in every corner of it, and some days in every

corner of the state. And then we start talking about

transport and so forth. So absolutely, it would be nice

to see where our resources are, and their progress for

officer safety issues as well as efficiency.”

Maketa admits his knowledge of the Army’s role

in Space was not extensive. No stranger to military

Bo Dunaway, Director, Spectral Operations Resource

Center, explains some of the technology to incoming El

Paso County Sheriff,Terry Maketa, left, during a guided

tour of Army Space Command facilities. 

Photo by Sharon Hartman
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 35

life, Maketa grew up on military bases.

“My dad was in the Infantry — a 26-year career. I

just never heard any discussions of the Army’s role in

Space. I knew the Army had artillery and ground

launched missiles but ... Space?”

“I was of course aware of the military use of

Space assets, but I was pretty surprised to learn of the

advancements and the deep involvement of the Army

in Space.”

Commenting on his visit to the Command and the

important role Space is playing in today’s world

Maketa said, “What I experienced was something that

I see as being the first step in a long-term relationship. It provided for me a snapshot of what we can

expect in the civilian sector and law enforcement.”

“I know the relationships between local law

enforcement and military installations — whether it is

the Army or Air Force — have improved over the

years. There is more of an effort to share information.

I’m actually looking forward to building on the blocks

that we have today.”

As to his thoughts about Army Space Command

personnel ...

“All I can say was I was just completely impressed

with not only the technological capabilities but also

the personnel here at Army Space. Anyone I interacted with had a very professional demeanor and was

very knowledgeable about what they did.”

Maketa went on to say that Army Space personnel

knew what their role was — be it National Defense,

Homeland Security or forming solid partnerships

with local law enforcement.

By Donald Montoya

Transformational Communications

conference held at Army Space

Command

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — The

Transformational Communications Office (TCO) —

Senior Leadership Team (SLT), a group responsible

for many of the actions that will change the face of

warfighter communications in the near future, held a

conference Nov. 20 at the new Army Space Command

headquarters here.

The TCO, formally organized in September, is

responsible for planning and directing the implementation of the Transformational Communications

Architecture for the Department of Defense, intelligence community and NASA. The TCO, under

Director Rear Adm. Rand Fisher, who is also the

Commander, Space and Naval Warfare Systems

Command, and Director of Communications at the

National Reconnaissance Office, meets monthly in

the Pentagon. 

At the invitation of BG Richard V. Geraci, Deputy

Commanding General, U.S. Army Space Command,

and Deputy Commanding General for Operations,

U.S. Space and Missile Defense Command, and also a

member of the TCO-SLT, the group scheduled the

November meeting to take place at the recently

opened Army Space Command facilities. 

The TCO-SLT is composed of representatives

from the Department of Defense, intelligence community and NASA, with the critical mission of coordinating, synchronizing and directing changes in

communications to meet the growing requirements of

warfighters and the intelligence community. The ability to transmit detailed information quickly and reliably to and from all parts of the globe will help

streamline military command and control and ensure

information superiority, enabling faster deployment of

highly mobile forces capable of adapting quickly to

changing conditions in the field. Satellite communications play a pivotal role in providing the interoperable, robust, “network-centric” communications needed for future operations

The conference included representatives from

Army Space, the National Reconnaissance Office, the

Office of the Secretary of Defense for Command,

Control, Communication and Intelligence, Air Force

Space Command, Defense Information Systems

Agency, NASA, MILSATCON Joint Program Office,

CIA, U.S. Strategic Command, National Security

Space Architect, Naval Operations, HQ Department

of the Army Chief Information Office,

Communications and Joint Staff Communications.

Several participants were virtually present from the

Pentagon via video teleconference. A tour of the new

Army Space Command headquarters was provided.

By MAJ Laura Kenney
e are a nation at risk from a new and changing threat. The

terrorist threat to America comes in many forms and has

many places to hide. Terrorists attack us and exploit our

vulnerabilities because of the freedoms we hold dear. The

U.S. government’s most important mission is to protect the

homeland from future terrorist attacks. To counter the

threat, the president established a Homeland Security

Department. The Homeland Security Department will

consolidate 22 agencies with 170,000 workers into the new

department, which constitutes the largest reorganization of

government since the Department of Defense was created

half a century ago.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld stated that

since the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review, DoD has

focused attention on the evolving threats. Defense of our

homeland continues to be our top priority. DoD established the U.S. Northern Command to consolidate under a

single unified command existing homeland defense missions that were previously executed by other military organizations. The specific missions of the command are to:

· Conduct operations to deter, prevent and defeat

threats and aggression aimed at the United States, its territories and its interests within the assigned areas of responsibility.

· As directed by the president or secretary of defense,

provide military assistance to authorities including consequence management operations.

U.S. Northern Command plans, organizes and executes

homeland defense and civil support missions. 

Approximately 500 civil service and uniformed personnel are assigned to the U.S. Northern Command

Headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado

Springs, Colo. The command will be augmented with additional forces, as required, to execute missions ordered by

the president. Plans call for the command to be fully operational by Oct. 1.

The Army’s top priority is winning the global war on

terrorism while defending the homeland. The Army has

not been directed to take such a large role in securing the

homeland since World War II. During the post-World War

II era, civil support activities remained an Army function.

The Army, however, devoted significant resources and priority to its other roles and functions, especially warfighting,

that allowed it to optimize its structure, doctrine and training to that end. After Sept. 11, 2001, the Army was directed to plan and prepare to protect, prevent and respond to

threats and disasters directed against our homeland. It

must also continue its support to civil authorities for other

significant dangers.

When directed, the Army will conduct combat operations within the homeland to prevent, deter, preempt and

defeat an adversary’s threat. Most of the Army’s participation in homeland operations will be civil agency augmentation. The Army maintains significant resources for

response to a major disaster and/or emergency, to include

threats or use of weapons of mass destruction or effect. 

36 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Homeland Security and

Transformation

W

By LTC Michael H. Postma

Winter/Spring Theme

“ ... Our nation has taken great strides to improve homeland security since Sept. 11, 2001,” wrote President George W.

Bush July 16, 2002. “Citizens, industry and government leaders from across the political spectrum have cooperated in a

manner rarely seen in American history. Congress has passed important laws that have strengthened the ability of our

law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute terrorists and their supporters. We formed a global coalition that

has defeated terrorists and their supporters in Afghanistan and other areas of the world. Over 60,000 American troops

are deployed around the world in the war on terrorism. We have strengthened our aviation security and made our borders more secure. We have stockpiled medicines to defend against bioterrorism and improved our ability to defend against

weapons of mass destruction. We have improved information sharing within our intelligence agencies and we have taken

steps to protect our critical infrastructure.”
37

Civilian agencies at the federal level are the primary

agents for the coordination and employment of federal

support. With the exceptions of protecting the nation

from missile, air, naval and ground assault and the protection of military facilities, the military will play a supporting

role. The Army will be guided by civilian law and led by the

principle that the federal government assists state agencies

except in terrorism and weapons of mass destruction incidents where the federal government has primary jurisdiction. When supporting state and local authorities, the

Army usually does so through other federal agencies

according to established agreements and plans. 

Homeland operations consist of those legally sanctioned military measures to prevent, protect and respond to

all threats against the United States and its territories and

possessions that endanger its people, resources, facilities

and critical infrastructure. The Army will support these

missions in the following ways:

· Prevent an adversary from attacking the U.S. homeland.

· Protect against homeland attacks when prevention

fails.

· Respond to civil authority’s requests for support

Army unit design must include the ability to be tailored

for homeland operations. This may require support to law

enforcement or consequence management. Unit design

must include sufficient manpower and equipment to provide the needed support without degrading the unit’s

warfighting capability. Additionally, units must have command and control capabilities that are interoperable with

Joint, interagency and local or state entities.

The U.S. military must be able to prevent, protect and

respond to threats and hazards in three geographic zones:

The Homeland Zone, Middle Zone and Forward Zone.

These zones are not strict boundaries and may overlap or

change depending on a given situation. They provide an

integrated defense toward preventing, protecting and

responding to homeland threats. This operational construct is proactive, threat focused and conducted in depth

by layering military and interagency capabilities. In each

zone, Army forces must also be able to rapidly deploy when

conducting Joint operations, while leveraging focused

logistics, providing trained and ready soldiers and units, and

increasing current and future capabilities for sustainment

and survivability. As needed, the Army will control and

defend land, people and natural resources in each zone. 

The Homeland Zone consists of all states, territories,

possessions and surrounding water out to 500 nautical

miles. It is the inner ring of a comprehensive land, maritime and aerospace defensive strategy. In conflict, the

Army may be called upon to defeat an adversary in this

zone while simultaneously conducting operations to defeat

the source of the threat in the other zones. The risks in this

zone include terror cells; enemy special operations forces;

weapons of mass destruction/effect and chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive attack; strategies

that degrade our installations or ground, air and sea means

of transportation and infrastructure; natural and technological disasters; challenges to public confidence; and criminal activities. 

The Army’s role in response to crises in the Homeland

Zone may include: Joint and interagency operations, defensive operations, support to law enforcement, disaster relief,

civil disturbance, counterdrug operations, force protection

of deploying forces, infrastructure assurance and other civil

support actions. As outlined in various plans, statutes and

directives, the Army will help defend the industrial base,

provide engineering and transportation support, treat and

evacuate casualties, manage the consequences of weapons

of mass destruction/effect and chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive weapons, and support and

reinforce civil authorities. Army forces in this zone will

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

The U.S. military must be able to prevent, protect and

respond to threats and hazards in three geographic zones:

The Homeland Zone, Middle Zone and Forward Zone.

These zones are not strict boundaries and may overlap or

change depending on a given situation. They provide an

integrated defense toward preventing, protecting and

responding to homeland threats. 

(See Homeland Security, page 51)
he Army Transformation is on a fast track. The Army

Chief of Staff established the foundation for transformation with the publication of The Army Vision on Oct.

12, 1999. This vision was followed by significant efforts

to update key Army doctrinal publications. FM 1, The

Army, was published in June 2001. FM 1 delineated the

roles, purpose and functions of the Army. In June 2001,

FM 3-0, Operations, was released. This document

describes the keystone doctrine for full spectrum operations. On Oct. 17, 2001, Concepts for the Objective Force

White Paper, was released with the purpose of building

the foundation of advanced capabilities and core technologies needed for the Objective Force and setting the

conditions for irreversible momentum to the Objective

Force.

The Objective Force will be organized, manned,

equipped and trained to be more strategically responsive,

deployable, agile, versatile, lethal, survivable and sustainable across the full spectrum of military operations. The

Objective Force will be composed of modular, scalable,

tailorable organizations equipped and trained for prompt

and sustained land operations that can transition quickly

between changes in task, purpose and directions by

maneuvering into and out of contact without degrading

operational momentum. Trained and equipped leaders

and soldiers at the lowest levels will make decisions on the

future battlefield.

The Army Transformation is not just about new systems; it is about major changes in doctrine, organizations,

training, materiel, leader development, personnel and

facilities(DOTMLPF). Not only will the operational

Army change, but the institutional Army will change as

well. The development of effective soldiers and leaders is

more important to the realization of the campaign qualities of the Objective Force than technological advances.

Although “change” is often viewed as a difficult

process within organizations, our Army has undergone

significant change throughout its history that required its

soldiers to adapt. Change is part of our strong military

heritage. The process to transform the Army to the

Objective Force unfolds along a path of deliberate and

theoretical discussions that will result in irreversible

momentum toward achieving the Objective Force. These

theoretical discussions have been frequently conducted

on a recurring schedule at the highest levels of senior

leadership within the Army as the journey continues to

define and refine the Objective Force. 

Informed by history and theory, concepts describe the

nature and practice of future warfighting. Concepts provide the basis for future developments across the doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership development, personnel and facilities. They help us decide on

investments in science and technology that will provide

required capabilities when they are needed. While concepts might be limited by technological possibility, they

are not limited to present day or near-term required capabilities. To be useful, concept development must be

broadly based and encompass both the art and the science

of future warfighting. Concept development must

include continuous refinement through experimentation,

assessment and analysis. 

Key to the successful development of concepts to

support the Objective Force is a series of seminar war

games that engage TRADOC and Army major command

senior general officer leaders. Seminar war games were

initiated to review and investigate issues, build understanding and foster commonality of purpose and unity of

effort. These gatherings focus on issues derived from the

operational environment and earlier concepts. Critical

concept and requirement products developed during the

seminar war games have received validation through

another series of reviews at the Department of the Army.

The Chief of Staff Army has regularly convened FourStar Requirements Review Councils to validate and

approve these developed products.

The concept of conducting seminar war games was

38 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Seminar War Games

T

By Terry Nelson

Winter/Spring Theme
39

initiated early in the Army Transformation process. The

consideration of critical Objective Force concepts and the

Future Combat System (FCS) Operational Requirements

Document (ORD) was central to the development of the

Stryker Brigade combat teams and functioned as a precursor to the seminar war game. It brought together key

strategic leaders from the development and user communities very early in the development process. Led by the

CG TRADOC, the forum addressed key DOTMLPF

issues, gave clarity to these issues and provided focus for

the way ahead. The result was a shared understanding of

concepts, needs and related issues that promoted unity of

effort and consistency in products developed at the proponents’ home stations. The war game has proved itself

in accelerating production of integrated, full-spectrum

concepts and requirements, producing products much

more quickly than the linear, decentralized requirements

development process used previously. 

In 2001, the Training and Doctrine Command intensified its efforts to define the future Objective Force.

TRADOC focused on war gaming those critical concepts

that required senior Army leadership decisions in the near

term. Key concepts that were reviewed during the initial

seminar war games included units of employment, units

of action, battle command, maneuver sustainment,

maneuver support, training, doctrine, leader development

as well as the Unit of Action/FCS ORD. These war

games not only enabled senior leaders to flush out the

specific concept under review but also enabled other

functional proponents to assess their functional areas to

determine required synchronization and interdependencies.

Each war game addressed a standard scenario that the

Objective Force may encounter in the full spectrum of

military operations. The Caspian Basin scenario was frequently used because it provided the potentially complex

environment needed to test operational capabilities. 

Prior to each seminar war game, a set of objectives

and issues were developed to focus the event and enable

the group to formulate operational imperatives or specific requirements for attaining concepts under development. Senior leaders were frequently assigned player roles

during the war game that caused them to further define

their concepts in the context of the overall warfighting

environment. Although the outcome of each war game

was not examined further in any constructive simulation,

each work group led by senior general officers reached

consensus in validating their product. An examination of

how “we used to do things” was not an option during war

games. The defining question became “how do we do

things in the future given a new operational environment?”

Seminar war games have been critical events for the

Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC).

These events produced the most significant recognition

of Space contributions to the Objective Force to date.

Recognition spanned from comments of the CG,

TRADOC, to specific support provided by the School

proponents during work groups and reinforced during

plenary sessions. TRADOC war games highlighted the

criticality of Space operations and information operations

(IO) to future warfighters. Although Space and IO are

not recognized as battlefield operating systems (BOSs),

these capabilities have surfaced as key enablers of full

spectrum operations during each war game. 

Space control operations are now recognized as a critical component of entry and decisive operations. There

is general consensus that Space control could be considered as an information operations enabler. Support for

Space control has enabled SMDC to accelerate requirements documents under development in this area.

SMDC war game objectives are twofold. First, the

command’s goal is to depict how Space and missile

defense contributes to achieving future force operating

capabilities defined in overarching TRADOC concepts.

The Objective Force will be organized, manned,

equipped, and trained to be more strategically

responsive, deployable, agile, versatile, lethal,

survivable, and sustainable across the full 

spectrum of military operations. 

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Seminar War Games, page 47)
ar gaming activities provide warriors with the opportunity to thoughtfully consider challenges to national,

regional and global security. The post-Cold War era,

rather than bringing peace and stability to the world

arena, has fostered security challenges along the entire

spectrum of potential conflict. Recognizing the volatile

international environment, the Chief of Staff of the

Air Force, GEN John J. Jumper directed that a recurring

war game be developed to examine the comprehensive

application of aerospace power: Global Engagement.

The Global Engagement war game series endeavors to

highlight the importance of aerospace power to successful Joint warfare operations. To this end, Global

Engagement examines the totality of modern warfare

on a level playing field.

The objectives of the Global Engagement war game

series are fourfold. First, these war games seek to make

a direct contribution to maintaining the national security of the United States. Second, the war games seek to

accurately portray the aerospace power’s contribution to

a commander’s warfighting objectives. Third, Global

Engagement seeks to educate a broad range of current

and future decision makers on both maximizing the

application of aerospace power and overcoming challenges to the security of the United States. The series

highlights aerospace power’s contribution to national

security, specifically as it relates to executing the national military strategy. Finally, the war games establish an

enduring input to the long-range planning process in

the Air Force that both informs and educates planners

on potential warfighting challenges and the means of

conducting future wars.

In November 2002, the Chief of Staff of the Air

Force hosted the Global Engagement VI (GE VI) Wargame at the Bolger Center for Leadership Development

in Potomac, Md. The war game’s objective was to

explore the Joint concept of operations against a 2015

robust asymmetric threat using currently programmed

force structures. The GE VI scenario was a major theater war level conflict with notional red forces in

Southwest Asia. It was conducted at the SECRET

RELEASABLE AUS-CAN-GBR classification level. 

The game was structured so that two sub-games

were conducted simultaneously. Two blue teams fought

two independent red teams. Each subgame had its own

assessment team while sharing the same

control/National Command Authorities and the rest of

the world/green cell. Each combined Joint task force

blue team worked with a Joint support team. The Joint

support teams represented the supporting unified commands and the interagency process. The Army’s GE VI

objectives were to:

· Demonstrate how networked land forces enable

the Joint force to achieve positional advantage and

operational dominance.

· Present how new and projected Army command,

control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities support the

operational and tactical Joint warfighting.

· Demonstrate the Army’s capabilities to conduct

precision strike (lethal, nonlethal, kinetic, nonkinetic)

from operational and tactical distances to achieve positional advantage.

· Demonstrate the complementary nature of dominant maneuver and precision engagement.

· Demonstrate the contribution of land power to

Joint warfighting.

The U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command deployed a team of four Army Space officers led by COL Glen Collins, the Force Development

and Integration Center director, to GE VI. The Army

Space officers worked closely with the other Service

40 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Global 

Engagement VI

W

By COL Glen C. Collins and 

LTC Michael H. Postma

Winter/Spring Theme
41

Space officers to ensure that robust Space play occurred

during the war game. Space play objectives included

developing offensive and defensive counter-Space concept of operations. The actual Space play focused on

the contribution of Space intelligence, surveillance and

reconnaissance (such as Space-based radar), protection

of Space assets from the red team’s anti-satellite

weapons and Space force application.

Blue team A was led by LTG (R) Michael C. Short.

Short’s plan was developed using a current day mindset

to employ the Joint force. He planned to flow forces

into the operational theater after sufficient force protection assets were in place to defend blue team A’s

units as they closed. His forces flow plan depended initially on air assets. They were followed by ground and

maritime forces. The overall concept was to conduct an

air campaign to set the conditions for operational success and then to introduce ground forces. Blue team A’s

planning focused on beginning operations when red

team A set off certain triggers. 

During GE VI’s execution, red team A attacked early

and was very aggressive. As a result, blue team A lost

portions of its Space-based intelligence, surveillance

and reconnaissance assets and some of its ability to

track the red team’s weapons of mass destruction and

anti-access systems. This changed blue team A’s focus

from “knocking down the door” by defeating the enemy

anti-access systems to dealing with several high-value

systems that the red team was husbanding and hiding.

Those high-value systems included the majority of the

red team A’s anti-access systems that presented targeting and force protection problems for blue team A.

This increased the time it took for blue team A to

“knock down the door” and delayed the introduction of

ground forces. It also delayed achievement of the blue

team A’s campaign objective of forcing a red team

regime change.

Blue team B was led by LTG (R) Stephen B Croker.

Croker’s plan was first to place a small blue team B

force in the red team B’s backyard. Blue team B’s forces

were arrayed outside the operational theater with key

units flowing into the region. The blue team B’s forces

leveraged in-place force protection capabilities. Once

blue team B’s forces had closed on the theater, Croker’s

campaign plan was to simultaneously kick down the red

team B’s door and seize key lodgments where the red

team B least expected it. Blue team B’s campaign plan

also incorporated a deception plan that had limited success. 

During GE VI’s execution, blue team B absorbed

some strikes from red team B while the blue team B

required forces closed on the theater of operations.

The red team B used its theater ballistic and cruise missiles as anti-access tools. This created a delay in the blue

team B’s ability to completely gain theater access. The

blue team B’s campaign plan to execute decisive operations only when a large Joint force could be sustained

inside red team B’s country was correspondingly frustrated. Ultimately, achievement of the blue team’s campaign goal to cause a regime change in red team B was

also delayed.

GE VI provided a great deal of insight on future

warfighting capabilities across the Services and identified seams that need to be addressed during the transformation process. New concepts such as the Air

Force’s Global Strike Task Force, Navy’s Sea Power 21,

Army’s Objective Force and the Marine Corp’s

Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare were played out in a

realistic setting against a future adversary. The GE VI

after-action review process was completed in February

2003. The results are posted in the Objective Force collaboration area on the Space Operations Network.

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal
lanning is such an important part of any process. It’s no

fun and nobody likes to do it, particularly when it involves

looking far into that nebulous, intangible place called “the

future.” In organizations as widely diverse as the

Department of Defense and the U.S. Army, without planning you are destined to follow the courses of the loudest

or most influential voices. In an environment driven by

the resources of manpower, money and time, volume and

influence carry loud voices. And those voices become

screams the closer to program implementation and the

wider the political and industrial support they have enlisted. All too often, it seems that a new piece of equipment

hits the field and we look back and ask ourselves, “How did

that happen? What was the requirement?”

Planning can help resolve such runaway programming

— the phenomenon that occurs when concepts evolve to

programs without adequate analysis to prove the need in

the first place. It can help combat developers in the Army

to focus on providing support to the Warfighter, keeping

those forces who execute the nation’s will — on the ground

and in the trenches — properly organized, equipped and

trained. Planning, separate from the more tangible aspects

of programming and budgeting, allows the freedom of

thought to provide that support, allowing the process to

get out in front of the influence peddlers. A plan, well conceived, analytically founded, collaboratively built and committed to by the implementing leadership provides a good

vector for the programmers. If articulated well to “the

outside,” good plans also lead to innovative thought from

the users and industry alike. The enemies of this process

are those that say we analyze too much; “just buy the thing

and get it out to the soldiers.” Equipment that results from

this reaction most often fails in the long course because of

inadequate doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leader

development, personnel and facility (DOTMLPF) foundation. 

We in the Army consider ourselves good planners and

executers. In the combat developments arena, however, we

rarely are. There are dozens of reasons why. We have

processes galore: Army Requirements process; ConceptBased Requirements System; the Planning, Programming,

Budgeting and Execution System; Joint Strategic

Capabilities Planning Process; and scores of others.

They’re complicated, twisted by parochial interests and

frustratingly long. We are often overcome by the industryprovided whiz-bangs for which we strive to find military

utility, and we spend more time protecting our interests

than developing them. Who hasn’t heard the expression:

“it’s obsolete before we get it fielded?” The Army Space

business is particularly subject to these criticisms. The

problem clearly drew the attention of the 2000 Rumsfeld

Space Commission Report that the Services were all over

the map on Space planning and control, unable to keep

pace with technology advancements. 

Relative to the Fiscal Year 2003 $365 billion defense

appropriation, Space-related programs demand as much as

10 percent; the Army’s portion of that approaches $500

million per year. Yet the size of the funding for individual

Army Space programs doesn’t necessarily measure their

importance or value. “Space programs” in their many

forms are critical to the execution of our newest Defense

Planning Guidance and the Army Transformation campaign. The American military in these times has no choice

but to leverage the fullest extent of Space-related programs

to be successful on the battlefield. But without adequate

planning, the small, seemingly unimportant Space programs can easily be marginalized out of existence; some

simply slip off the table, undefended. The Army can’t be

satisfied with the survival of only a few of the most visible

Space programs. Do we simply accept that our current

level of Space program success leaves us with the glass half

full? Half empty? Or will DoD say the Army simply has

42 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

SMDC Moves Into Space

Planning for Army

Transformation

P

By Bob Clarke

Winter/Spring Theme
43

too much glass?

Pursuant to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s

direction, DoD is moving out with a more concerted and

controlled effort to “get its act together” in Space.

Rumsfeld appointed the Secretary of the Air Force (also

Director of the National Reconnaissance Office) the Space

Executive Agent for DoD. Also at his direction, the DoD

Comptroller established what is today a “virtual” Major

Force Program (MFP)-12: Space. 

The contents of Joint Pub 1-02 notwithstanding, the

definition of “Space program” is arguably unclear — for

example, it’s easy to posit that a particular program is not

“Space” because it only “uses” Space sources. But, in a

programmatic sense, by including specific program elements in MFP-12, DoD is defining what it means by Space

programs. Service Space programs have always existed in

the Future Years Defense Program somewhere, but now

they are more easily identified as such and can be more easily analyzed and compared. One day, when the “virtual”

MFP turns real, it is likely that DoD, prompted by the

Space Executive Agent using its National Security Space

Plan yardstick, will exert much greater control of Service

Space programs.

In light of the potential for significant DoD oversight,

the Army’s reasons for solid, collaborative Space programming could scarcely be stronger than they are today. First,

global warfighting is more dependent on the technologies

of Space than ever before. Military commitments come on

ever-decreasing warning times requiring en route planning,

accurate and timely intelligence assessments, specialized

training and long-range communications. Combat units

must be smaller and lighter, fight more dispersed, move

more quickly over longer distances and yet produce greater,

more focused firepower — and some of the bullets we

shoot come in the form of electromagnetic radiation.

Forces must use equipment that is interoperable and connectable between and among other forces, and this all has

to be done seamlessly — both physically and in time. The

Army is transforming itself to fight in this new environment, and its Space program must support these changes.

Second, the existence and ultimately the power of the

Space Executive Agent will force the Army to develop

plans and respond with programs that will fit within the

National Security Space Plan. This will cause Army planners to provide the analytical underpinning that justifies the

need for its Space programs and the quantifiable rationale

if Army programs must be uniquely Army ... or join willingly with other Service programs where the support is logical and efficacious. Third, in the proverbial environment

of increasing demands on resources, the Army must

ensure that it stewards its funding prudently. That charge

implies that duplication is avoided where possible, that

technologies are shared and proliferated when they reveal

strong military utility, and, most importantly, that otherthan-materiel solutions are sought first rather than last.

In 2003, the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command (SMDC) will discharge its responsibility as the

Army’s specified Space proponent by executing a collaborative Space planning process (SP2). Founded soundly on

an identified need, articulated in the Army Transformation

campaign plan and the more recent Army Strategic

Planning Guidance for 2005-2020, the process will consist

of simultaneous efforts along five primary axes (Figure 1).

The SMDC approach aims to achieve its first major objective: to optimize the resourcing of Army Space-related programs in the next major Future Years Defense Program

build for Fiscal Years 06-11. Action officer activities on

each of the axes — from those involved with the Executive

Agent in National Security Space Plan development to

those involved with U.S. Strategic Command in developing

the combatant commander’s Integrated Priority List to

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

(See SMDC Moves into Space, page 51)
44 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

Key Enabler ... from Page 3

the Space control mission areas of negation,

surveillance, protection and prevention and

ensures the capability to control Space while

denying its use to the enemy.

Decisive operations in support of the

Joint Force Commander depend on tactical

success in close combat — the ability of the

Objective Force to close with and destroy

enemy forces and to seize and control terrain. Robust Space-based capabilities, integrated with a seamless command, control,

communications and computer intelligence,

surveillance and reconnaissance structure,

are key to this phase of the operation.

National technical means, coupled with tactical surveillance, theater reconnaissance and

wide area surveillance, will in the mid- to farterm enable the Objective Forces commander to see the enemy first, understand his

intent, plan a response, distribute the appropriate data and information, and then attack. 

The potential for future adversaries to

exploit urban and complex terrain require

the Objective Force to see, know and act

effectively throughout this environment as

well. The Space-enhanced Objective Force

will achieve rapid decision while discriminating between friend, foe and non-combatants

and avoiding collateral damage. Essential

near- through far-term force enhancement

Space capabilities will include beyond-lineof-sight communications, discrete imaging

and targeting data, and continuous GPS coverage for force positioning, navigation and

timing.

The countless command and control

linkages and situation awareness demands

fundamental to a ground maneuver force’s

tactical mission makes the Army the largest

military service user of Space-related force

enhancement capabilities. Legacy forces and

emerging Interim forces already leverage

overhead constellations of military, civil and

commercial Space systems for intelligence,

communications, early warning, positioning,

weather and terrain information and support

today. And they will make even greater use

of such capabilities as the Army’s

Transformation continues. The Objective

Force will not only exploit the potential of

planned and programmed Space systems,

but its requirements will help shape the

design of future systems and the architectures that deliver their Services. Space capabilities will play an increasingly key part in the

operational simultaneity, situational understanding, precise and tactically responsive

intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance,

and assured communications implicit in the

Objective Force Operational Concept. The

articles in this issue focus on our Space-related capabilities as we prepare ourselves for

the fielding of the Objective Force and what

Space will do for the Army. Future Journals

will discuss modernization requirements and

what the Army should do for Space. I

encourage you to study the articles and share

this information with those you support. 

Secure the High Ground!

tus of key infrastructure within other

nations. (Examples beyond ISR also exist.).

During ATWG, our own dependence on

Space created a lucrative, asymmetric target

for the enemy. It will remain paramount for

our leaders to be aware that loss of Space

capabilities will degrade more than just our

military operations.

Reachback Disruptions

The Objective Force relies heavily on

being able to “reach back” to remote locations where a more extensive knowledge

base of information, expertise or other capabilities exist. Secondary and tertiary effects of

network disruptions (or attacks on CONUSbased reachback centers or Space ground

stations) are generally not well understood.

This year, game controllers determined these

types of disruptions had significant worldwide impacts during ATWG. There is a critical need to recognize and prioritize protection of critical networks and Space-related

infrastructure across theaters.

Navigation Warfare

GPS jamming will be significant on

future battlefields and has the potential to

extensively influence transition operations.

We have grown increasingly reliant on GPS

services to aid in the accomplishment of a

variety of missions. Our military must

remain proficient in conducting operations

in a GPS-jammed environment. This type of

navigation warfare must be considered as we

evolve operational concepts and requirements for materiel development for Joint

warfare.

Global Perspective is Key

Space Operations must be coordinated

and applied with a global perspective across

all theaters of operation. Space Operations

have no logical geographical boundaries and

can impact target areas much wider than

those belonging to regional component

commanders. We must continue to mature

operational concepts for Space Operations

with a global perspective.

Conclusion

The most recent ATWG examined and

assessed Objective Force capabilities in a

hypothetical worldwide crisis nearly two

decades from now. Resulting findings and

observations will be useful in making preliminary key decisions about refinements that may

be required as we solidify Objective Force

specifications. Our assessment indicates the

Army cannot achieve its transformation goals

or realize the Objective Force characteristics

without Space-based capabilities. As we investigate Army Space operations in Iraqi

Freedom, we’ll also be able to confirm or

refute these findings. Providing robust Spacebased capabilities requires both a significant

resource commitment and long lead times.

Given that many of our adversaries will gain

access to similar capabilities over time, we

must be forward thinking about the need to

plan and invest adequately in Army Space

capabilities to ensure our Objective Force is a

“full spectrum force, dominant at every point

on the spectrum of operations.”

Army Transformation War Game ... from Page 5 
45

number of aircraft and small expendable rocket technologies exist that

may be used. What is clear is that significant efficiencies result because the

air-breathing first stage can return to

a base and be reused rather than burn

up on re-entry. Additionally, reusable

exo-atmospheric deployment allows

for higher flight rates for the aircraft

and placement of payloads to low

Earth orbit (LEO) at a wide range of

inclinations and locations other than

the two major launch facilities the

United States currently operates.

Because the reusable aircraft are not

associated with fixed launch facilities,

they could also be deployable across

the United States or globally if

required.

Deploy on Demand Versus Launch

on Demand

A key improvement and performance parameter desired by the Space

community is the ability to get military payloads to Earth orbit in a matter of days or hours as opposed to

today’s months or years. Whereas

many Space access studies focus on

specific new platforms to improve

the ability to reach orbit, the “deployon-demand” concept focuses on

bridging the gap in responsiveness by

using current launch systems differently. A deploy-on-demand architecture would place affordable microsatellites dormant in orbit with their

later use anticipated. Unlike current

constellation “spares,” these assets

would ride piggyback aboard currently planned chemical propulsion

launches in a “hitchhiking” mode.

Once in orbit, these assets could be

activated to replace or supplement

existing military Space capabilities

should conflict render them insufficient or unavailable. A deploy-ondemand supplemental architecture

would require significant improvement in micro-satellite potential and

experimentation to ensure that

instantaneous activation and reliability of small satellites in support or

replacement modes are possible.

Rail Guns

Rail guns use a conductive projectile fired from a light gas gun into the

rail gun. The projectile then slides

between two parallel conductive rails

and closes an electric circuit. The

resulting current flowing in the circuit

generates a magnetic field that accelerates the payload to orbit-achieving

velocities. Rail gun systems would

require specially hardened satellite

packages to ensure satellite stability as

it leaves the launch tube as well as

hardening to address significant gloading. The largest guns will subject

the satellites to a thousand times the

force of the Earth’s gravity (1000g)

for approximately one second.

Although damage by this vast acceleration can be overcome in circuit

design, it would require significant

hardening of some of today’s fragile

satellite components such as solar

cells or antenna structures. The rail

gun does away with the need for significant propellant volumes aboard

the launch vehicle because the massive electric generators and gas gun

components used to launch the vehicle remain on Earth, allowing the

payload to occupy a very large portion of the launch vehicle’s mass. A

Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal

Figure 2

Don’t Forget “Access” ... from Page 17
46 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

fixed rail gun system may be able to generate up to 300 launches per year with payload of 10,000 pounds per launch. At

these rates, the gas gun could potentially

loft 1,500 tons a year into low Earth orbit.

By comparison, the Space Shuttle (the

largest current U.S. Space access vehicle)

can place 63,500 pounds in orbit.

Slingatron

A slingatron is a propellantless, magnetic means of launching a projectile.

Slingatrons can be configured in a variety

of geometries, but the most common consists of a spiral track (or launch tube) that

gyrates at a constant frequency about a set

radius. Under proper conditions, a projectile entering the spiral at the center will

undergo nearly constant tangential acceleration before exiting. The slingatron

launcher offers the potential to conduct

intercontinental bombardment, and to

place nano-satellites and micro-satellites in

orbit. 

The Space Elevator

In the most basic description, the Space

elevator is a cable with one end attached to

the Earth and the other end roughly 60,000

miles in Space — over twice the distance to

geosynchronous Earth orbit. Although a

frequent device of science fiction, the

Space elevator has moved out of the realm

of pure speculation and into the “merely”

fantastic because of recent advances in

materials science. The Space elevator concept relies on a cable manufactured from

ultrastrong, lightweight composite carbon

nanotubes. Theoretically, a carbon nanotube structure is up to 40 times stronger

than steel; when used in a Space elevator, it

could be used to haul payloads to Space in

much the same way as an elevator climbs to

higher floors in a building. This is possible

because the carbon nanotube cables are

theoretically strong enough to hold together under the “orbital” dynamics of a very

long cable pulled taut by the spinning of

the Earth. 

The illustration (Figure 2 on page 45) is

a notional representation of the deployment scenario for the Space elevator. First,

(A) a Spacecraft is sent to geosynchronous

orbit where it begins deploying a small

cable. As the cable is deployed, the

Spacecraft floats outward to provide a stabilizing anchor for the emerging facility.

When the end of the cable reaches the

Earth, (B) it can be retrieved and secured at

some point along the equator. Climbers of

increasing size can then be sent up the initial cable (C) to reinforce the initial cable.

Finally, (D) a usable, high-capacity cable is

complete and can handle large capacity

payloads that can be released into a number

of differing orbits.

Funded by the NASA Institute for

Advanced Concepts, research into the

Space elevator indicates that once the apparatus is constructed it would have the

capacity to lift — not launch — payloads

of up to 50,000 pounds to geosynchronous

orbits at costs per pound of between $50-

$100. This is several orders of magnitude

better than current day (or even projected)

capabilities and would truly revolutionize

the ability of the United States to access

Space.

Conclusion

The Department of Defense currently

uses Space capabilities to perform a variety

of missions that are not easily or reliably

achieved using other terrestrial means. In

the future, this dependence shows little

sign of dwindling. The Joint force will rely

on Space for more than communications,

navigation and intelligence functions and

will begin to apply force in, through and

from Space. None of this is possible, however, without access to Space in a timely

efficient and flexible manner. Assured and

reliable Space access will require a transformation in U.S. launch capabilities. The

major insight gained from this study was

that current funding priorities in the area of

Space access have significantly constrained

the Space access architecture to a continued dependence on disposable, single-use

chemical propulsion to boost critical U.S.

payloads to orbit. In the future, this

approach may be insufficient to meet the

needs of future Joint operational warfare

and present significant exploitable vulnerabilities to adversaries in tomorrow’s international environment. 

Reliance on these expensive shuttle or

disposable staged rocket technologies is

increasingly unacceptable for the military

exploitation of Space. Indeed, the problems of anti-access, critical mobile targets

and hard and deeply buried targets place a

premium on the unique capabilities that

Space access provides. 

These capabilities, including hyperspectral sensors, the global positioning system,

missile defense, and even the application of

force to, through, and from Space, will provide the United States with the anti-asymmetric strategies of choice against future

(even current) adversaries. But these

“high-demand, low-density” capabilities

will remain so unless the United States is

able to access Space more cheaply and

responsively than it does today. Should

the United States move to a wider vision

of placing payloads in Earth orbit, the

resulting dramatic reductions in launch cost

and complexity will revolutionize U.S.

capabilities to exploit Space as a military

domain.

Jeffrey Becker is a military analyst working in support of the Joint Experimentation Directorate of

U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) and is a

Ph.D. Candidate in International Studies at Old

Dominion University. An employee of General

Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, Becker

has been involved in a number of projects regarding the future of warfare and military experimentation. Most recently, Mr. Becker was part of the concept review team for USJFCOM’s Millennium

Challenge 2002.

Gary Trinkle is the senior Space analyst supporting

the Space Applications Cell of the USJFCOM J9

(Joint Experimentation). He retired from the U.S.

Army in 1998 after 24 years of service as an armor

officer and concluded his career as the USASMDC

liaison to the CG, TRADOC. An employee of SY

Coleman/L3 Communications, Trinkle was

involved in the development of the Army FA 40

training program and has served as a SETAC

Space and missile defense contractor at J9 since

1999. Most recently, he was part of the J9 Future

concepts assessment group (Project Alpha) and

has led an extended study of future “swarming”

autonomous entities. 
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 47

Secondly, the war games are used to

broaden and refine our own Space

concept to develop the desired capabilities and to influence national

Space strategy and Joint requirements

to support Army needs. SMDC has

participated in the TRADOC seminar war games from their conception.

The Directors of the Force

Development and Integration Center

and the Space and Missile Defense

Battle Lab have routinely supported

each of the war games. Additionally,

the Commanding General, SMDC

and Deputy Commanding General

for Operations have also attended the

war games. 

War games will continue to be a

high priority within TRADOC and

the Army in the year 2003. Future

plans call for war games to address

issues such as homeland security and

to refine the unit of action and unit

of employment operational and organizational concepts.

Vigilant Warriors 2003 will be the

capstone event in a yearlong series of

seminar war games, workshops, studies and experiments. Vigilant

Warriors 2003 will address Joint

interdependence issues that confront

combatant commanders and Joint

force commanders in accomplishing

assigned missions. TRADOC and

Joint Forces Command will collaborate in examining force structure,

scenario development and Joint

operational concepts to include

assisting in the development of a single Joint capstone concept. The

game scenario will contain multiple,

near-simultaneous crises, stretching

across the globe with the potential for

multiple major combat operations

and lesser contingencies. Vigilant

Warriors 2003 provides the opportunity to experiment with the Joint capstone concept by examining functional and Service component issues

and transformation initiatives. The

war game will require each Service to

assume both its Title 10 responsibilities and to serve in a Joint functional

role.

TRADOC seminar war games are

providing the opportunity to the

entire Army and Joint community to

address the tough issues that will face

the Services in the future operational

environment of 2020 and beyond.

Seminar War Games ... from Page 39

same, and that I will obey the orders

of the President of the United

States and the orders of the officers

appointed over me, according to the

Uniformed Code of Military Justice.

So help me God.” 

Another special visitor to the

unit, the Army Space Forces

Commander, COL David Shaffer,

spoke to Adams the next day.

“The man was still smiling from

ear to ear, like the Cheshire cat. I

kidded him a little about not waiting

for me to administer the oath, but...

I don’t blame him. It’s not every day

you can get re-upped by the Chief

of Staff of the Army.”

Adams concurred.

“Even in these turbulent times,

the fact that the Chief of Staff of

the Army took the time to re-enlist

me shows an affirmation of the

connection between the leaders who

must decide freedom’s policies and

the soldiers tasked to enforce it. It

was a significant honor that I consider one of the major highlights of

my military career,” said Adams,

who re-enlisted for four years.

Shaffer and the Space Forces

Command Sergeant Major, Reginald

Ficklin, made the extensive trip for

the same purpose as Shinseki, to

show their concern and connection

to forces deployed far from home at

a special time of the year.

The JTAGS mission is to provide continuous 24 hours a day, 7

days a week in-theater processing

and dissemination of tactical ballistic missile and infrared data, intelligence alerting and early warning in

support of the Theater Event

System and the CENTCOM

Combatant Commander’s mission.

The hot, dry climate of this

region bears many similarities to

these soldiers’ home state of Texas,

but, still, it’s a far cry from “home

for the holidays.”

Shaffer said he was pleasantly

surprised, however, at the high

morale of the troops he visited.

“I went out there to motivate

them, and instead, they motivated

me. I came away so impressed by

their attitude that I’ve been bragging

about them to everyone, ever since.”

The motivation factors did seem

to work both ways though.

“Having the brigade commander and sergeant major come all the

way out here really tells us that we’re

not forgotten, even though we’re so

far away from home and loved

ones,” said PFC Wesley Wright,

JTAGS Operator.

Thanksgiving ... from Page 25

Terrance E. Nelson has been the Deputy

Director, Force Development and

Integration Center-West, U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command

since April 2001. Nelson received a

Bachelors Degree in Mathematics from

North Dakota State in 1968, and a

Masters' in Mathematics from the

University of North Dakota in 1970.

Nelson entered into active Army duty in

1970 and retired as a colonel in 2000 with

almost 30 years of active duty, plus two

years in the U.S. Army Reserve and

Colorado National Guard.
48 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

process. This singular mentality reduces

transformation efforts into rear-guard

actions to defend rice bowls.

Second, transformation is not just

about seeking revolutionary changes in

the conduct of warfare. Sudden and dramatic changes do occur. Nuclear weapons

and stealth technology are examples of

previous remarkable changes.

Revolutionary changes, however,

should not be the sole focus of our transformational activities. Silver-bullet solutions to meet future defense requirements

are rare. 

Finally, transformation is not a new

concept. As mentioned previously, the

U.S. military has been transforming for

two centuries. Military historians can

point to how Generals Dwight

Eisenhower, Carl “Tooey” Spaatz and

Holland “Howling Mad” Smith plus

ADM Chester Nimitz transformed

American fighting forces during World

War II. Fifty years later, Generals Fred

Franks, Chuck Horner and Walt Boomer,

together with ADM Stan Arthur, also

transformed the way U.S. ground, air and

maritime forces were employed during

Desert Storm. 

After the terrorist attacks in

September 2001, transformation has

taken a new urgency. We must accelerate

our efforts to gain transformation’s

potential for our new security environment. We can’t wait until the War on

Terrorism is finished. The Joint team

needs transformation’s agility and responsiveness to defeat those who threaten our

nation, our citizens and our liberties. The

United States no longer has the luxury of

time to prepare. 

Transformation ... What It Is

Transformation is a process and a

mind-set — not a product. Adopting a

transformational mind-set means applying current fielded capabilities — in the

current environment — to accomplish

any assigned mission. In today’s fluid and

dynamic world, no Service’s core competencies can accomplish the mission alone.

Transformation is about creating Joint

competencies from the separate Service

capabilities. Transformation is specifically

about uniting unique Service capabilities

into a seamless Joint framework to

accomplish the Joint force commander’s

objectives. 

Stated another way, transformation is

about demonstrating flexibility, dexterity

and adaptability to anticipate how the

Joint force can master unexpected challenges. To understand this, warfighters

must understand transformation’s intellectual, cultural and technological elements. 

This understanding of transformation

starts with the intellectual element. The

most important breakthroughs will take

place between the ears of warfighters and

planners. Soldiers, sailors, airmen,

marines, coast guardmen and DoD civilians must know their units’ technical and

operational capability. Joint leaders must

comprehend the Joint force commander’s

intent and adapt their capabilities —

sometimes in an unanticipated environment — to fulfill that intent. They must

understand not just the probable employment of their unit — they must appreciate its possible employment. 

Commanders should draw on their

previous experience — not just repeat

past endeavors. In some cases, transformation may mean reaching beyond doctrine — because doctrine may not have

described the specific scenario faced by

the warfighter. As a result, transformation

involves taking operational risk. 

That’s not to say military professionals

should be reckless. Rather, commanders

and leaders must take educated and calculated risks. They must weigh the options

— to include the option of doing nothing

— in the context of the ultimate objective. Transformation also means encouraging and rewarding subordinates to do

the same. That carries an obligation not

to punish subordinates when they try

something creative and fail. 

During the Second World War, GEN

George Kenney personified transformation’s intellectual element. He adapted the

capabilities of the Fifth Air Force in the

Southwest Pacific theater to meet GEN

Douglas MacArthur’s objectives. In one

example, during August 1943, Kenney

employed six squadrons of B-25s to

strafe and bomb the Japanese airfield at

Nadzab in advance of an airborne assault.

He then used the A-20 Havoc to lay a

smoke screen to shield the paratroopers

as they descended on the airfield. This

innovative use of bombers (to strafe) and

attack aircraft (to lay smoke) allowed the

U.S. forces to quickly seize the airfield.

Kenney comprehended the potential of

his forces and employed them in an imaginative way. Kenney matched his forces’

capabilities to the mission and environment — rather than trying to make the

environment fit his preconceived notions.

Stated another way, Kenney motivated his

units to perform as the mission required

— not as their habit patterns dictated. 

Transformation’s second element is

cultural — it involves the operating culture within and among military units and

Services. American military cultures are

reinforced by tested checklists and proven

tactics, techniques and procedures. It’s a

comfortable environment of known

quantities, familiar faces and common

verbal shorthand. Transforming the U.S.

military means operating in new ways and

sometimes with untested procedures.

When a new idea surfaces, we should

avoid dismissing it because we never did it

that way before. The new idea may not

work — but we should first evaluate the

concept on its merits. This will require

commanders and warfighters to rely on

their judgment. Success in embracing the

required cultural change will be driven by

the degree of trust and confidence

among Joint warfighters. 

In the past, the trust and confidence

among Service components made the difference in combat. Generals “Fighting

Joe” Collins and Pete Quesada demonstrated what is possible when warriors

extend trust across components’ boundaries. Following the breakout at Saint-Lô,

Fighting Joe and Quesada created a shortcut in the targeting procedures to support

VII Corps’ exploitation of the fluid batChairman ... from Page 13
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 49

tlefield. Quesada took some of his

pilots, gave them an FM radio and

had them ride with the lead Army

tanks. In the process, they reduced

the role of the upper chain of command. Collins and Quesada delegated the target approval to the lowest

level — to the warriors facing the

enemy. 

No one told them they had to do

this. These commanders assumed

risk in their operation. After all,

Quesada and Collins didn’t have

approved procedures or prescriptive

doctrine. Instead, they demonstrated flexibility and adaptability. They

succeeded because they trusted each

other’s judgment and experience. As

a result, they accomplished the mission with far fewer American casualties. 

This is just one example of what

S. L. A. Marshall observed after the

Second World War — “Improvisation is the essence of initiative

in all combat.”3 To succeed in the

crucible of combat often requires

warriors to adopt innovative

approaches. As the Joint team

comes together, such original concepts will only succeed if there is

trust among the Service components. 

Technology is the third element

of transformation’s foundation. For

Fiscal Year 2003, the Department of

Defense has requested nearly $128

billion for current and future

weapon systems and capabilities.

The Defense Department must

invest in the right capabilities that

reinforce its ability to perform the

unexpected and master emerging

challenges of the 21st century. To

be successful in the future, these

capabilities must allow Joint commanders to integrate our Service

capabilities — not force commanders to deconflict them. 

In the past, Joint warfare was

segregated warfare. Desert Storm is

an example of a successful campaign that had sectored operations.

Air operations kicked things off and

lasted 38 days. When ground combat began, U.S. Marines attacked in a

path along the Kuwait coast; the

Arab coalition forces assaulted the

middle sector while the U.S. VII

Corps and XVIII Airborne Corps

swept around the western flank.

Close air support sorties were flown

during the ground war, but they

were employed beyond the sight of

the troops they supported. These

are a few examples of how we segregated and sequenced our efforts.

It was not integration — it was

deconfliction. 

In the future, the Joint warfighters must meld component capabilities into a seamless Joint framework.

The key to this effort will be shared

information among the components. That’s what Quesada and

Collins did by having an aviator with

a radio accompany the lead tanks.

Transformational technologies are

an area of great promise for integrated information-sharing across

Service boundaries. Such technological solutions, however, must be

applied in an environment of trust. 

Interoperable and integrated

command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR)

suites are critical. Joint ISR will

allow our commanders to “watch”

the enemy. Enhanced Joint command and control will allow Joint

commanders to make decisions

faster with other members of the

Joint force. It allows for horizontal

and vertical integration of plans and

operations at all levels. The issue is

not moving data faster — the issue

is moving the right data to the right

people. Then, components gain the

insight needed to fulfill the commander’s intent in an unpredictable

environment. Improved Joint

C4ISR will allow U.S. forces to

exploit a decision cycle — to

observe, decide and act — faster

than an adversary. History is pretty

clear: The side that does this faster

— wins. 

Improved C4ISR connectivity is

more than a military issue. It must

extend to information — and

knowledge-sharing with other federal agencies and with U.S. coalition

partners. The War on Terrorism has

demonstrated that all instruments of

national power perform best when

they have access to the best available

and most complete information. 

Investing in the right new capabilities requires the Defense

Department to ensure that new systems are “born Joint” in order to

share information with the other

Services’ systems. The U.S. military

must avoid buying technologies that

bolster a Service-centric vision.

Such an approach risks segregating

the battlefield. To ensure that the

systems are born Joint, the Joint

Chiefs of Staff are developing a

Joint operations concept to better

describe how we will operate across

the range of military operations and

to better evaluate how individual

Service capabilities fit into the Joint

operational framework.

The Way Ahead

A liberally educated person

meets new ideas with curiosity and

fascination. An illiberally educated

person meets new ideas with fear.

— ADM James Stockdale

Joint professional military education (JPME) is an ideal place for the

intellectual, cultural and technological mind-set changes we need to

inspire our transformation efforts.

JPME must reinforce within the U.S.

military — both in the officer and

senior noncommissioned officer

ranks — the mental agility to understand Service and unit capabilities

and match them with the mission at

hand. A revamped JPME system
50 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

must foster an ability and a desire to look

forward and anticipate future conflict,

which is much different than the ability to

look back and recite past solutions. A

transformed JPME must teach our leaders not what to think, but how to think

and it must foster a culture that accepts

intelligent, calculated risk. Most importantly, JPME must inculcate a culture of

understanding and trust among the leaders of the Services and agencies. 

A transformed JPME requires reforming our intermediate and senior Service

schools, incorporating new and focused

education for our general and flag level

officers and offering Joint educational

and training opportunities for those who

have not received it before — our junior

officers and senior NCOs. These reforms

will proceed beyond formal education

and training opportunities and include

how the U.S. armed forces “grow” senior

general and flag officers. Joint task force

commanders and regional combatant

commanders must have an array of leaders with a full understanding of how to

integrate the Joint team prior to a crisis,

when the lives of Servicemen and

Servicewomen are at risk, and the mission’s success hangs in the balance. 

The idea that JPME must match the

demands of the new security environment is not a new one. When President

Theodore Roosevelt accelerated the

transformation of the U.S. Armed Forces

from a frontier Army and coastal Navy at

the turn of the 20th century, he and his

Secretary of War Elihu Root placed a premium on the education of the officers

who would lead the new forces. The

Roosevelt administration matched their

procurement of 16 new battleships by

expanding West Point and starting the

Army War College to educate the officers

who would lead the force. Following this

model, we know that current and future

commanders must have the same intellectual capital to match the technological

marvels this nation provides for its

defense. 

The end result of transformation is a

dramatically better Joint force. Joint operations will function best when Service

capabilities are integrated in a seamless

operation. Understanding, trust and confidence among warfighters; intelligent risk

taking; and forward-looking leaders who

anticipate future conflict are vital to making this happen. Investing in the right

technology, such as improved Joint

C4ISR, will also prove essential to ensuring that personnel at all levels have the

information to reduce the boundaries

among organizations. 

The new Joint Vision document

defines in further detail the security environment, the military tasks and the pillars

of transformation, but this article complements that effort by defining transformation’s foundation — its intellectual,

cultural and technological elements.

These elements will give U.S. Joint forces

the best tools to ensure the security of

our nation. 

I challenge readers of Army Space

Journal to build on what I’ve written here.

Give me your ideas of how transformation applies to our nation’s Joint forces. If

you think you know a better way to define

the potential and promise of transformation — put that in writing also. Send me a

copy of what you write — I will get back

to you. By all means, do not sit on the

sidelines and think that others are responsible for transforming our forces to meet

the challenges of the 21st century. Your

ideas can and will make a difference. 

Notes 

1. President George W. Bush, remarks to The Citadel,

Charleston, S.C., Dec. 11, 2001. 

2. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld,

“Transforming the Military,” Foreign Affairs,

May/June 2002. 

3. BG S. L. A. Marshall, Men against Fire: The

Problem of Battle Command (1947; reprint,

Oklahoma City: University of Oklahoma Press, 2000). 

GEN Richard B. Myers (BS[ME], Kansas State

University; MBA, Auburn University) is the 15th

chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and is the principal military adviser to the President, the Secretary of

Defense, and the National Security Council. As the

vice chairman of the JCS during the 19 months prior

to becoming chairman, he served as the chairman of

the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, vice chairman of the Defense Acquisition Board, and as a member of the National Security Council Deputies

Committee and the Nuclear Weapons Council.

General Myers has commanded the North American

Aerospace Defense Command, U.S. Space Command,

A.F. Space Command, and Pacific Air Forces. At the

tactical level, he commanded the 335th Tactical

Fighter Squadron, 1st Tactical Fighter Wing, and

325th Tactical Training Wing in addition to serving as

the commandant of the USAF Fighter Weapons

School. A command pilot, General Myers has more

than 4,000 flying hours in the T-33, C-21, F-4, F-16,

and F-15, including 600 combat hours in the F-4. He

is a graduate of Air Command and Staff College and

the Army War College.

The end result of transformation is a dramatically

better Joint force. Joint operations will function

best when Service capabilities are integrated in a

seamless operation. 
Winter/Spring 2003 Army Space Journal 51

those Deputy Chief of Staff for

Programs action officers involved in

working Program Objective

Memorandum (POM) issues at

Headquarters, Department of the

Army — must work in coordinated,

collaborative fashion. To do this, the

Army must have a common picture of

requirements and solutions. A comprehensive Army Space Master Plan

will serve as the first intermediate

objective that will provide this common picture. The degree to which the

second intermediate objective (the

Army POM) and objective Future

Years Defense Program can be significantly affected on this cycle may be

limited for this first-time effort. But

ultimately, as the Army Space Master

Plan process grows in strength and

utility, the ability to affect the Future

Years Defense Program and defend

the programs therein, will increase.

Hence, the Army Space Master Plan is

a means to an end and not an end in

itself.

On principle, the Army Space

Master Plan will be founded upon a

task analysis in seven mission areas.

Seven Mission Area Teams (MAT) will

provide the tracking of tasks from the

top, Army-wide level all the way down

to the specific Space-related tasks at

the user/provider level. SMDC will

create and shepherd these Mission

Area Teams in the taxonomy shown in

Figure 2. This grouping had its genesis with the former CINCSPACE

Integrated Priority List development

teams and has been used in a number

of Army Space planning efforts

including the Space Modernization

Plan developed last year (see article by

Karen Oliver, “Space Modernization

Strategy”). Work is under way to

more precisely define these mission

areas and the current programs (program elements) contained within

SMDC Moves Into Space ... from Page 43

Homeland Security ... from Page 37

likely be special purpose and include

small unit support packages. 

The Middle Zone is a buffer

between the Homeland Zone and the

Forward Zone. It is the air, land, sea

and Space immediately surrounding

the Homeland Zone. In this area, the

United States exercises influence

because of its regional proximity. In

this zone, DoD protects the homeland

by defeating adversaries before they

reach U.S. shores. The risks in this

zone include threats to maritime shipping or air avenues of approach to the

homeland, illegal immigration,

transnational criminal enterprise, ballistic and cruise missiles and cyber

attacks. 

The Army’s roles in response to

crises in this zone may include: missile

defense; interdiction; interception;

intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support to counterdrug

operations; and other Joint, interagency or multijurisdictional operations. Army forces in this zone will

include operationally and tactically

mobile maneuver units; special operations forces; networked, enhanced

command, control, communications,

computer, intelligence, surveillance

and reconnaissance capable units;

knowledge-based air defense artillery;

and ground-based midcourse defense

systems. 

The Forward Zone consists of the

remaining land and sea areas not

included in the Homeland and Middle

Zones. When actionable intelligence

is received, the United States may preemptively defeat the threat at the

source. The risks in this zone include

state-sponsored and transnational terror, aggressor rogue nations, weapons

of mass destruction/effect and chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear

and explosive proliferation, cyber

attack, ballistic missiles and anti-access

strategies and tactics. 

The Army’s roles in response to

crises in this zone may include: deterrence, preemption, threat reduction,

security of aerial and sea ports of

debarkation, counter-proliferation and

intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. In this zone, Army forces

will likely include special operations

forces. They will be operationally

mobile with high tactical agility and

will need external support for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, Joint fires and effects, human

intelligence and ground-based midcourse defense systems. 

For the Army to conduct homeland operations, it must have an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance architecture that ensures unity

of purpose. Human and technical,

manned and unmanned, terrestrial and

Space-based capabilities will be needed to sense the operational environment in detecting, identifying and

tracking threats. Additionally, offensive and defensive information operations will enable the Army to take

advantage of superior information to

achieve decision superiority. Finally, in

meeting the homeland threat, the

Army must be able to participate in an

integrated Joint force that will detect

and destroy enemy cruise and ballistic

missile systems.

LTC Mike Postma currently serves as the

SMDC Liaison Officer to the U.S. Army

Training and Doctrine Command. His

professional experience includes Space

Operations at U.S. Space Command, commander of a signal task force during

Operation Restore Hope in Somalia, and

combat developments action officer at the

U.S. Army’s Signal Center. Additionally, he

served as the Saudi Arabian Armed Force

J6 adviser under the U.S. Military Training

Mission, U.S. Central Command.
52 Army Space Journal Winter/Spring 2003

them. Several of the Mission Area Teams

will be chaired by key stakeholders from

other-than-SMDC commands. 

Each team will produce a Mission Area

Analysis, a Mission Needs Analysis, a

Mission Solutions Analysis and an

Integrated Investment Analysis (IIA).

During the IIA phase, each team will apply

fiscal constraints to the solutions identified.

The Mission Area Teams will strive to identify all DOTMLPF solutions to satisfy all

Space-related subtasks. The Space

Modernization Plan developed last year provides a good foundation for the materiel

portion of the solution set.

Each of the seven teams will develop its

products consistent with the methodology

defined by TRADOC’s Concept-based

Requirements System. Army Space Master

Plan project analysts will integrate them at

each stage. Each team will ultimately package the results of each phase of the analysis

into its Mission Area Plan. FDIC analysts

will then combine the seven Mission Area

Plans to produce the final Army Space

Master Plan. Along the way, each stage is to

be shared collaboratively with analysts performing the same methodology in Air Force

Space Command (their process is called the

Integrated Planning Process), Navy Space as

well as with analysts in the Space Executive

Agent. This cross-analysis will attempt to

ensure that planning is compatible in mission and scope, that Army programs are

jointly supportive and where not, Army programs are soundly justified as Army. 

An important, and perhaps the hardest,

part of this process is the identification of

future capabilities and programs.

Participation by SMDC and other Army

battlelabs, the Army Space Program Office,

the SMDC Technical Center, and associated

Army Materiel Command Research,

Development and Experimentation Centers

will allow for the consideration and insertion of Army future concepts, technologies

and requirements. Further, the Space

Integrated Concept Team, the TRADOC

Senior Advisory Group and a Space Council

of Colonels at HQDA will review the Army

Space Master Plan progress to provide rudder checks and guidance. The mere foundation of these Mission Area Teams, and their

continual existence under the tutelage of

the Space Integrated Concept Team, provides a forum for the Functional Area (FA)-

40 Space Operations Officers deployed in

warfighting commands and staff positions

around the world to send their ideas for

future concepts.

Once SMDC has compiled and staffed

the Army Space Master Plan and it is

approved by TRADOC, SMDC will present

it officially to the Army staff. The ultimate

goal is to obtain the signature of the Army

Chief of Staff — to give the document

credibility as the Army’s plan for the application of Space-related DOTMLPF solutions to support the Objective Force. This

approval, of course, does not imply adequate funding; programs in the plan will still

compete for resources in the POM process. 

The process — far more important than

the document itself — is designed to provide an ever-present source of the Army

position on Space-related programs and

future capabilities for action officers who

perform activities along the five axes of SP2

advance (Figure 1). Continuous, empirical

input from deployed FA-40s will also keep

the Army Space Master Plan process current and connected to real-world activities

and needs. 

SMDC will discharge its responsibility to

act as the Army specified proponent for

Space by institutionalizing the SP2 process.

The Army Space Master Plan will serve as

its principle vehicle for accomplishing this

mission, with the process to build its most

important aspect. With the concerted and

collaborative efforts of all those in the

Army combat developments community

who work in Space-related activities, SP2

will achieve its intended vision of being the

source of the Army’s position on these programs. It will lay the foundation for dialoguing with the Space Executive Agent,

and most importantly, it will assure the

warfighter that the transforming Army is

working to provide the best and most comprehensive DOTMLPF, Space-related capabilities possible.

Bob Clarke works as a SETA contractor for

SYColeman in Colorado Springs supporting SMDC

FDIC. He retired from active Army service in 1996

at the grade of Colonel. He graduated from the U.S.

Military Academy in 1968, holds a master’s degree in

Operations Research Systems Analysis from RPI,

and is an Army War College graduate. An Air

Defense Artillery officer with diverse of command,

staff, and combat development assignments, Clarke

ultimately served as Acquisition and Support

Programs Analysis Division chief, Army Program

and Analysis Directorate of the Office of the Army

Chief of Staff 1990-1993.
We are a nation at risk from a new and changing threat. The terrorist

threat to America comes in many forms and has many places to hide.

Terrorists attack us and exploit our vulnerabilities because of the 

freedoms we hold dear. The U.S. government’s most important 

mission is to protect the homeland from future terrorist attacks.

— LTC Michael H. Postma

Successful transformation to the Objective Force is key to the Army’s

battlefield dominance in the 21st century and to providing the most 

efficient, lethal land forces to the Joint Force Commander. Space is the

Army’s key enabler for supporting those forces in any theater. 

— LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.
UPCOMING JOURNAL THEMES

Summer 2003 — “The Army’s Future in Space”

SPECIAL EDITION — “Space: Focus on Operations”

Fall 2003 — “Space Technology — Where is it Leading Ground Forces?”

Winter 2004 — “The Army in Joint and Multi-National Space Operations”

“Another example of disregard for the conditions of Iraq and the Iraqi people is the

burning of oil trenches ... ” said BG Vincent Brooks, U.S. Central Command

spokesperson in a press conference April 1, 2003. He was referring to the

satellite imagery below. The map is a view of an oil fire in Baghdad, Iraq. It was

produced by soldiers and airmen from Army Space Command’s Spectral

Operations Resource Center who are deployed in the region.