the Army Space Journal

Fall 2003 A Professional Journal for Army Space Operators

Vol. 2, No 4 Published by U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command

Where is it leading e is it leading

ground forces?
Commanding General

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

Deputy Commanding General for Research,

Development & Acquisition

MG John M. Urias

Deputy Commanding General for Operations

BG Robert P. Lennox

Director, FDIC

COL James R. Pierson

SMDC Public Affairs Officer

William Congo

EDITORIAL STAFF

Editor in Chief

Michael L. Howard

Managing Editor

Richard Burks

Contributing Editors

Donald Montoya

MAJ Laura Kenney

Debra Valine

Brian Hermes

Theme Development

C. Sue Randles

Graphics Director

Sharon L. Hartman

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.

the Army Space Journal

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. www.armyspace.army.mil/SpaceJournal

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.

The views and opinions expressed in the Army Space Journal are not necessarily those of the Department of the Army or U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command.

Communicating Space 

to the Warfighter

Space Forum

A 1950-era

artist takes a

look at the

Army of the

future on pages

14 and 15.
36

38

40

Space Technology — 

Where is it leading ground forces?

from the Eyes of the Past

historical collage

Chief Scientist Speaks of the Future

Interview with Dr. Thomas Killion

Old Becomes New ...

Airships are out of the box

Michael M. Lee

No Longer Guaranteed ...

Global positioning system alternative necessary

Randy Yergert

Thanks, Buck Rogers ...

Pumpkin Chunking into Space

J. Rodgers Qualls

To Boldly Go ...

Single Integrated Space Picture (SISP)

Denise Jones

Keeping the Space Edge ...

Leveraging commercial Space technology 

for military uses

Adam Aberle

Strategic Force Multiplier

The importance of Space in the Army’s future

Adam Aberle

Future Combat Systems

New technologies foundation for more lethal Force

C. Sue Randles

The Path Taken

Army Space technology beginnings

Bernand Kerstiens

42

41

20

16

44

18

EDITOR’S FORUM

CG COMMENTS

Space Technology

Vital capabilities for warfighters

By LTG Joseph M. Cosumano, Jr.

DCG-RDA COMMENTS

Space Exploitation

Making Space technology matter

MG John M. Urias

DCG-O COMMENTS

Technology for the Warfighter

New technology, joint forces 

advancing modern warfare

BG Robert P. Lennox

FDIC COMMENTS

The View from (Army) Space

COL James R. Pierson

2

6

8

First Ground-based Midcourse

Defense Brigade in nation activated

MAJ Laura Kenney

SMDC sees many changes during

Cosumano’s time as commander

Debra Valine

SMDC competes at Department of

the Army NCO and Soldier of the

Year competition

SMDC NCO of the Year battled 

for DA title while younger 

brother faces own battles in 

Iraq

1st SATCON Soldier hangs tough 

at DA competition

Sharon L. Hartman

Chaplain uses experiences in OEF

to reach others at prayer breakfast

DJ Montoya

Command in Brief

22

26

24

4

12

30

Contents

Fall 2003 Edition

Tip of the Sphere

Fall Theme: “Space Technology — 

Where is it leading ground forces?”

14

10

32

The Flipside

Space Notes

Historical Feature

Seeds of a Soldier

A historical look at Edgar Allan Poe — 

the Sergeant Major

Michael L. Howard

58

60

26

28/
We want you to know — this Journal’s for you!

As we put the final touches on this Fall 2003 edition of the Army Space Journal focused on Space technology, I keep going back to the human factor. In this edition we have added a new section titled “The Flipside,”

which includes a historical feature on Sergeant Major Edgar A. Perry on page 60. Edgar was just an average

Joe — a bit down and out — who came into the Army and did his best. He made himself better. He stood out.

He was selected by his superiors for more challenges and responsibility. I guess the point is that even before

a Civil War when they were volleying cannon and musket balls — some human characteristics about our Army

became true. Before he was selected as sergeant major, Edgar was in a bit of a tight spot. He hadn’t been

honest with the Army — he had lied in his enlistment paperwork. Neither had he come clean with his family —

they didn’t know he had joined the Army. So, in the fall of 1828, Edgar told the company commander the truth. 

Fast-forward to the late 1950s in our Army. Another story. An Army lieutenant colonel is commissioned by

the Army to create a series of drawings to illustrate the Army of the future. His drawings are on pages 14-15.

Imagine having the job of trying to illustrate what our Army will look like 40 years down the road. There is no

“back to the future” to help prod the creative juices. We found the lieutenant colonel’s artwork and story last year

buried in the Army’s archive in downtown Washington, D.C. What I like about the futuristic artist is courage. 

I don’t think it’s too far out there to say that the same human factors are true as we delve into Space technology and current Space operations. Really, both Edgar and this artist are not unlike the men and women

who’ve accomplished great things in the history of Space and missile defense as technology evolved and developed from the early days until now. A stand out is the “Pumpkin-Chunking” article beginning on page 40. While

the author explores technology development since World War II, he does it from the perspective of the human

element. The beginnings of Air and Space goes to the Civil War when units used balloons to raise a photographer high enough to shoot pictures showing the other side of the battle line. Later, kites and pigeons carried

cameras high up to remotely snap photos. The earliest missile related history shows primitive horse-drawn

launchers with primitive rockets. When you consider that today we have sophisticated satellite and missile

defense systems, I believe that human side must’ve come out during development. 

A bit unrelated, but an appropriate editorial. Our Letters to the Editor section is growing, as are other sections in the Journal. If you have letters, please send the email to michael.howard@arspace.army.mil. In addition to the new historical spot in the Journal, we’ve added a Space News section beginning on page 58. The

point here is that we are looking for ways to make this publication more useful. If you have ideas on future theme

topics — or you have recommendations for already published articles to be highlighted in the Space News section, or have an idea for an historical feature — please email to richard.burks@arspace.army.mil.

One additional note. Four individuals have left SMDC over the last several months after creating and making this Journal what it is today. COL Glen Collins created this publication as a professional Journal intended to

keep the Army Space officer in career Functional Area 40 informed on Space initiatives. Collins retired in

October. It was Bill Furr who first brought me a copy of a Space magazine, suggesting we look at something

similar for the Army. Furr left SMDC in October. Next it was BG Richard V. Geraci who envisioned the publication as not only professional development for the Space operator, but a way to make our customer, the warfighter, aware of Space-based capabilities. Geraci left SMDC in June. Finally, it was LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

who constantly encouraged us to raise the bar across the board on this publication. Cosumano, as he likes to

put it, is “transitioning” to civilian life in the near future.

I should tell you one more thing about Edgar. Edgar lied about his name. His real name is Edgar Allen Poe.

What I think is fascinating, Edgar Allen Poe stood out in the 1st Artillery Regiment during his time as an enlisted

man. His leaders saw his potential, even though he ultimately didn’t find it as an Army officer. 

Just something to think about as you read between the Journal covers. 

— Michael L. Howard

Editor in Chief

2 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

What you didn’t know ...
I spent my Air Force career working Space

programs and since becoming a civilian, I have

been supporting DoD Space programs (including

working with Ed Zehner on the Joint Staff) as well

as starting my dissertation on Space policy — I'd

like to get a subscription to the Army Space

Journal.

— Lawrence Cooper 

I'm a Greek journalist working as Editor-inChief of the monthly Greek defense journal

"Ptisi/Isorropia Dynameon" ("Flight/Power

Balance"). Recently, in the Hellenic Army

General Staff, I found an issue of the Army Space

Journal (Special Edition, Operation Iraqi

Freedom) and would be extremely grateful if you

could add me to your distribution.

— Pericles Zorzovilis

I do not think that many people know about

the Army Space Journal, but I will definitely

spread the word to the DC area crowd. We all

read Space News, and this would be a great

addition. I am an Air Force Academy and

International Space University graduate, so this is

core to my business. Thank you.

— Roscoe Moore III

I am a U.S. Army Signal Corps instructor with

the Joint C4I Staff and Operations Course

(JC4ISOC), Joint Forces Staff College, in Norfolk,

Va. Our four-week course is taught six times per

fiscal year at the TS/SCI level. We are sponsored by the Joint Staff J6 and have been in existence since 1978. Our focus of instruction is at

the strategic and operational levels (baseline is

the JTF). Our Web site is www.jfsc.ndu.edu, then

click on "Schools and Academic Programs",

"JCIWS," and then "C4I Division" for course particulars.

I would like to request we be placed on your

organization's distribution list for the Army Space

Journal. We are trying to encourage more of the

Army Space community to attend our course,

and having this reference will help enlighten our

faculty and course curriculum structure.

Please include us in your distribution.

— Reynold F. Palaganas

I am just starting the Naval Postgraduate

School and studying Space Systems

Engineering. I would like to receive the Army

Space Journal. Thanks!

— LCDR Michael A. Porter

Letters to the Editor 

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 3

Letters to the editor are welcome and encouraged. The Army Space Journal reserves the right to edit for brevity and clarity. Unfortunately

all letters cannot be printed due to space. You may send letters to the editor in chief at michael.howard@arspace.army.mil
onsider for a few moments the challenge of accurately

predicting the possibility and utility of technological

developments. In 1895, Lord William Thomson

Kelvin, the Scottish mathematician and physicist,

noted, “Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.” Eight years later, in 1903, just a few months

before the Wright Brothers successfully made history

with the first manned flight, Simon Newcomb, an

astronomer observed, “Aerial flight is one of that great

class of problems with which man can never cope.”

These gentlemen would surely be surprised today with

the extent that powered flight has affected our lives.

The statements by Kelvin and Newcomb show the

difficulty of predicting the outcome of a particular

type of technology, but they also point to the importance of drawing upon the correct lessons when forecasting the future. GEN Tommy Franks, former

Commander, U.S. Central Command, reinforced this

point when he observed, “Neither Desert Storm nor

Operation Enduring Freedom or any of the other

operations that we have conducted tell us precisely

about the future. We are pretty sure that the future is

going to have certain characteristics and we ought to

pay attention to them so that, while we may be tactically surprised, we do not permit ourselves to be

strategically surprised.”

In this regard, while we may not be prescient with

how a particular type of technology will be used, compelling evidence clearly supports the growing importance of Space as a warfighting medium. What is also

clear is that Space technology is vital to enhancing

capabilities on the future battlefield — one demanding

great flexibility and adaptability.

The use of Space technology by the U.S. military

has changed radically since the launch of the first U.S.

satellite into orbit in January 1958. Today, in support

of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom,

Space-based assets furnish our military and coalition

forces with robust and uninterrupted communications,

around-the-clock Intelligence, Surveillance, and

Reconnaissance, accurate and responsive imagery, and

near real time navigation and positioning data. These

capabilities along with early warnings of tactical missile

launch, Blue Force Tracking, combat identification,

and innovative systems that enable access to broadband communications add essential enhancements to

operational effectiveness and efficiency.

Emerging threats to our homeland, friends, and

allies necessitate development of new capabilities —

and several Space technologies are showing great

promise, particularly in the areas of Space-based radar,

imagery, communications, and enhancements for situational awareness and combat identification.

Space-based missile early warning, currently supported by Defense Support Program satellites, provides detection and warning of missile launches and

nuclear detonations. However, the capabilities of this

system are limited, particularly against the cruise missiles and theater ballistic missiles that are being so

widely proliferated and pose such a looming threat to

U.S. forces. The Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS)

will ultimately replace the current Defense Support

Program satellites, and provide significant enhancements in the areas of missile warning, missile defense,

technical intelligence, and battlefield characterization

for warfighters and the National Command Authority.

The satellites for the SBIRS High portion of the program are currently scheduled for launch in 2006.

The follow-on capabilities of Space-Based Radar

extend our capabilities, even beyond those projected

with SBIRS. Space-Based Radar will provide daynight, all-weather, 24-hour detection and tracking of

Army Space Journal Fall 2003

C

By LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

CG Column

Space

Technology

Vital capabilities for 

warfighters

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.,

Commanding General, United

States Army Space and

Missile Defense Command

4
5

moving targets, in addition to 3-D radar mapping data.

Significantly, this system will offer capabilities currently obtainable by the Airborne Warning and Control

System, Joint Surveillance, Targeting, and Attack Radar

System, and Rivet Joint aircrafts systems and move

them into Space, reducing vulnerability against personnel and individual airborne platforms.

The Future Imagery Architecture (FIA) promises

to enhance substantially the quality and timeliness of

Space-based imagery. The envisioned system will

include satellites with infrared sensors, high-resolution

electro-optical cameras and/or all-weather radar capable of taking highly detailed images. The number of

satellites will be greater in number than those in the

current inventory of imagery satellites, thereby

enabling more frequent visits to areas of interest. The

satellites will also be farther out in Space and much

harder to detect. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) may

be one of the exciting technologies that support the

FIA. The radar will be able to detect hydrologic

changes and make discrimination between various

types of vegetation and ground cover. Its ability to

acquire imagery at night and in areas with persistent

cloud clover will significantly complement existing and

future optical systems. Advances in hyper-spectral

imaging will also augment information furnished by

traditional imagery, and will provide better battle damage assessment and terrain characterization.

Expansive demands for bandwidth, the necessity to

move large volumes of imagery and signals intelligence

information from operational collections systems, and

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal

comments

(See Capabilities, page 46)

In September 2001, in the inaugural issue of this journal, I stressed the importance of normalizing the Army's use

of space with seamless integration. This observation followed publication of the report of the Commission to Assess

United States National Security Space Management and Organization. This report was a milestone document that

emphasized the importance that space and space activities have to the security and well being of the U.S., our allies, and

friends.

Related to changes directed in the report, the Army was responsible for implementing actions to:

· Enhance space professional military education

· Maintain a cadre of space qualified officers

· Integrate space activities into military operations

· Establish space requirements

· Research, develop, acquire, and deploy space systems unique to the Army

To an extent that we could not have envisioned just a couple years ago, we have made remarkable strides in all of

these areas — and you, as space professionals, have made it happen.

We have made great progress in creating a knowledgeable and experienced cadre of space professionals. Outstanding

officers have been selected to serve in Functional Area (FA) 40 and are contributing immeasurably to leveraging space

as a vital component to warfighting. More than 140 officers are now serving in FA-40. These talented officers bring a

wealth of invaluable technical expertise to their assignments. In support of space knowledge, SMDC has established a

Space Operations Officer Qualification Course, which has now conducted five classes. Space knowledge is also infused

to the Army at large in space electives at Fort Leavenworth, KS, and by maintaining an instructor at the Interservice

Space Fundamentals Course. The Training Division at FDIC is working diligently with other Services to assure synchronization of efforts regarding space instruction.

Space professionals, most recently during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, brought space-based

products, services, and expertise directly to our Joint Warfighters. This responsive support continues even today in forward deployed locations and with reachback support.

Great progress has also been achieved in integrating space requirements for the Army's Future Force and the Joint

Space Force. As the Army Service Component Command to the U.S. Strategic Command, SMDC will now provide

coordination of Army resources in the accomplishment of USSTRATCOM's missions in its five mission areas.

Research and development efforts have also made landmark progress. With the activation of the Program Executive

Office for Air, Space, and Missile Defense and the extraordinary developments in our technology-oriented infrastructure, we are well poised to continue delivering cutting-edge equipment into the hands of our warfighters.

In conclusion, I wish to extend to the entire community of space professionals my most sincere appreciation for your

great efforts and tremendous support. President George Bush perhaps captures best the importance of your work when

he said on August 14, 2003, "Each of you has chosen, you have made the choice, to fill a great calling, to live by a code

of honor, in service to your nation, for the safety and security of your fellow citizens." Best wishes as you continue to

face the challenges of the 21st Century.

“Secure the High Ground”

— LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.
pace ... the final frontier.” So began a popular TV

series of several years ago. As our military transforms

into smaller, lighter, more agile units with more

responsive capabilities to address global uncertainty,

the necessity of harnessing and exploiting this “final

frontier” is quickly becoming one of the most important enablers for Army transformation.

We have long relied on Space as a means of

extending reliable communications beyond line-ofsight and over-the-horizon, for providing early warning of enemy missile launch, identification of military

and military-related construction, and detection of

major military movements. It’s important to additionally note Space as a provider of products to support

position, location, navigation, weather, terrain, and

environmental monitoring.

Traditionally, the exploitation of Space has primarily supported strategic concerns, but our recent campaigns in Southwest Asia and other hot spots around

the world have increasingly shown the importance of

Space support to warfighters at operational and tactical levels of warfare. Fluidity and flexibility are

required to win on future battlefields, therefore,

extending Space support as a complementary enabler

to Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)

support across all levels of warfare is critical as it

relates to real-time decision support and battlefield

situational awareness.

Our involvement in Space is divided into four

functional domains: Space support, Force enhancements, Space control and Space applications. The U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC)

has a proud lineage of supporting the development of

Space systems, products, and services to support the

warfighter across all four of these domains. SMDC is

unique in that it not only develops requirements, but

also sees these requirements through to fielding and

operational use.

The Army has not had a research and development

entity as a single agency focused on Space, as have the

other military services. SMDC’s science and technology (S&T) research, development, and acquisition

(RDA) efforts have supported a wide range of Army

customers with diverse views on the importance of

exploiting Space services and products. Recently, this

changed however, as the Program Executive Office

(PEO) for Air and Missile Defense (AMD) was redesignated as the PEO for Air, Space, and Missile

Defense (ASMD). Several of the Space research and

development efforts of SMDC are being transferred

to the PEO ASMD, and the PEO ASMD is realigning

internally to provide for integration of Space into the

system-of-systems concepts that are emerging to support Army transformation.

An exciting aspect of Space exploitation is the

multi-dimensional and multi-mission applications of

its technologies and products. For example, in our

efforts to develop a Single Integrated Space Picture

(SISP), we are exploring applications of volumetric

displays, immersion technologies, biometrics, manmachine interface techniques, and information technology advances.

When applied across the entire family of interoperable pictures, these applications will enhance situational awareness and understanding, and support intuitive and timely decision-making. Other technologies

initially developed with a primary focus on supporting

Space systems have shown tremendous potential for

“S

By MG John M.Urias

DCG-RDA Column

6

Space 

Exploitation

Making Space

technology matter

Army Space Journal Fall 2003

MG John M. Urias,

Deputy Commanding

General for Research,

Development and

Acquisition, United

States Army Space &

Missile Defense

Command and

Program Executive

Officer for Air, Space

and Missile Defense
supporting atmospheric systems in both military and

commercial functions. One such example is MicroElectro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS), which promises

tremendous volumetric decreases, while at the same

time, increases reliability in accomplishing critical

functions within a system application.

As we look to Space, and the harnessing and

exploitation of this “final frontier,” we must leverage

Joint and other Service activities through interoperability and common or standardized approaches.

However, just one Service cannot provide the

resources necessary to harness Space for the warfighter. The Department of Defense is not the sole activity involved in Space. We must therefore leverage

commercial Space technologies and ventures to round

out military capabilities to ensure our warfighters have

the best products and services available to them.

Commercial ventures in Space may be both a boon

and a curse.

Not only can the U.S. military leverage commercial

Space efforts, but our future adversaries can as well.

In the past, Space control involved concepts for the

destruction of enemy military capabilities in Space.

Now, with the introduction of so many commercial

ventures into Space, Space control must consider

denial of Space services to an enemy without destruction of “neutral” Space platforms.

As we rely more and more on Space and Space

products to support our warfighters, we also introduce

vulnerabilities to our warfighters. For example, if a

future adversary had a capability of denying Global

Positioning System (GPS) support to our precision

targeting functions, we would be denied a powerful

technological advantage our warfighters currently

employ. Therefore, as we look to Space, we must also

look to how the technologies we are developing to

support our warfighter can be made more secure and

reliable.

One aspect of reliability is replication or duplication. To that extent, SMDC is exploring techniques

and technologies for duplicating Space capabilities, by

regionally focusing capabilities using within atmosphere platforms. Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

(UAV), and an ultra-wideband signal transmitter, GPS

functionality can be duplicated within a theater of

deployment to ensure GPS functionality remains

available to a warfighter, even if services from the

GPS satellites in Space is denied them. High Altitude

Airships (HAA) may provide an extended duration

platform capability to replicate many of the Spacebased sensor functionalities in supporting ISR and

extended range communications within the deployed

theater.

As you can see, we have our work cut out for us if

we are to effectively embrace “the final frontier.” The

articles in this edition of the Army Space Journal will

more fully develop how the Army is involved in harnessing and exploiting Space to support our warfighters. Space and Space products are essential enablers

of Army transformation.

The Army has recognized the importance of Space

and has reorganized within its development community to ensure that a focused effort achieves the integration of these essential products into our future forces,

even as we improve the efficiency and effectiveness of

delivering needed Space-based services to our current

Force.

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 7

The U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC)

has a proud lineage of supporting the development of Space

systems, products, and services to support the warfighter across

all four of these domains. SMDC is unique in that it not only

develops requirements, but also sees these requirements

through to fielding and operational use.

comments
BG Robert P. Lennox,

Deputy Commanding

General for Operations,

United States Army

Space & Missile Defense

Command

oldiers prepare by studying the art of war and training.

Scientists and engineers prepare by thinking about,

looking for, creating, and developing capabilities that

will enhance the warfighters’ effectiveness. Both often

face difficulty in carrying out their charters. But the fact

that neither gives up is what has made our Army the

best, most advanced in the world.

I’d like to say that the SMDC Battle Lab - Space

Directorate went from the learning of the requirement

to the concept on the drawing board to the warfighter

in the field in six weeks, but that’s not exactly what happened. Two years ago, the Army Space Support Teams

(ARSST) were requesting larger bandwidth so they

could respond more quickly to requests for Space products and imagery (which are typically very large files and

even larger when they are encrypted). As part of its

experimentation plan in support of transformation, the

Battle Lab had integrated a number of off-the-shelf

communications products, encryption, computer systems, and some other items into the Space Support

Element Toolset (SSET), a HMMV-mounted assemblage of “tools” with which the Space Support Team

supported the commander and his staff. The Battle Lab

tested their creation at Millennium Challenge 2002 in

August 2002. It outperformed their expectations.

As the command was planning for Operation Iraqi

Freedom, commanders knew that they wanted to send

the ARSST forward with the best equipment. The

Battle Lab responded by reengineering the SSET’s capabilities into a smaller, transit case-sized version, procuring the various parts, assembling and testing twelve systems, and sending a mobile training and fielding team

into theater with the Army Space Support Teams.

The new system, dubbed the SSET-Light, greatly

enhanced the team’s ability to provide accurate, timely,

and effective Space products to the supported commanders. Besides offering the teams a suite of Spacespecific software tools, the SSET-L made possible

wideband communications connecting them not only to

the HQ in Colorado Springs, but also to each other,

Eagle Vision 1, an imagery ground station, and the

Spectral Exploitation Cell - Transportable (SPEC-TR),

in theater. With the SSET-L, teams could receive 2

megabytes of data per second and send up to 900 kilobytes per second. They routinely downloaded files of

100 megabytes and greater in minutes — and these were

encrypted files. Previously, files of this magnitude

would have taken hours to receive, if at all, or required

FEDEX delivery. More importantly, the teams no

longer needed to burden the supported unit’s communications networks.

There is no doubt that the synergy created in this

command by having the operational forces working

hand-in-hand with the research and development people helps get operational needs filled quickly. Generally,

that is how our military system works, i.e., the fighter

has a need and combat developers work with research

and developers and the fighter look for the solution

through one of the DOTLMPF areas: doctrine, operations, training, leader development, materiel, personnel,

and facilities.

Two years ago, SMDC produced a “Capabilities

Catalogue” listing all the equipment and products along

with their capabilities that had been developed by the

SMDC Battle Lab, Technical Center, and the Army

Space Program Office. From reading the descriptions

of items, I could imagine that the people who worked

in those organizations had either received a requirement

that needed to be met or had seen a capability and knew

that it had possible military application. It was also evident that they were already thinking about or making

improvements to what was already in the field, e.g., the

Army Space Journal Fall 2003

S

By BG Robert P. Lennox

DCG-O Column

8

Technology for

the Warfighter

New technology, joint forces

advancing modern warfare
9

Grenadier BRAT (GB).

Grenadier Beyond Line of Site Remote Asset

Tracking (BRAT) and mini-transmitters (MTX) provide

commanders with real-time updates, via Space-based

systems, on the locations of their forces and other

friendly forces. The GB weighs about 5 lbs and is best

suited to permanent mounting on vehicles and aircraft.

Its counterpart, the MTX, is about 2 lbs and is better

suited to being carried by Soldiers. (The Grenadier

BRAT and MTX are but two systems that the military

has for tracking its forces.) The Army has now fielded

more than 2500 of these devices that are enhancing the

effectiveness and safety of its Soldiers.

According to the “Capabilities Catalogue,” they

could be upgraded with a target engagement capability

that would allow forward-deployed Soldiers to report

the coordinates of targets. In the two years since the

publication of the catalogue, the Army Space Program

Office has put the laser-rangefinder integration on prototypes and demonstrated them during a live-fire exercise (JCIET 2003) in August 2003. Soon they may be in

the hands of our troops.

History is rich with stories of mankind finding new

and better ways to do things. Englishman James Watt

saw the possibilities and improved on Thomas

Newcomen’s steam engine that fired the Industrial

Revolution. American Eli Whitney won the contract in

1798 to produce 10,000 muskets for the young

American Army fearing a war with France. To do so

quickly he put his idea of precision machinery manufacturing interchangeable parts to the test. He succeeded, produced the weapons, and his system of manufacturing soon became the standard practice for American

business. (Fortunately, the war with the French did not

occur at that time.) Starting in the Civil War, Thaddeus

Lowe led the way by using the hot air balloon to gather

intelligence on enemy troop movements. By the end of

the century others were experimenting with cameras

mounted on kites and on pigeons. Today we’re using

satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles and yes we are

still using lighter than air ships ... the JLENS/RAID is

deployed today in Afghanistan.

In the 1930s, German Werner Von Braun used the

work of American Robert Goddard to develop the V2

rockets that terrorized London near the end of World

War II. They came down from the stratosphere without warning, could not be spotted, nor shot down in

flight; there was no defense against them.

Almost forty years after the first V2 flew and when

the nation still had no effective defense against a missile

attack, President Ronald Reagan directed the

Department of Defense to determine if it was technologically feasible to field a strategic defense to defend

the nation against intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Now, twenty years later, the Ground-based Midcourse

Defense (GMD) system is advanced enough that

President George W. Bush, has directed the system to

go on line for initial defensive operations in October

2004. This was possible only after adjustments to the

direction of the missile defense program as the threat

changed and after numerous experiments, including the

Army’s Homing Overlay Experiment which demonstrated that is was possible to intercept a missile in midcourse with a hit-to-kill interceptor.

In mid-October, we activated the GMD brigade in

Colorado Springs, Colo., and, in early December, we

will activate the GMD battalion at Fort Greely, Alaska.

Our missile crews and staff will be trained. And the

technology, advanced through research and development, will provide them their initial set of missile interceptors.

Almost forty years after the first V2 flew and when the nation 

still had no effective defense against a missile attack, President

Ronald Reagan directed the Department of Defense to determine

if it was technologically feasible to field a strategic defense 

to defend the nation against intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Now, twenty years later, the Ground-based Midcourse Defense

(GMD) system is advanced enough that President George W.

Bush, has directed the system to go on line for initial defensive

operations in October 2004. 

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal

comments

(See Modern Warfare, page 46)
mericans are infatuated with technology. High definition television, flat panel plasma screen displays, wireless connectivity and nano-technology are just a few

examples of our current focus. In fact, technology is

at the core of our increasingly productive society. The

Tofflers, well known futurists, declared that the way a

nation makes money is the way it will wage war.

Certainly this is true of the United States, as we continue to shed manufacturing jobs and become more of

an information-based economy. Our military is quickly spiraling into net centric warfare concepts heavily

reliant on information-based and other technologies.

We have relied heavily on the qualitative side of

warfare in order to defeat the quantitative advantages

of our adversaries. It has been the discovery and then,

more importantly, the application of technology that

has provided significant advantages to our military

forces. This was true with the atomic bomb, is true

with our prevailing situational awareness and will be

true with technologies like laser communications and

space-based radar.

GEN Schoomaker’s focus is on the development of

future transformational capabilities while maintaining

the ability to “pull ideas and capabilities, technologies,

back into the current force that makes us more ready

today.” It is critical that we develop the warfighting

concepts that can focus our significant technological

advantages and limited resources. The TRADOC 525-

series of warfighting concepts and the Army’s

Transformation Roadmap and Campaign Plan are

good examples of concepts guiding technology.

However, it is also clear that many times warfighters don’t know what they don’t know. Not knowing

the art of the possible, warfighting concepts are sometimes inherently constrained. This is where the bridge

between the combat development community and the

science and technology base becomes invaluable. The

technology base can open the thinking of warfighters

to eye-opening possibilities.

SMDC is a cradle to grave organization. The span

of the Command includes the Technology Center, a

Force Developments and Integration Center, a Battle

Lab and operational forces (1st Space Brigade (Prov)

and the GMD Brigade). The ability to synchronize

warfighting concepts with the right mix of technology,

generate the appropriate combat developments documents, prototype and experiment, and then field a

needed capability to our space and missile defense

forces is a very powerful organizational construct.

Have we realized the full potential of these integrated

organizations? No, we have not. However, progress is

being made on a daily basis and we must continue to

break down cultural barriers that inhibit the seamless

integration that future warfighting demands. Success

stories can be seen in the attempt to transition Zeus, a

laser mine-clearing capability, from SMDC into the

Ordnance and Engineer communities, and the development of a comprehensive space control strategy that

integrates the efforts of all elements of SMDC with

the Army and joint communities towards a family of

systems and capabilities.

As we all know, SMDC is no longer just space and

missile defense. We need concepts, technologies and

most importantly, capabilities, for all 5 of our mission

sets - space, global missile defense, information operations, C4ISR and global strike.

As the Command’s combat developer, I would be

remiss if I didn’t speak to the obvious but sometimes

overlooked need for synchronizing the spectrum of

doctrine, organization, training, material, leadership,

personnel and facilities (DOTMLP-F). Successful

fielding, and then employment, of cutting edge techArmy Space Journal Fall 2003

A

By COL James R. Pierson

FDIC Column

10

The View From (Army)

Space ...
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 11

nologies demands that we also have a well thought-out

and integrated plan to build the doctrines and TTPs,

MTOEs and TDAs, training bases, sustainment concepts and facilities required for our operational forces.

Last, but certainly not least, we must always remember

that it is the human element - our Soldiers and our

civilians - that will ultimately dictate our success.

It is fitting that we follow up our previous edition

of the Army Space Journal, focused on Operation

Iraqi Freedom (OIF), with this edition. The application of technology to OIF Lessons will be a critical

and important element in ensuring that we turn these

Lessons into Lessons Learned.

Simply put, technology is a seed corn for the Future

Force and our Army! The ability to balance our current

operational needs with our requirements to transform

the force is a major challenge. And we owe our

Soldiers the very best that technology can provide.

comments

I am an American Soldier.

I am a Warrior and a member of a team. 

I serve the people of the United States and 

live the Army Values.

I will always place the mission first.

I will never accept defeat.

I will never quit.

I will never leave a fallen comrade. 

I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in

my warrior tasks and drills. 

I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.

I am an expert and I am a professional.

I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy the enemies of the United

States of America in close combat.

I am a guardian of freedom and the

American way of life. 

I am an American Soldier. 

Soldier’s

Creed
12 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Space Technology

Where is it leading ground forces?

mplementing Space technology into Army operations has

been evolutionary in nature and slow in progress, taking

many twists and turns and slowly gaining acceptance as

our ground forces are transformed. Now having gained

momentum, Space technology has taken on the appearance of a steamroller promising to create mission effective

Soldiers for the next millennium. This technology is the

embodiment of a new vision, a transformation into a new

world. The Army’s future in Space is vital and essential. It

protects our Soldiers via situational awareness, enhanced

communications, speed of implementation, and operational overmatch that allows for better battle management

and combat support (Force enhancement). With the

potential of all but freeing our Soldiers from the “fog and

friction” of war, Space has now become mission essential

for combat operations.

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr., commander, U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC), recently

emphasized: “Force enhancement embodies the warfighter’s use of Space. It provides ‘value-added’ to the battlefield functions, enabling the land Force to accomplish its

terrestrial mission. As the future Army matures, we will

ensure that upgrades to Force enhancement capabilities

address future 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.”

BG Richard V. Geraci, former deputy commanding

general for Operations, SMDC and deputy commanding

general, U.S. Army Space Command, added: “We want the

Army 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.” He further stated: “Space-based ISR is a prerequisite to domination of the battlespace by the future

I

Space —

An Enabler
space

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 13

technology

Army. 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.”

The question of where Space technology is leading our

ground forces requires an open acceptance to new ideas

and visions. While both our American and our military

cultures are open to acceptance of new technology, it cannot be implemented so fast as to overwhelm our sense of

stability and common understanding of reality and possibilities. We accept Space travel because we modified our

thoughts and understandings through the technology of

airplanes, electronics, jet engines, etc. It is impossible to

explain Space flight or walking on the Moon to primitive

men still living in some remote areas of the planet. We are

all aware that many technologies once projected as science

fiction are now reality.

In an earlier edition of the Army Space Journal, COL

Glen C. Collins Jr., SMDC, said our inputs are “the key to

developing the right Space equipment and organizations to

meet those requirements.” He also reiterated: “Units of

Employment and Units of Action are being designed with

Space-based capabilities in mind. The Army Space

Command will be activated as a Table of Organization and

Equipment (TOE) brigade with TOE battalions.”

The Army must prepare for transformation and Spacebased capabilities will be an integral part of this new Army.

Space is an enabler. It will assist the military and revolutionize the way it fights wars. What was just a dream a few

years ago is now a reality — Space Soldiers are here.

We can expect our future operations to continue to

focus on safe, effective, efficient peacekeeping missions

that protect the lives of our Soldiers, thereby minimizing

casualties. To accomplish this, our forces may need to

aggressively target the adversary’s terrestrial Space assets

while at the same time protecting our own. Superior intelligence is essential to achieving a “mean, lean operating

machine”-type ground Force. The continued evolution of

Space technology promises to enhance intelligence products in many areas of combat operations and help us

achieve a winning battlefield environment.

Leveraging Space technologies for military utility offers

a distinct advantage to our ground forces. Integrating

technological advancements into our various operational

options will provide unique future capabilities. Since

advancements are progressing at steamroller pace, we

must remain open to new ideas, capabilities, innovation,

and change. As a nation, as a culture, as a military, we must

be willing and able to integrate these emerging technologies to produce unchallenged superiority. To accomplish

this, however, we must embrace quick and efficient acquisition processes, early testing, cooperative joint experiments, quick looks and developments of future ideas and

possibilities, early prototypes and fielding, as well as proficient and expert training. Only with such a holistic

approach will we be able to leverage the Space technologies that can provide the capabilities that will allow our

ground forces to achieve decisive victory on future battlefields.

Fielding smaller, more mobile, agile, and self-contained

ground forces and units means that they must be combat

ready when embarking on peacekeeping missions (war

zones, humanitarian efforts, political unrest, etc.). Space

technology will help our ground forces make timely and

accurate decisions to achieve victory. Communications

and updated situational awareness will be in real or nearreal time with precision targeting. Space will be the forward-looking observer — able to answer all the right questions (who, what, when, where, and how) and provide just

the right information to the right place at the right time.

Space technologies will give our Soldiers advanced warning capabilities, provide accuracy, radar imagery, detection,

real-time or near-real-time digital and analog data useful to

a warfighter, tracking, relay capabilities, position, navigation and time technologies, situational awareness, precise

targeting, superior communications, vertical and horizontal integration capabilities, surveillance, intelligence, and

much more.

As Space technologies evolve, smarter, faster, more

capable sensors, energy devices (kinetic, laser, nuclear,

etc.), communication enhancements, etc., will emerge and

engulf military ground forces in a new world of Space

capabilities and enhancements for effective battle management. But because we live in a time of constraints (limited resources, equipment, people, and budgets), we need to

approach every decision as a series of trade-offs. We

examine all the pros and cons. Our background in acquisition has taught us the criticality of the development and

implementation phases to the future of our nation. As the

Army transforms and matures, as its capabilities improve,

and as its future becomes certain, there will be numerous

trade-offs, hard decisions, and down-selects. The difficulty

lies in selecting the very best from the many possible

choices for our ground forces. Space technology is the

new challenge. It is moving to center stage. We must be

ready to seize every opportunity to enhance the battlefield

capabilities of our ground forces. We carry the burden.

We must make the right choices, choose the right developments, and field the right equipment. Our nation depends

on us. Our future ground forces expect us to provide them

the right leverage to win the war for peace!

1. The Army Space Journal, “Space ‘Key enabler’ for Army Transformation,” Winter/Spring

2003, Vol. 2, No 1, pg 2.

2. The Army Space Journal, “Army Transformation War Game: Insights Concerning Space

Operations,” Winter/Spring 2003, Vol. 2, No 1, pg 4.

3. The Army Space Journal, “The View From (Army) Space...How Space Contributes to

Transformation,” Winter/Spring 2003, Vol. 2, No 1, pg 6.
Strategic Wing Tactical Saucer actical Saucer

Atomic Era City Defender: Atomic Era City Defender: Nike Hercules Nike Hercules

Fur

Exp

Flying Spy: Future py: Future Army Jet Drone Army Jet Drone

Night Firing Night Firing

Revolution in Future Flight: Revolution in Future Flight:

The Tilt-Wing Plane ing Plane Night Reconnaissance Night Reconnaissance
f r o m t h e e y e s o f

In 1958, LTC Robert B. Rigg, an Army artist, donated a series of paintings to the Office of the

T H E P A S T

Chief of Military History. In his letter transferring ownership of the artwork, Rigg described his

works:

“Eleven paintings of this series represent current Army research and development projects —

current history in the making. General James M. Gavin, former Chief of Research and

Development, suggested this series and I have painted them in pastels in an effort to lend dramatic character and color to the machines under development for any war of tomorrow.”

The original titles and descriptions provide some insight into the artist’s thoughts. Riggs did not

provide additional comments beyond titling one of the paintings as Night Firing.

ATOMIC FIREPOWER AND AERIAL ASSAULT CRAFT — Concept of aerial and ground vehicles ready to exploit the effects of an atomic blast.

FUTURE ARMOR POWER TO EXPLOIT NUCLEAR FIREPOWER — The Army’s T-92 light

tank — a prototype vehicle undergoing engineering tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground, 1958.

AERIAL ASSAULT VEHICLE — Concept of a Sky-Cavalry vehicle under combat development

in 1958 to provide 3-D means of attach for the Pentomic Army.

FLYING SPY: FUTURE ARMY JET DRONE — A concept of unmanned, remote-controlled

drone — a 1958 R&D project to provide drones to accomplish: battlefield surveillance, target

spotting, nuclear fallout monitoring, radiation detection, countermeasures control, and tactical

reconnaissance.

REVOLUTION IN FUTURE FLIGHT: THE TILT WING PLANE — The first tilt-wing plane, the

Vertol 76, is turbine powered. Funded by the Army and developed in cooperation with U.S. Naval

Research, it is expected to achieve flight conversion in 1958.

STRATEGIC WING-TACTICAL SAUCER — A 1958 concept of a flying wing to carry tactical flying saucers into combat action a possible substitute for the parachute used by airborne troops.

BREAKING TRADITIONAL TERRAIN BARRIERS — Army R&D is in quest of a flying crane,

which can carry payloads of up to 12 tons for distances of 50 miles, and lift small armored vehicles over rivers and other terrain barriers. One 1958 concept is the Hiller duct-fan type crane.

NIGHT RECONNAISSANCE — Air Cavalry’s flying jeeps of the future will shoot to obtain information. A ducted-fan aerial jeep of this type undergoing Army development — 1958.

rture Armor Power to Armor Power to

ploit Nuclear Firepower ploit Nuclear Firepower

Breaking T Breaking Traditional raditional

Terrain Barriers errain Barriers

Atomic Firepower and Atomic Firepower and

Aerial Assault Craf Assault Craft

Aerial Assault Vehicle
16 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

r. Thomas H. Killion is the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary

for Research and Technology/Chief Scientist, responsible for the

Army Science and Technology program. Prior to this designation, Dr. Killion served as the Director for Technology in the

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,

Logistics and Technology under the Deputy ASA for Research

and Technology. In this position, he was responsible for oversight

and coordination for the majority of the Army's Applied

Research program and all of its Advanced Development program. He also co-chaired the Warfighter Technical Council and

managed the Science and Technology Objective and Advanced

Technology Demonstration approval process for the

DAS(R&T). These and other outstanding credentials made

him an obvious choice for ASJ to interview about the future of

Space technology. He spoke by phone from the Pentagon to

ASJ's MAJ Laura Kenney on that topic.

Q: From hot air balloons used during the Civil War

for aerial surveillance, to satellites providing similar benefits today — Space has been a combat

multiplier since its inception. How important a

role do you see it playing in current operations?

A: Immense. Bringing technology to bear that we’ve

invested on in the past, we see the results in widely

used space technology today. For example, people

invested in basic research in the atomic clock 50 years

ago that led to high precision timing. The Global

Positioning Satellite system that we use to geo-locate

vehicles, people, and targets today is based on that

research.

As far as current applications, in addition to using

GPS for navigation and precision targeting, there is of

course the traditional intelligence function, such as

imaging, which maps out terrain, infrastructure and

forces, allowing us to plan efficiently and effectively in

the application of our force capabilities. As usual, that

has been critical.

In communications, Space is absolutely essential,

allowing us to remain in constant contact, both in theater and back to the U.S., using both military and commercial assets.

Less obvious, but just as important, is how we utilize Space in the field of meteorology. The Army has

invested a lot of resources in learning how best to

exploit technology under varying weather conditions

and to use that knowledge to guide our use of sensors

and weapons.

Q: In future operations?

A: I don’t see the importance of any of the above

diminishing; in fact I only see it increasing.

In communications, limitations we’ve had in the

past have been infrastructure for Space-based comms,

such as fairly large tracking antennas. Electronically

scanning antennas will enable us to export low profile

satellite communications technology down to the

much lower levels.

For intelligence — advances in miniaturization of

processing, enabling high capacity laptops and even

advanced Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), can literally put imagery and other intelligence information in

the hands of the individual soldier. Very Dick Tracy.

Meteorology has seen tremendous advances in the

modeling domain. We’re already performing pretty

well at large scale ... I see us in the future getting better at providing high resolution local data... small scale

right down to where the soldier is, enabling him to

maximize and take advantage of those weather conditions from an operational sense.

Navigation tools will also advance significantly due

to miniaturization; we’ve already got amazing handheld

systems.

D

Q&A

Chief Scientist

Speaks of the Future

Interview with 

Dr. Thomas Killion
questions & answers17

Q: In what particular area do you see it as most

valuable — communications, intelligence,

weaponry? Why?

A: I don’t see any single one as the most valuable;

rather I see a convergence of functions over time — a

synergy of improvements in each area. Imagine a

weapon that, in addition to performing as a weapon

hitting a target, simultaneously feeds us intelligence on

the target area. Communicating back to us intelligence

and navigational information on the terrain, target and

weather — all this in a single system. Advancements

in terms of communications have sped up such concepts as using an artillery shell as an intelligence-gathering device. It expands the envelope of data sources

available to the networked force.

Q: What are drawbacks/showstoppers, if any, to

integrating and utilizing Space in such ways?

A: I’d use the term challenges rather than drawback or

showstopper. The first such challenge is bandwidth,

simply put. Our capabilities are expanding faster than

the bandwidth available. We’re answering that in various ways: being smarter in terms of data distribution

(minimizing the load on the network), real-time bandwidth management, dynamically matching information

demands to available bandwidth, and using more efficient antennas (such as directional vs. omni-directional

systems). So we’re working hard to meet that challenge, to ensure the warfighters have access to the

information they need.

Another challenge is making sure that the information we receive from these great assets is accurate,

that any adversary is not deceiving the system into

believing inaccurate info (similar to how meaconing in

navigation systems causes location errors). We need to

prevent intrusion, deception or disruption and we’re

also addressing that through techniques that maximize,

maintain and improve the integrity of our access to

Space assets.

Q: Science fiction writers and artists — notably

Jules Verne and Leonardo da Vinci — conceived of

ways to exploit Space decades, even centuries,

before such usage became reality. Do you believe

such exponential development to be still possible,

or are there already visible limits set by the laws of

physics, etc. Will there be changes as exponential

as we’ve seen this century, in twenty years? In

fifty?

A: The short answer is yes — the changes will be exponential. To expound, a noted futurist, Ray Kurzweil,

has postulated that advances in scientific knowledge

and technology accelerate in an exponential manner.

He believes that the explosion we have seen in technology in the last couple of decades is but a harbinger

of what is to come.

Kurzweil believes that we will explore Space further, but probably through robots. He believes that

there will come a time when, due to the expansion of

computer processing, it will rival human intelligence.

Nano probes to network and map the human brain

could theoretically allow us to download an individual’s

intelligence. It would then be reasonable to send that

intelligence into Space to explore for us, where perhaps our more fragile biological systems could not

endure. We could then explore Space virtually. All of

this is theoretical or speculation, but I do believe we

will see changes as startling and profound in our future

as we have seen in our past.

Q: Can you give us an unclassified view of some

Space technology under research and/or development currently?

A: The Army’s S&T investment in Space focuses on

the tools that we use to exploit the communications,

navigation and intelligence information available to us

from Space systems, rather than on the satellite systems themselves. Again, the rapid advances in miniaturization of technology play a large role in current

development. One example of what we’re currently

working on is shrinking an Inertial Measurement Unit

— used in navigation — to a fraction of its current

volume. Using micro-electro-mechanical systems

(MEMS) technology, the goal is to provide a low cost

device for munitions that provides adequate accuracy

and much lower volume so it can be used in even very

small munitions, greatly increasing their precision.

Where Space technology comes in is that we are also

looking at integrating GPS into the system to provide

real time location updates in-flight, further increasing

the accuracy of the weapon.

A couple of other relevant technology efforts are

the work on satellite communications antennas for

comms-on-the move, mentioned earlier, and techniques for more rapidly exploiting imagery and other

Space-based intelligence to aid in maintaining battlespace awareness.

Q: How adversarial do you see Space technology

as becoming? Do you foresee actual Space wars,

or Space-based weaponry, despite the current

treaties forbidding such, in our lifetime?

A: The answers to those questions really depend on the

Space capabilities of our potential adversaries. Many

people around the world have access to Space-based

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Scientist, page 47)
18 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

ver the next decade, the transformation of the U.S. military will continue at a rapid pace. Homeland defense, terrorist threats, near-competitor nation states, the spread of

high technology weapons, and the proliferation of

weapons of mass destruction make it imperative that our

military develops new technologies to transform itself

into an organization capable of countering these threats.

One emerging technology being demonstrated is actually

an innovative use of an old technology — airships.

Combining the old airship concepts with modern sensors

and communications equipment transforms these ideas

into the emerging technology of a high altitude airship

(HAA). This article describes the capabilities of the

HAA: its military utility as an alternative to Space platforms (such as satellites) and unmanned aerial vehicles

(UAVs), its potential as a communication relay, and its

possible use by other government agencies.

The HAA is a Department of Defense FY03

Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD),

with a projected demonstration completion in FY07. The

Missile Defense Agency is conducting the ACTD. The

U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Technical Center is

supporting the ACTD as the technical lead for payloads

and transitioning of the airship to a follow-on program.

The objective of the ACTD is to demonstrate the engineering feasibility and potential military utility of an

unmanned, un-tethered, gas-filled airship that can fly at

65,000 feet. The prototype airship will be capable of

continuous flight for up to a month while carrying a

multi-mission payload. The ACTD payload weight is

4,000 pounds and payload power is 10 kilowatts. The

ACTD is intended as a developmental step toward an

objective HAA that can self-deploy from the continental

United States to worldwide locations (Figures 1 and 2)

and remain on station in a geostationary position for a

year (or more) before returning to the United States for

service at fixed ground launch and recovery areas. The

objective HAA may also increase in payload weight and

power. These potential improvements will be determined

during the course of the ACTD.

The HAA payload bay will house a variety of payloads

supporting multiple missions and providing multiple

capabilities to the warfighter. These missions include, but

are not limited to, intelligence, wide-area surveillance,

psychological warfare, communication relay, Space control, missile defense, and blue (friendly) force tracking.

One way to better understand the HAA concept is to

consider it as a “high mobility multipurpose wheeled

vehicle (HMMWV) in the sky.” Like the HMMWV, the

payload will determine the mission that the HAA supports. Areas under investigation during the ACTD

include the use of the HAA as a surrogate Space platform, as a surrogate UAV, and as a communication relay

platform.

Examination of the HAA as an alternative to a Space

platform or a UAV reveals that all three provide significant on-station time over an area of interest and all three

are capable of carrying a variety of payloads. Generally

speaking, the HAA falls in between the on-station time of

a UAV (measured in hours or days) and a satellite (measured in years). However, the HAA is not envisioned as a

replacement for the UAV or satellite, each of which has

its own unique capabilities. Deployability, transit time to

theater, logistical support, and operational/tactical

employment concepts must all be considered in determining the type of aerial platform required for a given

mission. For short duration missions, a UAV may be

adequate. For a mission requiring an asset to be on station for years, perhaps a satellite is required. However, a

distinct advantage of the HAA is its ability to provide a

cost-effective alternative to UAVs and satellites.

In comparison studies between the UAV and HAA

O

By Michael M. Lee

Old Becomes New ...

Airships are out 

of the box

Michael M. Lee serves in the U.S. Army Space and

Missile Defense Command’s Space Technology

Directorate. His professional experience includes radar

technology development at the U.S. Army Missile

Command and the PATRIOT Project Office, Lead

Engineer for the In-Flight Interceptor Communication

System for National Missile Defense, and the Transition

Manager of the High Altitude Airship (HAA) Advanced

Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD). He was a

key participant in the effort resulting in the approval of the

HAA ACTD for initiation in FY03. 

Fall Theme
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 19

space

(where both conduct the same type of mission), one

HAA provides the same capability as four UAVs, with the

cost of the UAV life cycle being three times as much as

an HAA. This results in a 12:1 value for the HAA over

the UAV. In a comparison study between the HAA and

a generic satellite conducting a 24/7 mission over a specified area, approximately 50 satellites would be needed for

one HAA. The resultant cost would be 50 or more times

as much as an HAA — resulting in example of substantial value for the HAA. In a budget-constrained environment, these studies illustrate the fiscal rationale of using

HAAs, but only if they meet the warfighter’s mission

requirements.

Another possible HAA perspective mission is as a

communications relay platform. The Army is very interested in over-the-horizon communication relay and wide

area surveillance. The Navy is very interested in servicing carrier groups for over-the-horizon communication

relay. An aerial relay platform provides several advantages over ground-based relays. The HAA is less manpower intensive, immune from ground and artillery

attack, and has a reduced logistics footprint. The HAA

could also be deployed sufficiently to the rear of the theater for immunity from surface-to-air missile attacks. An

example is the current communication relays in Korea.

One HAA with the proper communication payload could

replace all the communication relays currently located in

the South Korean mountains. Not only would this

improve the over-the-mountain communications, but it

would also reduce requirements for ground facilities, personnel, force protection, and logistics support.

Given its continuous, geostationary, long endurance,

large payload characteristics and its significant cost benefits, the HAA provides tremendous capability not only

for the military but for other government agencies. For

example, the Department of Homeland Security and

NORAD are interested in cruise missile wide area surveillance (Figure 3). Also, the Drug Enforcement Agency

is interested in border security wide area surveillance and

blue (friendly) force tracking. Other potential users are

providers of commercial communication relays. All of

these possibilities must be explored before the full potential of the HAA can be realized.

As the military transforms, the HAA provides a flexible, cost-effective platform to meet the wide variety of

missions required by the military, from homeland defense

to major combat operations. The HAA is an example of

the innovative thinking required to transform the military.

The HAA’s use of modern sensors and communication

equipment provides the commander an alternative to

Space platforms, UAVs, and communication relays. As

research continues, more “out of the box” uses of the

HAA may be developed.

technology

JOINT THEATER OPERATIONS

Missile

Defense

Regional

Conflict &

Special Ops

HOMELAND DEFENSE

Sovereignty

Theater 

Missile 

Defense

In-Theater

Control/Tasking

Look-Down

Look-Up

Near Real-Time Processing

External Cueing

Sensor Data 

Downlink

Comm Relay

C2 Data Link

CINC

JTF

THEATER OPERATIONS

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3
he U.S. military requires accurate positioning, attitude,

velocity, motion compensation, and positioning synchronization data to maintain effective real-time theater

coordination of our allies and our highly mobile military forces. Additionally, our military requires an awareness of enemy position and movement. The military’s

use of the global positioning system (GPS) has created

a significant military advantage in accurate navigation

and a time reference system. Missile defense and surveillance weapon systems rely on this data through all

phases of the system’s employment. Additionally,

Department of Defense (DoD) embraced GPS for use

with many weapon systems to support guidance and

navigation of smart, steerable weapons. This heavy

reliance upon GPS by the U.S. military, however, makes

it a prime target for jamming by hostile forces.

Miniature Aircraft Geolocation System (MAGS) is a

potentially viable alternative that will allow DoD to

continue to embrace GPS and solve the threat of GPS

jamming devices.

Currently, an open market exists for commercially

available GPS jamming devices. For example, one

Russian company is marketing a long-range GPS jamming device that can deny GPS operation over a 200-

kilometer diameter area at altitudes up to 50,000 feet.

GPS is no longer a guaranteed navigation solution for

our forces and weapon systems in times of military conflict. In the absence of the Space segment and GPS

satellite access, there are now no sufficiently secure,

jam-resistant, precision positioning devices or systems.

Accordingly, there is a need for a non-GPS projectile

navigation system.

Current inertial navigation systems lack the accuracy, durability, and versatility, in addition to exhibiting

poor drift performance and shock sensitivity to fill this

need. Over the past several years, two specific technologies have been proposed to overcome these critical

weaknesses as well as GPS jamming. One alternative

was the use of an inertial navigation system; the other

was the use of a MAGS.

To address the issue of overcoming GPS jamming

of precision-guided munitions, the Navy first funded a

technology development called the extended range

guided munitions (ERGM) program. ERGM are rocket-assisted munitions that fly into the target area at

extended ranges. Navigation systems are integrated to

guide the munitions to the target to achieve greater

accuracy and reduce the circular error probability.

Initially, GPS was contemplated to provide munitions

navigation en route to the target. However, GPS jamming was anticipated so an inertial navigation system

was integrated to provide the end of flight navigation

function in lieu of GPS.

The second GPS alternative effort was in support of

the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s smart sensor

Web program and included the Office of Naval

Research’s smart sensor wireless netting program. Part

of this effort included development of an ultra wideband (UWB) leveraging non-GPS navigation system.

The result of this development was the MAGS concept.

The MAGS consists of multiple subsystems and

functions much like the GPS. Unmanned aerial vehicle

(UAV) platforms perform identical functions as GPS

satellites. Many UAVs fly precise patterns underneath

the munitions trajectory path. At regular intervals, the

UAVs transmit a series of S-band UWB pulses that signal each UAV’s current location and local time. Also

similar to GPS, assets requiring location knowledge are

equipped with MAGS receivers to process signal differential time of flight and determine resulting locations.

The MAGS UAVs determine their position by using

video imagery from a down-looking camera and corre20 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

T

By Randy Yergert

Fall Theme

No Longer Guaranteed ...

Global positioning system

alternative necessary

Randy Yergert serves in the SMDC Space Technology

Directorate. His professional experience includes participation in directed energy weapon programs, aircraft radar

and communications equipment, and the battlefield ordnance awareness program.
space

21

lating the images with locations on georegistered maps

stored in their on-board map database. UAVs fly sufficiently low (approximately 500 feet above ground location) to avoid cloud ceilings and camera image resolution. Also, UAVs use UWB radar altimeters to maintain

altitude control and aid in Kalman filtering for their

position determination using the map/image correlation. An inertial navigation system supplies the precision location information between map/correlation

image navigation updates. Additionally, UAVs carry

precision clocks to timestamp the packets transmitted

with the UAV geolocation information. Finally, UAVs

communicate among themselves to synchronize their

system clocks and determine the timing of the packet

burst sequences for their geolocation packets.

Those systems requiring location knowledge have

MAGS receivers to interface with the inertial navigation

systems in the same manner as GPS receivers. The

MAGS systems receive UAV location packets and

record the relative time of arrival respectively. Based on

relative time of arrival between messages with location

and transmission time, the receivers calculate position

and local time. The relative packet arrival times are

measured with a receiver clock capable of surviving system mission stresses and of achieving an accuracy of 1

part per million. UWB waveforms allow the receivers

to acquire precise flight time measurements from the

UAV transmitters to the MAGS receivers. The receiver

architecture is highly sensitive to the leading edge of the

first packet pulse for precision time of flight measurement. Additionally, because geolocation transmitters

are located in a geometric plane close to the ground, the

geometric dilution of precision increases vertically as

the MAGS receivers approach the transmitter. To

reduce this uncertainty, the MAGS host systems require

an UWB radar altimeter.

The use of short pulses, with a broad instantaneous

frequency spectrum, provides a unique waveform supportive of a wide variety of applications. In the MAGS

architecture, UWB is used for sensing and ranging the

ground for altitude and for determining range and location between transmitters and receivers for geolocation

and communications. As an added benefit, UWB waveforms offer a low probability of intercept and detection

signature, hence a low probability of interference.

Finally, because of the nearly all-digital nature of the

UWB radar, microminiaturization through the use of

custom advanced system integrated circuits (ASICs)

and hybrid technology is currently achievable. A further size reduction through ASICs and Radio

Frequency Integrated Circuits will allow UWB systems

to occupy a very small footprint to fit on nearly all classes of air platforms and munitions.

With improved clock synchronization among

MAGS UAVs, it will be possible to provide navigation

with the equivalent performance of GPS. Furthermore,

the total MAGS system employs technologies that are

low cost and, in many instances, currently available via

commercial off-the-shelf. UWB technologies are

affordable and enable navigation performance with

wide distribution. Given these key advantages, the key

challenges in the near future facing MAGS development

are system integration and ensuring supporting technologies are developed to fit inside the respective

receiver packages.

As the proliferation of GPS jamming technology

increases, it is imperative that the military develop alternatives to the current satellite-based GPS system.

MAGS is one possible solution that will help ensure our

military maintains leadership in reliable, precision-guided munitions as well as other technologies dependent

upon precise location and timing information.

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal

Navigation systems are integrated to guide the 

munitions to the target to achieve greater accuracy 

and reduce the circular error probability. Initially, GPS

was contemplated to provide munitions navigation 

en route to the target. However, GPS jamming was

anticipated so an inertial navigation system was 

integrated to provide the end of flight navigation 

function in lieu of GPS.

technology
22 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Tip of the Sphere

ETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — A historic moment for the nation’s homeland defense

strategy took place here Oct. 16, when the U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command and the

Colorado Army National Guard activated the nation’s

first Ground-based Midcourse Defense Brigade.

The brigade will operate the first part of the integrated Ballistic Missile Defense System, which, in concert with sister Services, is designed to protect the

nation from accidental or intentional limited ballistic

missile attacks. It will be manned by Colorado Army

National Guard and active component Soldiers.

The brigade will provide expertise to U.S. Northern

Command’s command and control operations from the

Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center.

Another component of the brigade, the Alaska

Army National Guard Missile Defense Space Battalion,

will be activated in December. It will provide operational control over ground-based interceptors located

in Alaska.

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr., commanding general of U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command,

and Air Force Maj. Gen. Mason C. Whitney, Adjutant

General of the Colorado National Guard, hosted the

ceremony.

Welcoming the new brigade, Cosumano addressed

the crowd of state and local politicians, military service members and their families.

“The missile defense strategy of the 20th century

was largely based on the concept that rational countries

won’t attack each other. We’ve learned in the 21st century that those theories don’t apply anymore. Hostile

states, and even non-state hostile groups, now either

have or are working on long-range missiles. This activation today of an important part of our homeland

defense strategy allows us to defend against that

threat,” said Cosumano.

“The technology and the organizations have

changed dramatically to meet the current threat. The

technology has changed from nuclear kill to hit-to-kill.

In two wars now, Patriot has proven beyond a shadow

of a doubt that we can hit a missile with a missile,

despite naysayers of past years. Now we can do it in

space.

“As to organizational change — where we’re having this ceremony, in front of the U.S. Northern

Command building, and close to both the Army and

Air Force space buildings, is indicative of the joint

nature of this effort to protect our great nation. We’ll

be depending on Navy Aegis missile cruisers, and on

the early warning architecture of the Air Force, as well

as the superb skills and training of our own Soldiers.

“And within the GMD Brigade itself, we see the

melding of active component service men and women

with Colorado National Guardsmen. The Guard is a

perfect fit for this mission, with the genesis of their

role in national defense dating back to the 1700s. That

makes them a natural for this mission, just as

Colorado, the hub and nerve center of Space for the

nation, is the most logical site for command and control.”

Whitney spoke next, expounding on the mission of

the Guard.

“We are tremendously proud to be part of this mission. It continues in direct descent the role of the

Guardsman in protecting our nation. The only difference between the mission of 200 plus years ago and

now is that, with our current technology, we can defend

more rapidly and accurately. Even being in Space isn’t

new; we’ve been in Space more than ten years now. In

all three buildings behind me, you’ll find both Air

Force and Army National Guardsmen. I congratulate

all the members of the new Ground-based Midcourse

Defense Brigade, and wish them well as they begin a

new tradition of excellence.”

GMD is designed to attack and kill any incoming

missile in the “middle” phase or “midcourse” of its

trajectory, after the boost or launch, and before it

reaches re-entry to impact, therefore destroying that

missile in Space. Working in concert with the early

warning architecture, provided in part by the Air Force

and the Navy’s Aegis missile cruisers, GMD will

launch a booster missile toward a target’s predicted

location releasing a “kill vehicle” on the path of an

incoming target. The kill vehicle uses data from the

ground-based radars and its own on-board sensor to

collide with the target.

While the GMD Brigade is assigned to SMDC, its

operators execute the decision/directive from

Northern Command to destroy a ballistic missile

threat. The brigade also has responsibilities to both

NORTHCOM and U.S. Strategic Command.

Command relationships are still being worked out at

the four-star level due to the possible trans-regional

P

First Ground-based Midcourse Defense Brigade

in nation activated

By MAJ Laura Kenney
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 23

nature of the threat.

Approximately 90 personnel will be

located at the Headquarters. Operators

are Air Defense qualified Soldiers and

are supported by a Brigade staff (personnel, intelligence, operations, supply

and communications.)

The 110 Soldiers who will be located

at the battalion include air defense

operators, force protection guard force

and staff personnel. Actual interceptors will be

located at Fort Greely, Alaska. The battalion will

have not only the operational mission, but the testbed mission as well, to ensure continuation of

development.

Alaska was chosen as a site for interceptors

due to requirements of the system. Geometry and

the arc of any missile in flight over the globe make

Alaska a perfect choice. There will also be interceptors located at Vandenberg Air Force Base in

California.

COL Gary Baumann, commander of the

newly activated brigade, spoke with conviction

about his unit and its mission.

“In the 1970’s, we briefly had the capability to

defend ourselves against the threat of ballistic

missiles. At that point, intelligence indicated that

nine countries possessed such capabilities. Today,

that number has increased threefold. This unit’s

activation is a small step towards ensuring the

safety of our nation. In December 2002, the

President of the United States directed that we

push the fielding of this system up from 2006, to

2004. I believe we are on target to meet those

goals. Our Soldiers, chosen from the best across

the state and nation, are well-trained, excited, and

looking forward to the challenge, and have been

working tirelessly to be prepared for it.”

Left, Air Force Maj. Gen. Mason C. Whitney, left, adjutant general of the Colorado National Guard, unfurls the flag of the

newly activated Colorado National Guard Missile Defense

Brigade, at a ceremony activating the nation's first Groundbased Midcourse Defense Brigade. The "stand-up" took place

at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo.

Below, COL Gary Baumann, center left, commander of the

newly activated Ground-based Midcourse Defense Brigade,

accepts the brigade's flag from LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.,

commanding general, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command, at a ceremony 'standing up' the nation's first such

unit. Framing the two are, left to right, GMD Brigade CSM

Daniel Marques and Air Force Maj. Gen. Mason C. Whitney,

adjutant general of the Colorado National Guard. The brigade

will be manned by both National Guard and active component

Soldiers. Photos by Dennis Plummer
24 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Tip of the Sphere

Editor’s Note: At a date to be determined, LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

will relinquish command of the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command and Army Strategic Command. Army Space Journal’s Debra

Valine sat down with LTG Cosumano to get his thoughts. (Some information contained in this article appeared previously in The Eagle.)

hen he assumed command in April 2001,

Cosumano had a vision. He wanted the command to normalize Space, provide layered force

protection for commanders in chief throughout the world,

and develop soldiers and civilians with technical and leadership skills to support the Objective Force of the 21st

Century.

“Our challenge is to continue providing the expertise,

research and work that will move the nation closer to the

ability to field a missile defense capable of protecting

American citizens and deployed forces against missile

attacks,” Cosumano said in his column in The Eagle in June

2001.

In just two years, SMDC has made great progress in

fulfilling that vision.

“I wanted to make the command more operationally

focused,” Cosumano said.

“And I wanted to improve the command’s team relationship. I wanted the operational and materiel development sides to work more closely together.”

SMDC reorganized in mid-2003 from having separate

staffs in three locations to a single staff to support the

command.

In 2001, the United States did not have a single system

that would protect deployed warfighters, allies and coalition partners, and citizens. The Administration made a

commitment to missile defense, looking to a multi-layered

architecture to counter threats in all phases of their flight:

boost, mid-course and terminal. Cosumano predicted at

that time that the Army would be responsible for the

ground-based portion of the mid-course segment.

Work on a ground-based midcourse defense test bed at

Fort Greely, Alaska, started in June 2002. Later, in

December 2002, the test bed overview was changed and

the command was directed to have an Initial Deployment

Operational (IDO) capability in October 2004.

“The deployment of the ground-based midcourse

defense is timely,” Cosumano said.

“Years ago when we thought about building a system

to protect the United States, we had projected an uncertain

world. We had the foresight to predict the world we are in

today — certainly not to the scale of 9-11, but in the circumstances we are in today. We are threatened by nonnation states such as Al Qaeda and nation states that do

not agree with our ideas of democracy and freedom.

“The ground-based midcourse defense program is on

schedule with operations and training to become operational in 2004,” Cosumano said.

“It is the first step of a global integrated missile

defense system that will allow seamless protection from

region to homeland. It is a joint system in that the Army is

just one of the participants. The Navy will provide early

warning and the Air Force will provide satellite- and

ground-based early warning.”

To help meet the manpower requirement, SMDC

stood up the first ever Ground-based Midcourse Defense

Brigade, part of the Colorado Army National Guard, Oct.

16.

Work on ground-based midcourse defense is just one

area where SMDC has been transforming into a command

that can support the modern day warfighter with Spacebased products and the Army go-to command for the U.S.

Strategic Command.

When SMDC was named the Army Service

Component Command for STRATCOM in January 2003,

its mission areas grew in scope and depth from three mission areas to five, taking on a global nature. SMDC’s mission areas include global strike, Space operations, integrated missile defense, and strategic information operations,

with Command, Control, Communications, Computers,

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) as

the enabler.

“The greatest honor the command has been bestowed

is being named the Army Service Component Command

for STRATCOM,” Cosumano said.

“SMDC was selected based upon performance in current and past operations and its ability to not only develop

but field and support high-tech equipment. We are appropriately recognized to be the service component command

to STRATCOM.”

Taking on the increased responsibility meant that

technologies needed to be developed and put into the

hands of the warfighters, and people needed to be trained

to use them.

Many technologies have been transferred from SMDC

to the Program Executive Office for Air, Space and Missile

Defense. “Hit to kill” technology used in current anti-tactical ballistic missiles was originated in Huntsville’s

Technical Center to include the Patriot (PAC3), which saw

significant action in the war with Iraq. Another capability

SMDC sees many changes during Cosumano’s

time as commander

By Debra Valine

W
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 25

being developed — and used in the Afghanistan theater of operations — is ZEUS, a laser mounted on a

HUMVEE that detonates unexploded surface ordnances.

Others include the Tactical High Energy Laser

/Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser, the Medium

Extended Area Defense System, Theater High

Altitude Area Defense, Joint Land Attack Cruise

Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System,

TES, and Grenadier BRAT, along with the Army

Space Program Office.

“Transferring technologies and capabilities to

PEO-ASMD allows those technologies to soon be in

the hands of the service members to enhance their

warfighting ability,” Cosumano said.

“Our units are becoming smaller but more agile

and lethal through the technologies being developed

in Huntsville.”

In addition to developing the Space-based technologies and capabilities, SMDC stood up three

Space battalions: 1st Space Battalion, 1st Satellite

Control Battalion and the 193rd Space Support

Battalion, and developed a program to train Space

officers. Army Space officers are a key asset to the

ground forces. To date, four classes of Space officers

have graduated and been assigned to duty supporting

combatant commanders worldwide. They support

commanders to leverage Space for ground warfighters around the world.

“Ground warfighters must be able to see first,

understand first and then finish decisively,”

Cosumano said.

“Space will enable this by providing near realtime navigation, communication, weather, imagery,

missile warning and intelligence.

“The Space operators are being received as members of the combined arms teams to which they are

assigned,” he said.

“Space operators are deployed with division and

corps teams in the areas of operations. They are

becoming key members of the teams that are providing key capabilities that enable the current forces. I

think Space operators will become more important as

the years go on.”

Looking back over his tenure as commander of

SMDC, Cosumano said he is most proud of the performance by the command’s soldiers, civilians and

contractors in Operation Enduring Freedom in

Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq.

“The team came together to support these operations and made a huge difference in the fight. We

deployed and supported every operational element of

the command, to include our reserve components,”

he said.

“The time has just flown by,” Cosumano said, not

only of his time with SMDC, but of his 35 years in the

Army.

“It has been a great opportunity to serve with

some of the finest people I have ever met at every

assignment along the way,” Cosumano said.

“At each assignment, I am sure I have gained

more than I gave. Each one has its own special memories for my wife, our children, and me. We are honored to have served for all these years.”
26 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

SMDC NCO of the Year battled for DA title while

younger brother faces own battles in Iraq

Tip of the Sphere

Two members of the Headquarters Company, 1st

Satellite Control Battalion proudly represented U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command in the

second Department of the Army NCO and Soldier of

the Year competition. SSG Steven Cato, SMDC NCO

of the Year, and SGT Jennifer Swift, SMDC Soldier of

the Year, competed against 10 NCOs and Soldiers in

their respective categories during the weeklong competition that was conducted at Fort Lee and

Arlington, Va., Sept. 12-18.

The event, initiated last year by Sergeant Major of

the Army Jack Tilley, brought together once again the

“best of the best” in today's Army.

At the end of the competition, SPC Russell A.

Burnham, U.S. Army Forces Command, was named

the 2003 Soldier of the Year, and SSG James W. Luby,

Military District of Washington and National Capital

Region, was the 2003 NCO of the Year.

Competitors for the Department of the Army NCO and Soldier of the

Year Competition pose for a picture with Sergeant Major of the Army

Jack Tilley during a break in competition. 

Photo by Sharon L. Hartman

SMDC competes at Department of the Army

NCO and Soldier of the Year competition

RLINGTON, Va. — SSG Steven Cato of the

Headquarters Company, 1st Satellite Control

Battalion, represented U.S. Army Space and

Missile Defense Command as he vied for the title of

Department of the Army Noncommissioned Officer of

the Year during a weeklong competition. The contest,

conducted in Fort Lee and Arlington, Va., Sept. 12-18, pitted him against 10 other NCOs representing their major

commands as they performed an array of tasks to include

a PT test, various common task tests, day and night land

navigation, and a mystery event that consisted of a sixmile ruck march, two more CTTs and an M-16 qualification while wearing their protective gas masks. Yet during

this time, as often as his mind was focused on the competition and the task at hand, Cato found his thoughts

frequently shifting to his brother, John, a truck driver who

has been serving in Iraq with a National Guard unit out

of Ardmore, Okla., since April of this year. For Cato, the

title he was competing for was one, which, in his heart

and mind, had already been bestowed upon his brother

and every NCO that has served and sacrificed in the fight

for freedom.

Cato, a native of Vernon, Texas, joined the Army

believing it to be an experience that would send him

down a new and challenging path. He knew nothing of

what an NCO was or what his role as one would be, but

with five and a half years of service behind him, he can

now sum up with one word, what it means to be an NCO:

Influence.

“NCOs make today’s Army. We’re molding the

Soldiers of the future, and we have an extreme influence

on them,” said Cato.

“If a Soldier has a poor leader, it reflects directly on

that Soldier. That Soldier may not turn out the same way,

but even if he or she is a good Soldier, their progression

will be much slower. It will hold them back.

“I definitely keep a higher standard for myself, but I

also keep a higher standard for other NCOs. A good

NCO will give his or her Soldiers guidance and sometimes even a little push to help them reach their potential.

That is my goal as an NCO. To embrace that influence

and use it to the advantage of the Army.”

With this attitude, it was no wonder Cato shone at the

company, battalion, and regional boards and was subsequently selected as SMDC’s NCO of the Year. Although

a competitor at heart, Cato modestly admits that he did

not expect to make it as far as he did.

“I have a will to win and always want to do the very

A
27

best I can no matter what I’m doing, but the competition I

had all the way through the MACOM level was tremendous

and I believe, just by pure luck, I came out on top. I never

expected to come this far and would have never been upset

to be beaten along the way because my competition was

that outstanding.

“The competition at the DA level was just another step

up,” added Cato.

“The Soldiers I work with are satellite controllers like I

am. It was interesting and exciting competing against

Soldiers from different branches.”

The Soldiers he competed against and roomed with for

a week, side by side, represented such military branches as

Special Forces, Forces Command, Rangers, and the Old

Guard to name a few.

“It was a great experience. I was able to learn from

these guys and take things from their fields of expertise,”

added Cato.

“Although there were many differences between the

competitors at the DA competition, one thing we all had in

common was the drive to live up to that higher standard.

We all set standards for ourselves that are so far above the

normal standard that we never have trouble meeting the

norm, but can have trouble meeting the standards we have

set for ourselves. Sometimes this can be a blessing, but

other times, an affliction.”

When asked what drove him to strive so hard and what

prepared him to meet challenges such as this, Cato had

another one word answer: Family.

Raised on farms and ranches in Texas and Oklahoma,

Cato was placed in a position of responsibility at a very

early age. He was responsible for weapons, tractors, making sure he was where he was supposed to be on time, and

that his job was accomplished. The standards he had to

meet and the safety precautions he had to observe were

things he grew up with.

He also credits the love, support, and even discipline

from his parents Dena Moss, and Terry and Donita Cato,

as well as his siblings, as contributing factors to his successes as an NCO.

“They taught me about sympathy and compassion.

They also taught me to listen and understand,” said Cato.

“I think the relationship with NCOs is similar to that of

your family ... especially the relationship with siblings.

We are peers and are all on the same team. As long as

things are good, there’s nothing to say to try to correct

each other. However, we all mess up sometimes and when

we do, we should expect someone to come and correct us,

just like you would your brother or sister. That’s how we in

the NCO corps and Soldiers are throughout the Army.”

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal

Sharon L. Hartman, is a DoD contractor with COLSA Corporation, and has

served in the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command Colorado

Springs Public Affairs Office for more than three and a half years. She is a

computer graphics designer, journalist, and photographer, and is the graphics

editor for the Army Space Journal. 

Top, SSG Steven Cato performs sit-ups during the physical training portion of the Department of the Army NCO of

the Year competition; center, Cato dons his protective gas

mask prior to performing a nuclear, biological and chemical task; bottom, a judge, right, weighs Cato’s rucksack to

standard. Photos by Sharon L. Hartman
Tip of the Sphere

RLINGTON, Va. — The Department of the Army

Soldier of the Year competition was held this year at

Fort Lee and Arlington, Va., Sept. 12-18.

Representing U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command was Headquarters Company, 1st Satellite

Control Battalion, SGT Jennifer Swift — one of four female

Soldiers competing “one-onone” against seven men for

the title.

“It was really a tough,

good competition, and the

people I was up against are

the most talented people I’ve

ever met in the Army. They

are very good at what they

do,” said Swift.

A native of Redding,

Calif., Swift came into the

Army after deciding that the

party scene often associated

with college life was not for

her. Although she didn’t consider the military until her

brother joined the Marines her

sophomore year in high

school, the physical aspect of

the military and being able to

keep in shape was something

that definitely appealed to her.

An athlete from a very early

age, Swift viewed PT tests and

ruck marches as an exciting

challenge.

“I’ve been a swimmer

pretty much all my life,”

added Swift.

“I’m a rock climber right

now, and go whitewater rafting. I also started dancing

when I was five and the flexibility that comes with that has

really helped more than you

might think it would.”

Coming to 1st SATCON’s

Headquarters Company straight from Advanced Individual

Training in early 2002, Swift worked her way up the ranks in

good time. Her journey to the Department of the Army

Soldier of the Year competition began as a specialist. She

competed for Soldier of the month at her company level just

hoping to get practice for her E5 board. (Swift appeared

before the E5 board and was promoted shortly after being

selected as SMDC’s Soldier of the Year.) 

“I won that, so went up to the quarter board, won that

and went to the company

Soldier of the Year board,

and ... I just kept progressing. I certainly never

expected to go all the way

to the Department of the

Army level,” commented

Swift.

Once she was there

though, she made sure

everyone knew she

belonged. Especially during the six-mile ruck march

that was part of the mystery

event. Swift, as did all the

competitors, had to carry a

25-pound backpack, but

she had to do so on a 5’2”

120-pound frame compared

to the larger physiques of

the male competitors.

Although the other three

females were roughly close

in size to Swift, what separated her from the other

females was the fact that

she crossed the finish line

ahead of them by quite a

margin, and beat several of

the males to boot.

“The competition was

not quite what I expected.

The way they ran the whole

thing was very rigid, but it

was very, very professional,” stated Swift.

“The ruck march was

challenging and difficult

mentally and physically, especially with my being short. I

could not match the strides of the male Soldiers because

they have longer legs, so I would jog ahead of them and

28 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

A

1st SATCON Soldier hangs tough at 

DA competition

By Sharon L. Hartman
then walk a bit while they caught up, and would jog

again for a bit then walk while they caught up again.

I just basically kept doing that the entire time.”

To make things even more complicated, the

competitors had to cross the finish line within an

hour and a half from the start to get a score on that

portion of the event. Although Swift missed the time

limit by a mere minute and a half, she did not let it

get her down.

“It was really difficult. Coming that close and

missing it was frustrating and you get mad for

awhile, but then you have to go on to the next event

and move on. You can’t be a bad sport. Being competitive does force you to drive yourself a little bit

harder to try to do better than the person that is right

next to you, but if you’ve done your best, that’s all

you can ask of yourself.”

Swift has been told she will be traveling a bit over

the next year representing SMDC as the Soldier of

the Year. When that is complete, it will be close to

time for her to head off to her next assignment.

“I would like to go overseas, maybe to Germany,

but don’t know if I will go to the SATCON

Operations Center in Landstuhl or not,” added Swift.

Future goals for this young Soldier include an

appearance in front of the SGT Audie Murphy board

and continuing her education through eArmyU in

pursuit of a degree in applied technology.

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 29

Opposite page, SGT Jennifer Swift

takes a much needed break from

the competition; left, Swift performs

a nuclear, biological, and chemical

task; bottom left, Swift prepares

herself for a grueling day at the

Department of the Army Soldier of

the Year Competition; below, Swift

finishes qualifying with an M16, in

her protective gas mask during a

portion of the mystery event. 

Photos by Sharon L. Hartman
30 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Tip of the Sphere

ETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. —

Terrorism, various personal problems, and a sense

of helplessness were the issues covered during a

recent prayer breakfast sponsored by the 1st Space

Brigade (Provisional) at U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command - Colorado Springs.

The guest speaker for the event was Chaplain (MAJ)

Andrew C. Meverden, currently assigned to the 2/135th

General Support Aviation Battalion of the 89th Troop

Command, Colorado Army National Guard. Meverden is

one of only two chaplains in the entire COARNG.

Addressing a group of early risers consisting of military and civilians from the command, as well as some

curious next-door neighbors hailing from U.S. Air Force

Space Command, Meverden’s subject was “When you’ve

got problems that can’t be solved.”

Known to all as “Chaplain Andy,” the reverend

touched upon recent experiences as chaplain of the 5th

Battalion, 19th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Kabul,

Afghanistan, August 2002 through July of this year.

“At different times in your life you are going to find

yourself in the following kind of a situation,” said

Meverden.

“You are going to be in the midst of a storm. A storm

that you didn’t cause. One that you cannot control and

you have no choice but to wait out.”

“These kinds of problems are the most difficult ones

to face because they make us feel so helpless. This current period for those of us in the military being faced

with situations — ones we did not cause, or were forced

into — sometimes relates to family separations. Other

times it relates to hazardous duty. All we can do is wait

out the storm.”

Meverden added that other issues revolve around

money, family, work, and even pets. But the important

thing to remember about all such problems is that they

are only temporary in nature.

Referring to himself as a wounded healer, Meverden

said that he has been through the best and worst of life

— witnessing much of both this past year in

Afghanistan.

“You can endure anything if it will not last forever.

That was the perspective I took when I said goodbye to

my family here at Pete Field last year. It was 7,293 miles

away. It was hard to leave my wife and children.”

He also reminded the audience that the problems

don’t necessarily have to make one miserable.

“We can live this life with a sense of hope and optimism.”

Meverden recounted growing up with a personal fear

of the dark and how he dealt with it.

“It was our first night in Afghanistan and there was

no electricity in Kabul. We had a little generator powering lights in the mess area. You take your food out about

50 feet away to eat it so the bugs don’t get into the

kitchen. And here I was standing with wire around us.

We had about 800 new Afghan recruits whom we knew

could possibly be infiltrators from al Qaeda and the

Taliban. And there I was without an assistant — chaplains are non-combatants. I didn’t have a weapon. I was

standing in pitch-black darkness in Afghanistan. For

some strange reason, from that moment on, I lost my fear

of the dark. And then ... other things happened and I

lost other fears.”

He then gave an example of how tragedies can be

turned into blessings.

Dec. 14 and 16, 2002, are two days Chaplain Andy said

he would never forget. He witnessed a live fire exercise

between U.S. forces and Afghan friendly forces that led to

a horrible tragedy — the accidental death of five local

boys.

Despite extensive precautions to clear the area prior

to the exercise, 10 boys came over the targeted area on

top of the mountain and found themselves in the line of

artillery fire.

After the first barrage hit, five of them lay dying.

When villagers and personnel from the camp realized

what had happened and took action, it was too late. One

boy died on the mountain. Two died on the stretchers

coming down. Another died in the ambulance. A Special

Forces medic from camp saved the fifth boy.

“It was a horrible tragedy,” said Meverden.

“That night the Soldier who set the tubes — a Special

Forces heavy weapons expert who had been in Somalia

during Black Hawk Down — sat down with me. He said

to me ‘Chaplain, when I was in Somalia I had to shoot a

13-year-old boy because he would not put down an AK-47

that was pointed at us. I swore I’d never let myself be put

in that situation again. Today I believe I’m responsible

for the death of four boys. I did not come here to kill

boys. I came here to get rid of terrorists.’ And he handed me his weapon, put his head in his hands and cried.”

The bodies were autopsied, cleaned up, and placed

in body bags.

Chaplain uses experiences in OEF to reach 

others at prayer breakfast

By DJ Montoya

P
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 31

“I was there when the fathers and uncles came

to claim the bodies. I learned to say in their mother tongue ‘I’m very sorry.’”

In a situation where understanding and forgiveness between both sides was necessary, it

became apparent there was a problem. There was

a sense of ignorance of local customs, hurt feelings, and bureaucratic hand tying which gave the

wrong perception to the outside world.

Chaplain Andy used his skills and knowledge

of the area’s customs, in addition to what he considers divine assistance, to help aid the healing

process and bring closure to the incident.

Prior to the accident, he had worked teaching

English in the local village. One of the boys killed

was a student of his. Meverden laid the groundwork through back channels to bring both sides

together.

Through little gestures of good faith toward

villagers and a simple local custom used when a

life is taken or injured, forgiveness was achieved

all around. The custom involved the giving of a

sheep to the affected families and feasting with

the relatives. The Soldiers expressed their sadness

for the incident and the Afghans respond in kind

by forgiving them.

“I remember what the spokesperson for the

Afghans said. That man said ‘You didn’t have to

bring us anything. Just your coming today is more

than words can express. The fact that you have

come today to mourn and shed tears with us for

our boys shows that you see us as people, and not

just mere animals. Our country has been at war

and many have died, but since your coming last

November the war has stopped. For the first time,

there is the hope of peace and prosperity in our

lifetime.”

According to Meverden, the ceremony turned

from a solemn occasion into a time of celebration

and reconciliation.

“Many of us are caught in storms of our own,”

said Chaplain Andy.

“How we react to that storm is important.

Remember they are only temporary.”

Finishing his presentation, the multi-faceted

Chaplain Andy took out a guitar and lead the participants in a couple of inspirational songs as the

prayer breakfast came to a close.

Attendee LTC Mary Miller, executive officer

for the SMD Battle Lab — Space Directorate, was

moved by Meverden’s address.

“I was intrigued by his experiences from the

field,” Miller said.

“Rarely does one get to hear or share stories

that are of a person-to-person nature. It was also

very compelling to see what one person can do or

effect. It’s like my mother used to say — how

many ripples can one stone cast?”

Left, Chaplain (MAJ) Andrew C.

Meverden, Colorado Army

National Guard, teaches

English to members of a 

village in Afghanistan.

Meverden spoke recently of his

experiences at a prayer breakfast held at SMDC-Colorado

Springs. U.S. Army photo

Above, members of SMDC bow

their heads in a moment of

silence at the beginning of the

prayer breakfast.

Photo by DJ Montoya
32 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

COMMAND IN BRIEF

D Co., 1st SATCON goes Ground Mobile Force

with the National Guard

By SPC Glen Jones and SGT Logan Maynard, Unit

Reporters

CAMP ROBERTS, Calif. — This summer, the Soldiers of

D Company, 1st Satellite Control Battalion Operation

Center had the rare opportunity to participate in a Ground

Mobile Forces (GMF) satellite communications training

exercise with the California Air National Guard.

The training was coordinated by the 149th Combat

Communications Squadron (CBCS) out of the 162nd

Combat Communications Group and conducted at

Camp San Luis Obispo, located in the central coast

area of California about a 45-minute drive from

D Co. This is one of the few GMF training

exercises that are conducted close enough

for the Soldiers of D Co. to attend.

Seizing the opportunity to work

closely with the GMF terminals

that they control, D Co. personnel contacted the 149th

CBCS to see if they could

send Soldiers to participate in the exercise.

Getting the goahead, two

Soldiers from

D Co. were then

selected to participate in the two-week

exercise. SPC Glen Jones

and SPC Jarrod Mantz were

chosen because of their strong

initiative to learn and their willingness to pass that knowledge on to

their fellow Soldiers.

Mantz said, “I enjoyed working with

the Air National Guard, they were very helpful

and informative, as well as eager to learn.”

The focus of the training was to familiarize the

Soldiers of D Co. with the daily operations of a GMF

mission as well as to refresh their already extensive knowledge of the equipment.

The first week of training was hands-on with the

equipment. The Air National Guard had four types of

communications terminals. Three types of terminals

were satellite based, including two hub terminals; a TSC85B and a TSC-100A and two spoke terminals — both

TSC-94A. The fourth type of terminal was a TRK-170, a

line of sight microwave communications terminal. The

Soldiers of D Co. had never had the opportunity to work

with line of sight communications, but were eager to

learn about it.

In one instance, Mantz was able to set up and then

troubleshoot a line of sight link using the TRK-170.

Jones and Mantz were able to help the National Guard

Soldiers further their understanding of radio frequency

theory as well as how the satellites are controlled and how

the Operations Center views their carriers.

The second week of training consisted of an actual GMF training mission running over the same

DSCS III satellite the two SATCON Soldiers

control at the Operations Center on a daily

basis. This afforded them the opportunity to experience what Soldiers in the

field go through.

Daily operations that the D

Co. Soldiers participated in

included setting up the

dish, taking readings,

dealing with user

data, and troubleshooting

equipment

problems. All of

these actions were

new to the two, as unit

members typically have

never participated in a GMF

mission on the “ground level.”

In a unique coincidence, one of

the civilian contractors from D Co. was

able to join them in their GMF experience.

Mike Arenas is a full time ITT contractor at

D Co., but he also serves in the California Air

National Guard as a member of 149th CBCS. As

part of his annual training, he spent a week as one of

the operators with their GMF mission.

Arenas said, “It was terrific being able to work with

Delta Company, 1st SATCON Soldiers recently trained with National

guard Soldiers during Ground Mobile Force Exercise, giving the

satellite Soldiers a rare opportunity to experience “grunt” life and a

helicopter ride. U.S. Army Photo
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 33

the Soldiers on a different level and they were a

great help; I think the people in my unit also

learned a lot from them.”

The mission was a resounding success because

it provided the opportunity to cross-train with

another branch of the service and expand the

knowledge of all those who attended.

Jones said, “It gives me a much better perspective on how GMF missions work in the field.”

The knowledge gained by Jones and Mantz has

been a benefit to others as well.

SGT Mike Feddema, Jones’ squad leader said,

“I’m glad my Soldier got to participate in the training — his new knowledge will be a great help on

the (operations) floor.”

D Co. looks forward to sending more Soldiers

to GMF missions and is currently trying to arrange

participation in a mission aboard a U.S. Navy ship.

RSSC CONUS gets SMART-T Training

By Air Force Tech Sgt. John Steele, Unit reporter

MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. — Members

from Regional SATCOM Support Center CONUS

Extremely High Frequency section had the rare

opportunity in May to do some hands-on training

on a particular piece of high-speed equipment.

The 280th Combat Communications Squadron

made the two-day road trip from their home base in

Dothan, Ala., to train RSSC personnel on the

Secure Mobile Anti-jam Reliable TacticalTerminal, or SMART-T.

The training consisted of getting familiar with

the terminal, its capabilities, and terminal set-up.

Even though the RSSC personnel routinely plan

user communication needs regarding the terminal,

hands-on experience with it for themselves is rare.

The training lasted three days, and six members

were able to get up to speed on this new EHF terminal’s capabilities. The base is home to U.S.

Central Command, and this terminal is widely used

to support ongoing operations in Iraq.

The terminal is mounted on the back of a

HMMWV, which makes it completely mobile —

set-up time taking about 30 minutes. The terminal may use commercial power, the HMMWV

itself, or an onboard generator for power. It can

support voice and data up to 1.544 Mega bits per

second, and has a maximum throughput of 2.24

Mbps, allowing more information to transmit

more rapidly and accurately.

The SMART-T can even work under remote

operation up to a mile away.

It has the capability of using any EHF capable

satellite, but for data rates in excess of 2400 bps, it

can only use Medium Data Rates Milstar birds, a

more robust satellite.

The training was a special treat to the communications planners stationed at RSSC CONUS,

since most of their time is spent allocating

resources for others to train. It was their turn this

time, and they got to see first-hand how the products that RSSC supplies to the tactical warfighter

are implemented.

“SMART-T is the operational terminal of the

future, and the training was phenomenal. We

greatly appreciated the efforts of the 280th CBCS,

in coming all that way to provide the training,” said

Tech. Sgt. Kelven Preston.

HHC 1ST SATCON steps up and out during

national exercise

By PFC Jesse Childress, Unit reporter

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — Dedicated newshounds might have heard recently about the

nationwide terrorist response exercise known as

Determined Promise. A less widely publicized fact

is that 1st Satellite Control Battalion’s own

Air Force members of RSSC CONUS engage in training on

the Secure Mobile Anti-jam Reliable Tactical-Terminal, or

SMART-T. Senior Airman Amber Duncan and Staff Sgt.

Shannon Metcalf are setting up the terminal for operation,

while, behind them, Tech. Sgt. Kelven Preston and Senior

Airman Candy Knight are going over the theory of operation.

Photo by Wilson Small
34 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Headquarters and Headquarters Company played an

important role in this national level exercise

Determined Promise 2003 was a Homeland Defense

and Northern Command exercise to determine the

nation’s response capabilities to terrorist attacks in various regions of the United States, as well as other important events, such as natural disasters. A biochemical

attack on the city of Las Vegas, raging wildfires in the

Northwest or a devastating hurricane in Florida were just

a few examples of scenarios that were used to test the

strength of our nation’s emergency responses in national

and state government agencies.

Taking place Aug. 12-28, Determined Promise 2003

was the largest coordinated exercise of terrorism response

to date. Involved were 15 federal agencies, several state

and local organizations, a number of military units, and

the American Red Cross.

That long list of support agencies included a group of

HHC, 1st SATCON Soldiers and contractors. These

satellite technicians deployed to an undisclosed location,

and worked 24-hour shifts providing satellite support

functions to keep leaders talking and data flowing. One

participant, SGT Robert Smedley, said about the experience “I feel this was a great opportunity for everyone here

to learn and ‘train as you fight.’ It also shows everyone

involved what HHC has to offer and proves what we are

capable of providing.”

Another involved SATCON Soldier, SPC Terry Clough

said, “Exercises like this give the Soldiers an opportunity

to work in an operational environment that creates stress,

which improves crew cohesion and mission focus.”

Reflecting on “playing” on such a large stage, HHC

1st SATCON’s Commanding Officer CPT Daniel

Gager commented, “HHC 1st SATCON’s participation in Determined Promise 2003 was a great

training opportunity for all involved. The

Soldiers adapted to operational and communication challenges without any problems and identified new areas in Space support where they can

be useful to the Northern Command staff. It was

also a testimonial as to how important contractor

support is to the Satellite Control mission.

Without the contractor support we had, there

would have been a gap in the operation of our

more complicated control systems. The teamwork displayed between all of the exercise participants was truly exceptional.”

With the experience gained, the Soldiers of

HHC 1st SATCON look forward to Determined

Promise 2004, as well as other upcoming deployments — opportunities to once again show what

they can do.

JTAGS CENTCOM helps warfighters get 

R & R

By SPC Aaron Evans and CW2 Jeffrey Robinson, Unit

Reporters

DOHA, Qatar — Temporarily far from the dust and heat

of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, Soldiers involved in those

operations can report to this Persian Gulf-front city for a

few days’ rest and recuperation. Locally stationed

Soldiers from Detachment Echo, 15th Air Defense Joint

Tactical Ground Station, Central Command, already an

integral part of ongoing operations with their critical mission of providing Theater Ballistic Missile early warning,

volunteered to help the incoming weary Soldiers enjoy the

R&R opportunity to the fullest.

Army Central Command (ARCENT)-Qatar has the

overall responsibility for what is called the Fighter

Management Program. The JTAGS Soldiers, along with

other local units’ members, act as sponsors, and offer

vehicles, time, and guide services to those Soldiers lucky

enough to make it to this temporary Mecca.

“It feels really good to be able to share something

with these Soldiers; to give something back and support

them for their efforts. We are lucky to be in a position

where we can get them off post and allow them to feel like

real people again,” said volunteer sponsor Petty Officer

Patricia Viviano of Naval Network and Space Operations

Command, Detachment Echo.

The mission of the ARCENT-Qatar Fighter

Management Program is to increase the morale and welfare of the Soldiers that support Operation Enduring

SPC Terry Clough works on satellite terminal equipment under the tutelage of

Richard Hamer of ILEX Corporation during the national level terrorism response

exercise called Determined Promise.
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 35

Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. As of

Sept. 7, 2003, about 7,091 Soldiers have participated

in the Fighter Management Program. Soldiers are

afforded the opportunity to spend five days relaxing and participating in on-post and off-post

Morale, Welfare, and Recreation activities. Some

of these activities include Dhow cruises, Jet Ski

rides, and water skiing.

The time span allotted is a period that participants can enjoy themselves and mentally and physically take themselves out of the battlefield mentality for a few days. While the Soldiers are here, they

are afforded the opportunity to swim, visit the

malls, and eat some well-deserved meals at restaurants far removed from military chow lines. They

also have the opportunity to visit with other

Soldiers and share their stories.

Another volunteer, SGT James Smith, of

JTAGS Colorado Springs, said, “It’s great to

reunite with fellow Soldiers from other units and

have an opportunity to take some of them out to

the restaurants and talk about the good times of

the past. It’s a good feeling to see their faces glow

because they are in a restaurant in the Middle

East.”

SPC Jorel Santiago of JTAGS Colorado Springs

said, “It’s nice to meet some of the Soldiers that

are putting their lives on the line in the war on terrorism up there in Iraq. This is a great opportunity for them to have some fun, and for us to show

them that they are appreciated.”

While the letters of support from around the

world, buttressing speeches made by national leaders, and infrequent phone calls home are equally

important for morale, ARCENT-Qatar’s Fighter

Management Program and JTAGS Detachment

CENTCOM do their part and “roll out the red carpet” to allow these heroes critical down time. In

the midst of their own important duties, JTAGS

Detachment CENTCOM is assisting these service

members in truly getting quality R&R, fitting them

for the fight they return to.

National Guard ARSST deploys to Iraq,

farewelled by Mayor

By MAJ Laura Kenney

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — The

most recent Army Space Support Team to deploy

received a special sendoff from the mayor of

Colorado Springs.

Lionel Rivera, a former Army captain elected in

April as mayor of the city known as “the gateway to

the Rockies,” met with Team 12, Sept. 24. He

spoke with all six members privately just prior to a

farewell ceremony, and was briefed on their

upcoming mission.

The team, which had recently returned from a

mission in Korea, deployed Sept. 29 to support the

Coalition Provisional Authority in its mission of

rebuilding Iraq.

Team Leader MAJ Michael Willis joked about

the quick change in missions exemplified by the color of the uniforms

now worn by the team.

“Going from green for Korea,

where we were supporting operations

(exercise Ulchi Focus Lens) to the

tan of Desert Camouflage Uniforms

for Iraq, where we’ll be assisting people on a humanitarian mission,

speaks exactly to the versatility of

Space, and to how pervasive the need

for it has become,” said Willis.

1st Space Brigade commander,

COL David Shaffer, commented on

the “pervasive need” aspect.

“The demand for Space teams far

exceeded what our original capabilities were. We ended up battle-rostering, which means looking through

rosters for people who weren’t necesPosing in front of a local tourist attraction along the Persian Gulf city of Doha,

Qatar, Soldiers on a brief rest and recuperation respite from duties in Iraq and

Afghanistan pal with their guides, Joint Tactical Ground Station - CENTCOM

volunteers. The JTAGS Soldiers are, fourth from left, CW2 Jeffrey Robinson,

and, last two on right, SGT James Smith and SSG Jeff

Patterson. Photo by SPC David Nussbacher (See Command In Brief, page 51)
propose that the most innovative and useful weapon systems are developed from technologies initiated prior to

the publication of a validated military requirement. I

believe that military needs arise from observations of

commercial technological advancements, and seldom

vice versa. Examples of this reasoning include the airplane, the automobile, and military derivatives.

I remember reading at an early age, as you may have,

a copy of Buck Rogers’s adventures to the Moon (if you

missed this one it is well worth a trip to the library to

peruse a dog-eared edition). Looking up at the Moon on

many clear summer evenings, I could see the looming

luminescence with its craters and pockmarks beckoning

me to adventure. The real intrigue each night was imagining the nature of the rockets and spaceships that would

allow Space travel to the Moon and back.

A few years later as I watched the astronauts walk on

the Moon’s surface, I compared the events described in

the newspaper and on television with those descriptions

of Buck’s adventures. I grew even more fascinated and

immersed in the comparison. I began to wonder how

the technology that permitted us to reach the moon

would change our lives. Some possibilities were being

proposed in the news and surely other possibilities would

be forthcoming, if not by lunar exploration, then certainly with the pending trips to Mars and the remaining

planets.

Only many years later in college philosophy class

while recalling Buck’s adventures did the impact of this

technology begin to form a nucleus of thought. The

design, development, integration, test, and finally the

fielding of the Pumpkin Chunking Accurate Targeting

System (PCATS) by my office made me revisit the concept of technology transfer. How will the PCATS technology affect the warfighter? Will the changes be technology driven or threat driven? (Note: This paper concerns Pumpkin Chunking, but readers can substitute

their own vision of any advanced warfighter technology.)

Now, 30 years after my college philosophy class, we

have “been there/done that” for lunar journeys. The

modern versions of Buck Rogers (that has almost

become factual resource material) are the television series

of Star Trek and the movies in the Star Wars Trilogy.

Further references are novels such as Starship Troopers

and video games such as Dune and Sim Civilization.

Just as I once thought that Space travel to the Moon

would eventually be possible, the current 19-year-old

Army corporal knows that one day he will be the recipient of PCATS weapons. Additionally, just as this Soldier

uses Ultima Online or America’s Army to participate in

cooperative play across the country, he knows that one

day Pumpkin Chunking military units will become reality

and just another example of the ever-advancing technology we have experienced since the end of World War II.

How is the state of technology advanced? You’d

heard it said that necessity is the mother of invention.

Once needs are expressed, if there is sufficient return on

the investment for the commercial invention houses or if

there is sufficient interest for the private/self-financed

inventors, technology creation begins! 

In the military we describe a flow from needs to

requirements. Years ago we were searching for a materiel

solution. Later we started focusing on a “threat-driven”

technology solution.

Lately we have added an additional concern: that our

materiel solution provides an end-state capability for the

warfighter. In following this road of needs, requirements, and materiel solutions, we have historically made

compromises along the path that occasionally resulted in

a solution that provided very little additional capability.

So we are now capability driven. We are to remain

focused on the end-state capability we want to achieve —

36 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

I

By J. Rodger Qualls

Thanks, Buck Rogers

Pumpkin Chunking 

into Space Rodger Qualls is a system engineer and weapon systems planner with more than 20 years at SMDC. He is

responsible for designing and developing the Spatial

Weapon Systems Analysis Center now operated by the

Battle Lab. He will be transitioning elements of Space

Control to the Program Executive Office Air, Space, and

Missile Defense this fall.

Fall Theme
37

spacetechnology

and hope — that it is linked to the best value materiel

solution.

We also talk about technology evolution and revolution. We seem to think that revolutionary advances are

the best value because they allow the warfighter to make

a significant change in the methods of warfare. But significant changes often require a leap in technology that

seldom if ever occurs on demand. There are many

examples of valid needs and requirements for revolutionary change that have gone unfulfilled for decades.

The wet and dry cell battery is a perfect example.

Proportionally, it is the heaviest and bulkiest article on

the battlefield and there are orders of magnitude of

advantages to be gained in every field from satellites, to

airplanes, to automobiles, to electronics, to the Soldier’s

field gear for a breakthrough in this technology to allow

a 10- or 100-fold decrease in size and weight.

So the norm is the development of technology to

meet specific needs; the development of technology in

advance of a valid military requirement is called “technology push.” As previously mentioned, two examples

of technology push are the airplane and the automobile.

These systems were not developed in response to a military requirement; rather they were developed by inventors with sufficient interest and funding. Sometime later

(decades later I might add), military forward thinkers

examined possible military applications. There were no

threatening foreign hordes of advancing armor columns

or squadrons of enemy aircraft forcing our development

of these technologies, just columns of cavalry and the

occasional hot air balloon.

In step with 20th century consumers (including the

military), 21st century consumers continue to have an

insatiable appetite for bigger and better, faster and lighter

technological solutions in every aspect: items that purport to prolong our lives, save us time, ease our workloads, allow us to keep up with the Joneses, and make us

happier and more fulfilled human beings. In short, we

desire to make significant changes to our lives. Assuming

this premise is correct, does the military culture foster

the same desires? Are we developing technology to satisfy our cultural genes? Do we want to change the ways

and means of conducting warfare or are we subconsciously altering the art of war because our culture relishes technology? 

The best route to optimize the PCATS as well as

other military applications is a three-step process: (1)

concept (unconstrained by our current understanding of

physics and the other sciences), (2) followed by technological initiatives, and (3) the construction of firm

requirements. This approach allows consideration of a

smorgasbord of technologies enhanced by our growing

understanding of basic sciences such as physics and

chemistry. We solicit the best technical ideas from industry, national laboratories, and universities. Should the

military develop what we can imagine or should we limit

our developments to countering valid threats by adding a

“delta” of warfighter capability?

What is the best approach for determination of valid

threats? If you are at the wrong end of a loaded .45-caliber pistol, then little analysis is needed to determine the

validity of the threat or if it needs the publication of an

operational requirements document. However, most

threats are not quite that obvious. While one military

community (infantry, armor, aviation, etc.) may feel a

threat is real and valid, another community may have

only a passing concern. The current scrutiny of the

American and British intelligence communities over the

accuracy of intelligence information concerning Iraq’s

capabilities is a valid example of imperfections of

remotely sensed collection data and its subsequent interFall 2003 Army Space Journal

(See Pumpkin Chunking, page 47)

Additionally, just as this Soldier

uses Ultima Online or America’s

Army to participate in cooperative

play across the country, he knows

that one day Pumpkin Chunking

military units will become reality

and just another example of the

ever advancing technology we

have experienced since the end 

of World War II. 

Pumpkin Chunking Catapult
38 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

magine a futuristic tool, similar to the computer and

holodeck used by Captains Kirk and Piccard aboard the

Enterprise that could instantly provide holographic

images of terrestrial areas of interest and the associated

exoatmospheric environment for situation assessment

and planning optimization. Although the original Star

Trek series ran nearly 40 years ago, scientists are still

unable to build some of the futuristic concepts first

introduced in those early episodes. This article describes

some of the thought processes behind and the progress

to date for the Space and Missile Defense Command’s

(SMDC’s) Single Integrated Space Picture (SISP) technology concept.

The idea for a SISP was born out of the technology

premise that a single display could be used for Space

command and control (C2) situation monitoring, situation assessment (often referred to in combination as

Space situation awareness or SSA), and for planning and

executing Space C2 operations. This effort involves

monitoring, assessing, and managing a larger battlespace

than ever before (the exoatmosphere is huge); interfacing

with many types of data sources and sensors supplying

various types of information, formatted in different

ways, arriving at different rates; synthesizing information

related to geopolitical situations, positional identifiers,

orbital dynamics, intelligence products, environmental

I

By Denise Jones

To Boldly Go ... Single Integrated Space

Picture (SISP)

Denise Jones has more than 15 years experience leading Army battle

management command, control, communications, computer, and information (BMC4I) system development efforts. She currently manages

the SMDC Space control BMC4I development. She has also served as

the BMC4I section leader and senior BMC4I expert at the NATO

Medium Extended Air Defense System Management Agency. She has

worked extensively on the national missile defense (NMD) terrestrial

and interceptor communication programs as well as NMD C4 testing

and related C4 programs. 

Fall Theme

Scene 1

(MAJ Smith, Functional Area 40 (Space Officer) special adviser to the commander, is speaking to what appears to be a holographic image arising out of a three-foot disc on the floor. Within this holographic image is a rotating topographic map-like surface with a clear view of the exoatmospheric environment.)

MAJ Smith. (speaking to the three-foot disc on the floor:) Command One, what’s my status?

Command One SISP Terminal. (voice emanating from inside the holographic image:) Satellite Cgi-Bin has been changing its orbit pattern every

third orbit. It appears to be searching in sector Tango Charlie.

(Scene changes to show the holographic image “replay” of Satellite Cgi-Bin’s latest orbit passes over the area of interest.)

MAJ Smith: When will Satellite Cgi-Bin be able to image Alpha Company?

Command One SISP Terminal: At 0900 tomorrow.

MAJ Smith: What are your recommendations?

(Scene changes again to show the holographic image “fast forward” to 0900 tomorrow, showing the orbit of Satellite Cgi-Bin, and the interfering

storm cover.)

Command One SISP Terminal: Do nothing. Cloud cover, Space and ground storms will prevent clear imaging by Satellite Cgi-Bin sensors. By

the time the storms and clouds move out, Alpha Company will have completed its mission.

MAJ Smith: Thank you Command One. Please continue to monitor the situation and notify me if there are any changes requiring defensive

actions. Now, can you tell me when Bravo Company will have clear communications for downlink of latest OPORD (operations order)?

(Scene changes again to show the holographic image “fast forward” by 23 minutes, showing a cartoonish communications link extending from the

satellite communications bird, down through the gap in the storm system, to Bravo Company.)

Command One SISP Terminal: The storms and cloud cover will provide a window for downlinking in approximately 23 minutes.

MAJ Smith: Thank you, Command One. I’ll report out to the commander.

(Scene fades to the commander’s office ... )
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 39

spacetechnology

conditions, and naturally occurring and manmade phenomena; and providing this expert capability in hyperreal-time in an intuitive, easy-to-use display. Does this

sound like another science fiction adventure story? Read

on to see how the SMD Technical Center is meeting this

challenge.

Information Overload

A couple of issues from regional conflicts in the past

decade have direct bearing on the approach taken for the

SISP concept. First, there is an overload of information

that decision makers must contend with. Command

and/or decision headquarters typically have an assortment of computer terminals and communication devices

providing various types of written reports, maps, radar

scans, information updates, and screen displays. Human

processing of this written and visual data is interrupted

with person-to-person or telephone conversations and

meetings. In time-critical situations, it is difficult to make

an “optimized” decision and still take into consideration

all the “facts” and information available.

The next issue concerns physiological and psychological factors found in a wartime environment that result in

less-than-optimum decisions and human error. Although

fatigue and stress are not unique to the battlefield, the

errors they cause provide fodder for the members of the

press, but even more tragically may result in injury or death

to our troops or allies.

Interoperability wraps up the trio of issues being

addressed in the initial technical concept for the SISP.

Even with today’s modern technology, warfighters are still

confronted with communication and interpretation problems in the dissemination and utilization of information.

Approach

Discussions with several of the information technology (IT) experts within SMDC led to the approaches

taken toward realizing an SISP. Without using IT jargon

and buzzwords, the creation of a SISP (and addressing

the issues presented earlier) can be condensed into

answering three basic questions:

1) How can SISP minimize information overload on the

user?

2) How can SISP improve decision-making? 

3) How can SISP be made interoperable with existing

and future data sources and users?

Get the Picture

Of course you’ve heard the expression: “A picture’s

worth a thousand words.” During recent world events,

the network news channels made use of news announcers talking over photo or video images with superimposed headlines and broadcast station designators; all

while a text trailer ran across the bottom of the screen

bringing different news snapshots. This approach gets

lots of information to the audience by evoking different

senses, different skills, and different emotions.

Visually representing large amounts of data is rapidly becoming the norm, both on television and on the

Internet. A study conducted by SMDC went even further to prove that actual three-dimensional, volumetric

representations could be easily assimilated to facilitate

rapid and more accurate problem solving than twodimensional representations. By the close of the last

decade, SMDC had investigated quite a few technologies

promising to be the “Holy Grail” of volumetric displays.

(See To Boldly Go ... , page 48)

3D Volumetric Displays: Conceptual

3D Volumetric Displays: Prototypes
he commercial Space industry is expanding at a rapid

rate. Spending in the commercial Space industry

between 1995 and 2010 will top $100 billion. This large

commercial push for placing satellites in Space combined

with the limited Department of Defense (DoD) Space

budget makes it difficult for the military to keep pace

with the latest and most advanced commercial capabilities. Rather than trying to go toe-to-toe and match commercial spending in Space, an alternative for the U.S. military is to leverage this incredible commercial investment.

For example, DoD and the intelligence community

increasingly rely on satellites for reconnaissance, surveillance, early warning of missile launches, weather forecasts, navigation, and communications. The increase in

commercial Space capabilities is allowing DoD to carefully weigh which multibillion-dollar Space systems are

affordable. Dedicated military Space systems are not

likely to be procured when suitable commercial systems

are available. Commercial placement of satellites in

Space focus in four major areas: communications,

remote sensing, imagery, and navigation. Each of these

focus areas provides the military with a significant

opportunity to leverage the commercial investment in

Space.

Often called the first “Space war,” the Persian Gulf

War (1990-1991) is a perfect example of how these commercial Space capabilities are leveraged. Commercial

sources such as INTELSAT (Inter-national

Telecommunications Satellite Organization) provided

more than 45 percent of all communications between

the theater and the United States. LANDSAT (Land

Remote Sensing Satellite), French SPOT (Satellite Pour

L’Observation de la Terre), and advanced very high-resolution radiometer satellites provided much of the

imagery information used to develop military plans.

Space-based sensors furnished detailed battlefield information to commanders and staff.

Civilian communication satellites have been primarily

a private sector activity since the passage of the 1962

Communications Satellite Act. In 1984, by passing the

Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act, Congress

continued to facilitate the commercialization of land

remote sensing satellites by privatizing the government’s

LANDSAT program. The Land Remote Sensing Policy

Act of 1992 brought LANDSAT back under government supervision at the same time that it promoted the

development of new systems by the private sector.

With strong, continuous congressional backing, several U.S. companies initiated programs to build remote

sensing satellites and offer imagery on a commercial

basis. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration manages the operating licenses for these

private remote-sensing endeavors. In September 1999,

Space Imaging built and successfully launched the

Ikonos 2, the first commercial imaging satellite.

But it’s not our Satellite

The United States is not the only country with

imagery satellites in orbit. Other countries with imagery

capability include France, Russia, India, China, Israel, and

the United Kingdom. This proliferation of imaging and

other Space-based capabilities has caused tension

between the military and commercial sectors. The military has concerns about the resolution and quality of

commercially available Space products and their potential

use by adversaries. The challenge is for the United States

to maintain its decisive advantage in Space.

The military’s strategic vision is set forth in Joint

Vision 2010. Information superiority, one of the key

enablers for full spectrum dominance, is summarized as

“the capability to collect, process, and disseminate an

40 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

T

By Adam Aberle

Fall Theme

Keeping the Space

Edge ...

Leveraging commercial Space

technology for military uses

Adam Aberle spent five years working at

the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile

Command developing laser systems

and data processing techniques. In

2000 he transferred to the U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command

where he specializes in infrared and

hyper-spectral sensor systems. His

interests include Space exploitation and

near-real-time data processing.

(See Space Edge, page 50)
spacetechnology

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 41

The Army has been involved in Space since an Army

team launched the first U.S. Explorer satellite in the

1950s. Since then, the Army’s use of Space has evolved

to become fundamental to the successful conduct of military operations. Today, the Army relies on very sophisticated Space-based systems to provide unprecedented

reconnaissance, imagery, sensor, communication, and

intelligence capabilities to reduce the “fog and friction”

of war. But is Space critical for the future success of the

Army? Will the current trend of reliance of Space products by the Army continue to increase? The success of

Army Transformation and how the transformational

force will conduct future military operations depends on

it! 

In 1997, the U.S. Army’s Training and Doctrine

Command (TRADOC) sponsored an Army After Next

War Game with the intent of determining how the Army

would fight future battles. At the start of the war game,

the first significant loss was the ability of U.S. forces to

use Space-based systems and capabilities. This caused a

large degradation of the communication and reconnaissance information available to the warfighter, resulting in

reduced situational awareness on the battlefield. The

commander was not able to accomplish the mission. In

one bold sweep, Army After Next War Game removed all

doubt among senior Army leadership concerning the

central role that Space would play in future Army operations.

Today the Army has a tremendous reliance on Spacebased information capabilities as we continue to increase

our reliance on Space-based assets to collect intelligence

and provide strategic, operational, and tactical information across the depth of the battlefield. Because information is absolutely critical to the success of military

operations, information warfare may be the most complex and most unpredictable type of warfare facing the

military in the future.

From a military perspective, control of Space and

information operations are very closely linked. Both are

critical to our ability to achieve and maintain information

superiority. The U.S. military’s ability to establish information dominance on the battlefield is a force multiplier

that allows us to operate effectively on a dispersed battlefield. The linkage between Space and information is

so important that the former U.S. Space Command established a Space and Information Operations Element to

support the war against terrorism.

DoD Space policy focuses on operational capabilities

that enable the military services to fulfill national security objectives. The policy breaks out three Space-related

efforts that guide the military services: (1) deter or, if

necessary, defend against enemy attack; (2) enhance the

operations of U.S. and allied forces by employing Space

systems; and (3) ensure that forces of hostile nations cannot prevent our use of Space. From this policy, the Army

determines its responsibilities for Space operations: (1) to

organize, train, equip, and provide Army forces to support Space operations; (2) to develop, in coordination

with the other military services, tactics, techniques, and

equipment employed by Army forces for use in Space

operations; (3) to conduct individual and unit training of

Army Space operations; and (4) to participate in joint

Space operations, training, and exercises as mutually

agreed to by the services concerned or as directed by

competent authority. Within this policy construct and as

a result of fundamental changes in our operational environment at home and abroad, the Army has adopted a

new, regionally oriented military strategy. This strategy

calls on the Army’s ability to design specific force packages to satisfy diverse worldwide missions.

Implementing this new strategy requires the Army to

fully exploit the capabilities of existing Space assets and

incorporate the use of future, programmed Space systems and capabilities. The Army’s use of Space capabilities to support its missions will evolve from the use of

ground receivers in the near term to direct satellite-touser linkage in the far term. The implementation strategy falls into three timeframes that occur concurrently, not

sequentially:

· In the near term, we will acquire receivers to take

advantage of currently deployed Space system capabilities.

· In the midterm, we will acquire or develop processors for more complete integration and direct interface

with Space systems.

· In the far term, we will influence the development

of future Space systems that have been totally or partly

designed to meet specific Army requirements.

The Army’s future doctrine is also tied to Space. As

stated in TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-14, Concept for

Space Operations in Support of the Objective Force, we

plan to exploit all forms of information operations

against any potential adversary to minimize risk and

Strategic Force Multiplier

The importance of Space in 

the Army’s future

By Adam Aberle

(See Force Multiplier, page 51)
42

o achieve operational dominance, warfighters need highspeed, interoperable systems that allow quick access and

dynamic control of critically needed information. To

facilitate the achievement of this objective and to support Army Transformation, the Future Combat Systems

(FCS) program is envisioned as an umbrella system linking large numbers of manned and unmanned platforms

into a lethal combat Force. FCS will serve as the foundation for developing a faster, lighter, smarter, and more

lethal next-generation force. Space platforms play a

vital role in the realization of this concept.

Achieving operational dominance will require the

development and fielding of new technologies. One

such Space technology with potential to support Army

Transformation is Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems

(MEMS) or sometimes referred to as microsystems

technology (MST). Generally, these systems include:

· Application-specific, -integrated microinstruments (ASIMS)

· Micro-optical-electro-mechanical systems

(MOEMS)

· MEMtronics (micromechanical structures)

· Nanoelectronics (atomic/molecular)

· MESO-technology (modules with many

microstructures)

· μEngineering

· Smart structures1

Since its emergence in the late 1980s, MEMS have

developed into a billion dollar commercial market.

MEMS are miniature devices that integrate actuators,

sensors, and processors to form intelligent systems.

Functional subsystems could be electronic, optical,

mechanical, thermal, or fluidic. MEMS are characterized by their close relationship to integrated-circuit

components both in terms of manufacturing techniques

and their potential for integration with electronics.

MEMS advantages include miniaturization (allowing

distributed sensing and actuation coupled with redundancy), reduced fabrication cost (through the use of

microelectronics processing technologies), and real-time

control (allowing on-line active process control and

health monitoring). MEMS can also control macro systems by using the natural physical amplification characteristics of the macro system. Other MEMS current

realizable advantages, as well as potential promises,

include small size (volume, mass, and weight) through

miniaturization, low power consumption, increased

functionality, modular design methodology, and low

fabrication costs via mass production processes2.

Numerous aerospace and military MEMS applications are currently under consideration. Examples

include microjet arrays for flow control, inertial measurement units (IMUs) for inertial measurement and navigation, fuse/safety/arming for munitions, health monitoring of machinery, and telecommunications for pico

satellites.

The MEMS aerospace applications are not without

their barriers and challenges. Since failure to meet these

challenges has more severe consequences for military

than for commercial applications, progress has been

slow in inserting many of the potential MEMS aerospace applications4.

Implementation barriers and challenges include reliability, harsh environment, supply availability, obsolescence, packaging, manufacturing, lack of standards, and

security aspects5.

The telecommunications infrastructure across the

world is expanding at a staggering rate in response to an

ever-increasing demand for mobility, interconnectivity,

and bandwidth. Fiber optic telecommunication systems

have had a phenomenal growth in the number and size

of manufacturers of optical components and devices.

T

By C. Sue Randles

Future Combat

Systems —

New technologies foundation

for more lethal force

Carolyn Sue Randles has more than 20

years of experience in acquisition. She

served as the deputy director for the Joint

Missile Alert Broadcast System in the OSD

Joint Test and Evaluation program; has

expertise in Battle Management,

Command, Control, Communications,

Computer, and Intelligence (BMC4I), testing, systems, and acquisition. She has a

master’s degree in Industrial and Systems

Engineering and a bachelor’s degree in

Electrical and Computer Engineering.

Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Fall Theme
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 43

Initially, manufacturers relied on costly precisionbased engineering to produce optical fiber connectors, splices, and alignment structures. Such manufacturing techniques have, however, evolved to

encompass micromachining as the basis for manufacturing low-cost, mass-produced components.

Current micromachining methods in combination

with integrated circuit-based processing techniques

enable the fabrication of complex optical-electronic integrated circuits and micro-electro-mechanical

alignment devices in production quantities6.

In the context of military systems, the performance of MEMS devices must clearly satisfy the

stringent specifications and environmental conditions expecting to be posed by such applications.

These operational and environmental requirements

will include electromagnetic compatibility and

resilience to radiation, to high temperatures (including sharp cycles in excess of 150 °C), and to vibration

and shock (up to 100,000g levels in force). In addition,

the technologies should take into account the nonaccessibility after launch, in certain circumstances, which dictate the need for "first-time-right" qualification.

Packaging for military MEMS is therefore more critical than that for commercial application of the technology; even in commercial applications, it is regarded

as a prime discriminator between commercial success

and commercial failure. For commercial microsystems,

packaging is said to account for 80 percent of the cost

and 80 percent of the failures. Both percentages in a

military environment are not likely to be lower and will

in all probability be even higher.

Military MEMS applications are being addressed in

the NATO Research and Technology Organization

MEMS Task Group Applied Vehicle Technology-078.

This group is assessing potential applications, determining technology status and research and development

needs, discussing barriers for implementation, and

developing insertion strategies. The task group saw the

need to enhance user and MEMS supplier interactions

and to increase MEMS awareness as enabling technology for several applications.

Army Transformation envisions a faster, lighter,

smarter, and more lethal force. MEMS have the potential to not only support Space platforms but other platforms as well. As the concepts and technical capabilities of MEMS are realized, the use of MEMS will play

a vital role in supporting the development of Space

capabilities.

Footnotes:

1. El-Fatatry, Ayman. MEMS Aerospace Applications, Feb 2003, "Mechanical-OpticalElectro-Mechanical Systems (MOEMS)", pg 8-3

2. Ibid., pg 8-4.

3. Schadow, Klaus C. MEMS Aerospace Applications, Feb 2003, pg. I-20.

4. Ibid., pg 1-1, 1-2.

5. Ibid., pg I-23.

6. Ibid., pg 8-6

spacetechnology

Aerospace MEMS applications

with "high-end" functionality

· Complete inertial and navigation units on a single 

chip.

· Inertial Measurement Units on a chip.

· Distributed sensing systems for monitoring, surveillance, and control.

· Miniature and integrated fluidic systems for instrumentation and biochemical sensors.

· Embedded sensors and actuators for maintenance 

and monitoring.

· Identification and tagging system using integrated 

micro-optical-mechanical MEMS.

· Smart structures and components.

· Microflow control.

· Fuze/safety and arming.

· Micropower and propulsion.

· Mass storage and novel display technologies.
epartment of Defense (DoD) Space efforts can be

divided into four basic areas: Space support, force

enhancements, Space control, and Space applications.

In each of these key areas, the Army has a rich history

and has made significant contributions.

Space Support — it does take a rocket 

scientist

Collectively, the technologies required to achieve

and sustain Space operations in orbit are referred to as

Space support. This includes the launch, tracking, control, and satellite bus. The Army’s historical role in

Space support is probably the one most often chronicled.

The Army’s development of launch capabilities by

the Von Braun team at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the

best known. The Army Ordnance Corps started longrange surface-to-surface guided-missile research with

Cal Tech in a remote area outside of Pasadena, Calif., in

May 1944. These facilities were the beginnings of the

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). In less than a year, the

contract for the Hermes project was given to General

Electric and in February 1945, Bell Laboratories

received a contract for the Nike project. These two

missiles became the progenitors of many of the Army’s

contributions to the application of “rocket science.”

While JPL was at the heart of the Army’s research

in long-range rockets, the Army’s fiscal investments

were small, late, and disorganized in comparison to the

activities of a group of scientists in Germany. Prior to

World War II, the German scientists at Peenemuende

had the finances and organization to conduct a rapid

succession of experiments to perfect weapons (such as

the V-2 rocket) capable of delivering a high explosive

payload at distances up to 300 kilometers. These scientists created production and engineering facilities

designed to manufacture more than 600 V-2 rockets a

month by the end of World War II. This feared

weapon of war captured the imagination of the world

and inspired rocket research worldwide.

Mr. Rocket comes to America

In an attempt to dismantle the Nazi war machine

and to prevent the revival of Nazi war potential by the

transfer of its economic and industrial capital, the

British and U.S. military collaborated in a plan know as

Eclipse. This plan implemented the U.S. State

Department’s Safehaven project, focusing on the nonproliferation of German nuclear weapon expertise.

These efforts spawned Project Paperclip, which sought

out strategic centers of German scientific knowledge to

provide “proper and permanent control” of them in

the best interest of “world security.” One of the individuals who supervised Project Paperclip was COL H.

N. Toftoy (also know as “Mr. Rocket”). It was his

relentless pursuit of rocket expertise that brought the

Von Braun team to the United States. By May 1948,

Project Paperclip had brought 492 German specialists

to the United States: 177 with the Army, 205 with the

Air Force, 72 with the Navy, and 38 with the

Department of Commerce (under Army custody).

With the delivery of 121 German rocket scientists

and 300 freight cars of V-2 components to Fort Bliss,

Texas, high-altitude scientific experiments and transfer

of German rocket expertise began. The German scientists commented just after World War II that the

American capabilities in 1945 were approximately 10

years behind the level of German expertise. Over the

next few years, 52 V-2 rockets were fired from White

Sands Proving Grounds (WSPG) and the Florida

Missile Testing Range, the last one on June 28, 1950.

These series of tests helped facilitate the technology

D

By Bernard Kerstiens

Fall Theme

44

The Path Taken ...

Army Space technology

beginnings

Bernard Kerstiens serves as the Space technology directorate, acting director, U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command. Kerstiens has worked on Space

technology Research and Development efforts at the

Space and Missile Defense Technical Center for the

Space Application Technology Program for 10 years.

From 1986 to 1993, he performed transceiver module,

radar, signal processing, and waveform generation

research for the U.S. Army Strategic Defense Command. 

Army Space Journal Fall 2003
transfer of German “know how.”

In February 1949, the Bumper Round 5 Missile,

fired at WSPG under Von Braun’s direction, was the

first penetration of Space by a U.S. missile. Project

Bumper was a modified V-2 that accommodated a WAC

(without attitude control) Corporal (developed by JPL)

to test multistage rocket flight and separation. It also

tested second-stage ignition in rarefied air. The

Bumper test achieved a 250-mile height to make the

Army the first to place an object in Space. The Army,

working with the Navy, collaborated on a number of

upper atmospheric tests and even launched a V-2 from

the deck of an aircraft carrier. The Navy was so interested in the upper atmospheric test that it pursued the

Viking missile to continue scientific research when the

V-2 stockpile was depleted.

On Oct. 28, 1949, the Army’s Ordnance Research

and Development (R&D) Division at Fort Bliss was

transferred to Redstone Arsenal, Ala. At Redstone, the

Von Braun team started work on missile improvements

conceived at the end of World War II. Building on the

Hermes C-1 rocket, it developed what later became

known as the Redstone rocket.

On Feb. 1, 1956, the Army established the Army

Ballistic Missile Defense Agency (ABMA), to which the

Secretary of Army delegated unparalleled procurement

authority. ABMA brought together the unprecedented

combination of German creativity and U.S. Army ordnance production capabilities. The Von Braun team’s

unity of purpose allowed ABMA to remain at the forefront of U.S. rocket R&D.

Redstone Arsenal’s initial proposal to manufacture

the Redstone missile by using its own R&D shops was

denied. Because of delays at the contractor’s facilities,

the Arsenal ended up building the first 12 Redstone

missiles as well as missile numbers 18 through 29. This

fabrication experience created a virtual “skunk works”

that was fully capable of readily modifying the

Redstone missile for various configurations and payloads. The Army joined with the Navy to propose

launching a satellite with a Redstone missile under

Project Orbiter. But in 1955, the government elected

to pursue a less military-related effort under project

Vanguard. Vanguard was based on using the Navy’s

Viking missile to boost an upper atmosphere scientific

payload. The Navy’s Vanguard project was under contract to the Martin Company and funded by National

Science Foundation. The Vanguard project, however,

was doomed because Martin received a more lucrative

Titan missile contract from the Air Force, causing redirection of limited talent and resources.

The Army began work on a 1,500-mile range intermediate range ballistic missile (Jupiter C missile) to support sea and land requirements on Feb. 1, 1956. To

pursue the development of the Jupiter C missile,

ABMA became a Class II activity. On Aug. 8, 1957, the

nose cone of a Jupiter C missile was successfully recovered. The nose cone success is attributed to German

scientist creativity and was accomplished on one-tenth

of the budget that the Air Force expended under its

nose cone research efforts.

The Oct. 4, 1957, launch of the Russian Sputnik I,

followed by Sputnik II on Nov. 3, 1957, unleashed the

Army’s R&D expertise at Redstone Arsenal to launch

the first U.S. satellite (Explorer I). A series of Army

“first in Space” events unfolded:

· Explorer I was launched on Jan. 31, 1958, as part

of the International Geophysical Year. It was a 30.8-

pound satellite that carried a cosmic ray detector, a cosmic dust gauge, thermometers, and microlock and

minitrack transmitters. This payload led to the discovFall 2003 Army Space Journal 45

(See Beginnings, page 52)

spacetechnology

The Army has been a leader in Space research throughout

the 20th century as evidenced by numerous technology firsts

and capability demonstrations. The Army is now continuing

this heritage in the 21st century in accordance with new

DoD guidance and emphasis on Space dominance and operations. Space has evolved from a mission of achieving the

“high ground” to one of extending power/might and providing global capabilities to the individual Soldier. It will be

imperative to protect and secure these Space 

capabilities for our future national defense needs.
46 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Capabilities ... from Page 5

the importance of facilitating compatibility across Department of Defense

and other government agencies’ created

the necessity to develop an improved

communications architecture. The

Transformational Communications

Architecture (TCA) is being designed to

support those requirements. The TCA

will ultimately tie together Space-based

and ground networks, and will include

all types of communications capabilities.

Pushing the data down to the lowest tactical level faster and more securely will

be achieved using Space-based satellite

transmissions. Achieving these faster

transmission speeds will require technologies that go beyond those offered

by line-of-sight radio frequency (RF)

transmissions that can be easily disrupted.

Laser communications, which transmit eye-safe light from one photondetector receiver to another using lowpower infrared laser, demonstrate great

promise to increase data rate payloads

while minimizing the risk of interference with other communications systems. Speed of data transfer will expand

significantly, literally allowing warfighters to have real-time access to whatever

is being received. Freeing up the radio

frequency bandwidth for other types of

uses will provide a collateral benefit.

Operation Iraqi Freedom offered a

glimpse into the capabilities of Blue

Force Tracking (BFT) and combat identification technologies. Space-based

BFT systems like the Grenadier Beyondline-of-Sight and Mini-Transmitter provided tremendous enhancements for

Special Operations Forces and several

aviation units, but their potential was

limited by the degree data could be disseminated and displayed for the commander’s common operating picture.

However, technologies currently in

development will profoundly revolutionize this exciting area.

Radio Frequency (RF) “Tags,” with

stealth capabilities to transmit and/or

receive from a radar platform may ultimately serve as the basis for systems

that expand our current capabilities in

battlefield surveillance, BFT, and combat identification. Tags will help to

identify friendly assets by adding a

unique identification to their radar

return. By combining a Global

Positioning System (GPS) receiver with

a Tag, and using the Tag to transmit the

coordinates to a Space-based platform,

the location can be determined with

great accuracy. The capabilities provided by GPS-III promise to extend the

accuracy of the position, velocity, and

timing signals while expanding anti-jam

capabilities. Reducing instances of fratricide on the battlefield is central to this

enhanced situational awareness. This

technology, supported by the enhanced

capabilities of GPS-III, may also revolutionize the way logistical supplies are

tracked and non-intrusive inspections

are conducted.

Technologies beyond the future

Army are not certain, but as Space technologies evolve, smarter, faster, more

capable sensors, energy devices (kinetic

and laser), and communications

enhancements, will emerge to provide a

wide range of capabilities and enhancements for effective battle management.

Clearly, we are only at the beginning of

the exciting journey for Space technology.

Sir Winston Churchill once noted,

“It is no use saying, ‘We are doing our

best.’ You have got to succeed in doing

what is necessary.” This statement is

particularly relevant as we consider the

implications of our work. While the

future is uncharted territory, its direction is one that can be affected by our

actions today. We must succeed, and

Space technology is part of that process.

The pathway being laid by the team of

Space professionals at Space and Missile

Defense Command will help assure that

success. Secure the High Ground.

Like a number of products I read

about in the “Capabilities Catalogue,”

researchers and developers will continue

to improve the GMD system. They will

use the Alaskan base as a test bed for the

interceptors. The integrated test bed

will provide for more realistic tests and

data that will be used for further system

development and refinement. It will also

expand to test weapons and sensors from

throughout the entire integrated ballistic

missile system, a system of layered

defenses designed to protect the Nation

and its allies.

History tells us that sometimes people do not see the advantages of new

inventions, and we must beware of being

too conservative or unimaginative. For

example, early Gatling guns and

machineguns faced Army conservative

pressure, and the fear that too many

rounds would be fired, creating logistics

problems. Early repeating rifles were

discouraged because the Soldier would

fire his ammunition too quickly. As a

result, in some clashes Soldiers with single-shot rifles faced Native Americans

with repeating rifles. When Alexander

Graham Bell tried to make the case for

his telephone in London, he was

informed that his “interesting” invention

might have some limited use in America

with its great distances, but in Great

Britain their multitude of messenger

boys would suffice. In the 1950’s, a government panel of experts reported that

the U.S. government would never need

more than five computers. Just imagine

where the military would be if someone

hadn’t seen the possibilities and pushed

forward.

From a requirement to a solution, the

military’s combat developers, engineers,

and researchers provide our military with

equipment that makes Soldiers more

effective. They help us stay ready for war

so we can better achieve peace.

Modern Warfare ... from Page 9
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 47

spacetechnology

Scientist ... from Page 17

imagery and communications from

commercial or military sources.

Denying such access may be necessary in certain situations.

With regard to direct confrontation in space, either antisatellite weapons or satellite-based

warfare, there are probably not too

many countries with those capabilities. The recent growth of the

Chinese Space program is a concern. In any case, what we need to

do is to make our systems as resistant to threat as possible. This

means on the ground as well as in

Space. And we have to make them

resistant to Space weather as well as

potential adversaries, the recent

solar flares providing a case in

point.

I don’t see Space wars happening anytime soon, but possibly

Space-based weapons.

Q: How can technology be used

to protect the sovereignty of

Space?

A: I think the best answer to that is

ensuring that our systems will survive in the harsh environment of

Space, be that Space weather or

attack. As we ensure our access,

and work to provide better protection to counter any threat of attack,

we will be doing our part to ensure

that Space remains free.

Q: How deniable to adversaries

are the Space benefits we are

presently using?

A: That’s directly in proportion to

how well we design our systems,

and how well we protect them.

Encryption, jamming, deception,

and protection — these are all tools

by which we deny any adversaries

greater or even equal access.

Q: Realistically, how large a role

do you see Space playing in

future conflicts?

A: A very large continuing role.

Space has become an integral part

of how we conduct the warfight.

We depend on it for precision navigation, intelligence, meteorology,

and communications. Expanding

and exploiting the uses of Space to

an ever-increasing degree will

define how well we support our

forces, in logistics as well as operations.

pretation in determination of what

actually constitutes a “valid threat.”

Accurately determining valid

future threats is the most subjective

portion of the formula used to

develop a responsive materiel solution’s capability. Careful analysis

should allow us to make intellectual

choices between materiel solution

alternatives (but only choices). For

instance, what effects do different

color shades of the pumpkin have

on its stealthiness? What is the optimum shape for the intended sub-ballistic trajectory? And should the

pumpkin be developed in total darkness, shade, or full sun to enhance its

nucleotide sequencing? Therefore,

technological choices may be

enhanced with prudent analysis. Ah,

but the imagination is required first!

After all, technology is adapted in

the “hand” of the user. Give a 1-

year-old child a new and totally different toy and what does he do? He

feels it, tastes it, tries using it in a

variety of ways; hits it on the ground

like a hammer, scoops it in his food

like a spoon, or hits his brother over

the head with it like a weapon. Take

this toy away from him before the

“newness wears off ” and we have a

tantrum, red face, and tears. The

child is enamored with the new toy.

Soldiers also find various uses for

their new technology “toys.” For

example, the first helmets were used

to shave in, to bath in, to heat water

for cooking in, as pillows for sleep,

to keep heads dry in the rain, and, oh

yes, to protect heads from shrapnel.

As Americans we have, at all ages

of our lives, embraced toys, tools,

and ideas as long as the changes have

not come too rapidly. My grandfather (in the 1950s) was the first in the

neighborhood to own a television.

My father (in the 1960s) was always

the first to purchase the latest automobile technology. When computers became available and affordable

for home use (in the 1980s), I often

led the neighborhood in the purchase and use of a computer. My

son (in the 2000s) is satisfied with

nothing less than the smallest and

the fastest self-designed computer

technology, palm pilot, cell phone,

and DVD.

Each generation of Americans

sends a legacy to the next generation

to pursue the latest and greatest technology. Do you know anyone without a cell phone, or without access to

a fax or a home computer? Did you

really need these devices? How did

we operate without them? They

have no doubt changed the nature of

our lives. Everyone knows we will

continue this technology spiral. We

have to. We are programmed by our

ancestors. In the final analysis, it may

not really be about a neat three-step

development process. It might just

be about our love affair with the

promises of “Buck Rogers” technology and the eternal chant deep within our American souls: “I love

Pumpkin Chunkers. I want a

Pumpkin Chunker. I need a Pumpkin

Chunker.”

Pumpkin Chunking ... from Page 37 
48 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Some of these concepts have matured to

prototypes for the medical and transportation industries.

Although there is proof of its benefits

to problem solving, there is little evidence

the Department of the Army or other

Department of Defense agencies are

actively maturing the technologies necessary to provide true volumetric displays to

the military community. In the meantime,

while Hollywood producers continue to

tempt us with their awesome visual

effects, gaming tycoons wow us with their

virtual reality games, and fiction writers

weave the spell of synthesized threedimensional images ... where is the contribution of the computer industry? (Bill,

Steve, if you build it, we will come ... )

The bottom line is that three-dimensional

volumetric displays may have to be

spawned within the commercial sector

and purchased as an end-item by the military. In the meantime, other promising

technologies will be evaluated to address

the information-overload and presentation challenge, such as immersion technologies and biometrics.

Improve Decision-Making

The majority of computers found in

major command operations centers today

merely serve as information repositories.

Users analyze the information (some relevant and some not) and present the

results to decision-makers, who then

attempt to make the best decision given

the available information. The limiting

factor of course is the user’s ability to

evaluate lots of information within a

short timeframe (tracing back to the

information overload dilemma discussed

earlier), sometimes while literally under

the gun! Stress, fatigue, or a moment of

daydreaming can cause essential information to be overlooked or misinterpreted.

To alleviate these symptoms, it is time

to treat the command operations center

computer as an analyst merged with an

expert decision-maker. In order for a

computer to search for and analyze massive amounts of data to generate an optimized decision, the computer must contain specialized software applications.

These applications must draw from the

knowledge and experience of top-notch

analysts and seasoned commanders. But

unlike humans, the computer could provide analyses and optimized courses of

action in seconds, not minutes, hours,

days, or months, as may be the case with

human analysts.

Now is the time to roll out some of

the impressive IT jargon — terms such as

collaboration, data mining, expert systems, chaos theory, neural networks, and

adaptive algorithms top the list. The IT

field is fertile with techniques for optimizing decision-making. These IT fields

are gaining a second look by military technologists as enemy targets and environments become more complex. And,

these technologies are actively being evaluated for use within the SISP.

Interoperability

Lack of interoperability may be

caused by using different languages (message protocols), by failing to understand

the meaning when the same language

(message protocol) is used, or by using

dissimilar communication media (radios).

Using the telephone industry as an example, notice how the type of telephone and

network hardware (rotary, pushbutton,

ISDN, cordless, cellular, copper, fiberoptic, etc.) and the service provider

(AT&T, Singular, BellSouth, etc.) have little effect on whether or not you can conduct a conversation with another individual who is using a different type of telephone equipment and service provider.

However, if the individual with whom

you’re trying to communicate is speaking

Arabic and you don’t understand a word

of Arabic, then you’re having an interoperability problem.

This leads to the conclusion that the

different languages (message protocols)

being used across military networks are

the greater causative factor to preventing

interoperability rather than the types of

communication hardware. (This brings

up an interesting debate on whether or

not commercial hardware and providers

could provide better solutions than military radios and networks. This debate,

however, is beyond the scope of the SISP

effort.) The invention of a super or universal language (metalanguage) that

everybody could speak (commercial standards) is a need to which the Extensible

Markup Language (XML) may be the

solution.

Contract Initiation and Status

In FY01, the Army approved a Phase

I Small Business and Innovative Research

(SBIR) effort to develop a concept for a

SISP, using a metalanguage, intuitive

screen displays, three-dimensional displays [on a flat screen video monitor],

with embedded intelligence for Space situation assessment, and evolvable to Space

planning and execution activities. In

FY02, two Phase I contracts, valued at

$70,000 each were awarded to FGM, Inc.,

of Colorado Springs, Colo., and 21st

Century Systems, Inc., of Herndon, Va.

Each contractor had unique strengths

that they brought to the SISP effort.

FGM is a small-business leader in XML

with considerable defense applications;

their focus was developing a comprehensive XML schema and addressing the

issues associated with using XML. 21st

Century Systems has considerable expertise in developing decision support systems; their approach focused on the decision support aspect of the SISP.

The SISP concept was first presented

to Dr. V. Garber, director for

Interoperability, Office of the Under

Secretary of Defense, Acquisition,

Technology, and Logistics and his staff in

March 2002.

In FY03, the Army approved a Phase

II SBIR ($730,000 over two years, with up

to $250,000 matching funds available for

follow-on work) to be awarded to 21st

Century Systems, Inc., to take the SISP

beyond the concept prototype to the

technology prototype phase. 21st

Century Systems will subcontract with

their Phase I rival, FGM, Inc., to further

the XML work for the SISP.

In July 2003, 21st Century Systems

demonstrated their SISP prototype, aided

with voice-activated commands and

responses, to an approving audience at

To Boldly Go ... from Page 39
SMDC, Huntsville, Ala. A representative from Dr. Garber’s office was

also present for the demonstration

and provided words of encouragement. His office has been tracking

the SISP progress as a possible technology insertion into the DoD

Family of Interoperable Operating

Pictures. Although quite ambitious

for a Phase II effort, the intent is to

integrate the SISP into the SMD

Battle Lab’s Advanced Warfighting

Environment for play in future exercises.

Challenges

As with any new concept or program, there are technical challenges,

financial challenges, and political or

nontechnical challenges. Usually, it’s

the technical challenges that are the

easiest to solve.

Technical

From a technical perspective, the

use of XML may prove to be an

excellent alternative to traditional

military message protocols. The

XML has all the features of a super

language, and its inherent richness

compensates for its minor challenges. One of the less obvious

challenges is that each user of the

language must be using the same

schema or rules for describing the

fields of information within that

domain (in this case, the Space

domain). Since XML is written in

the English language, each digital

user only needs an English language

interpreter. But what about those

instances in the English language

when the rules waiver, like in the

case where “insure” and “ensure”

are both acceptable terms and

spellings to mean the same thing? 

The other challenge in using

XML is the tremendous amount of

Space it takes to pass a string of

information such as a satellite element set (ELSET). The best case

when using ASCII text is 160 characters of information to pass an

ELSET. Using XML, that ELSET

can easily grow to more than 10,000

characters because of the various

types of information that are packed

into that message. This added information is useful for such things as

granular updates and message verification — something that a minimum

ASCII text message cannot accommodate. In a bandwidth-constrained

environment, the problem is obvious. On the technology horizon, are

data compression technologies

specifically geared to the XML environment? These technologies are

being evaluated for incorporation

into the SISP.

One of the other technical challenges is in the area of currency and

synchronization. Although not

unique to the Space domain — all

common operating pictures share

this challenge with marginal success

— it certainly presents some interesting timing constraints caused by

the velocity of Space objects in relation to slower flying objects such as

rotary-winged platforms. For

instance, in the amount of time it

takes to fuse together all the information to build a “Single Integrated

Space Picture” to be transmitted to

other users, the Space object could

have moved several kilometers, thus

making the picture old; but the recipient of the picture would use it as

though it were new and current.

(Recall that using old air pictures has

contributed to friendly fire incidents.) To its credit, XML helps keep

data current on limited bandwidth by

enabling granular updates rather

than requiring full updates.

Advances in hyper-real-time simulation and decision-making are also

being evaluated to address this challenge.

Financial

As any program manager knows,

the success of their program

depends upon funding continuity.

As indicated earlier, the SISP has just

entered the first year of a $730,000

Phase II SBIR effort. If some other

customer or user of this technology

provides funds, the Department of

the Army would match those funds

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 49

spacetechnology

3D Volumetric Displays: Sample Images

3D Digital Terrain Air Traffic Control

Antenna Signal

Visualization and Analysis MRI Image

Visualization
up to $250,000, for a total effort of more

than $1.2 million. Beyond the technology

prototype phase comes the real work (and

funding driver): the Research,

Development, Test, and Evaluation

phase.

SMDC has an Army unfunded

requirement for FY05 to advance the

SISP beyond the technology prototype

and will submit a robust cost estimate for

the FY06-11 budgets. Architectural

trades will be pursued to ensure that the

SISP architecture is compliant with the

Army future direction for Space systems.

Political or Nontechnical

The concept of a SISP to overlay the

common air, ground, and maritime pictures has gained support to such an extent

that several contractor and military organizations are proposing their own SISP

development effort. The downside of

this support is predictable when recalling

all the years, dollars, and heartache

(friendly fire) that have resulted from the

various dissimilar development attempts

toward a common, interoperable air picture. History will repeat itself as every

organization rushes to “build their own”

SISP-like capability and interoperability

flies out the window. The only way to

preclude this is for a knowledgeable person with sufficient financial and political

clout to mandate that all SISP and SISPlike development attempts be jointly managed.

But this is merely one facet of the

problem: others include contractors lobbying to ensure their business goals are

not affected, organizations withholding

vital information for constructing a SISP,

organizational battles, etc. Perhaps the

biggest hurdle is convincing users and

battlefield commanders to pull the manin-the-loop out of the analysis and decision-making process and let an automated

SISP capability provide this capability.

Future

The SISP concept prototype has all

the right ingredients to achieve true interoperability, provide Space surveillance

and situational awareness to the Space

operators and commanders, and provide

a framework for execution of Space operations, testing, training, exercises, etc.

Couple volumetric display technology

with intuitive, user-friendly commands,

throw in some immersion technologies, a

sprinkle of biometrics, and the SISP is a

recognizable achievement, akin to the one

first used by Captain Kirk aboard the

Enterprise.

50 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

uninterrupted flow of information.”

Commercial satellite systems will be

essential for gaining and maintaining

information superiority for all future

activities from major theater wars to

small-scale contingencies. The ability to

collect and disseminate timely, relevant

information to the Soldier on the ground

will continue to be a determining factor in

mission success.

Today the military relies on a wide

variety of commercial Space products and

services with the heaviest concentration

in the imagery and communication areas.

The military currently uses the commercial capabilities in both of these areas for

training and operations. The resources

used for training provide vital information and capabilities for conducting operational planning and military operations

as directed by the President and Secretary

of Defense. Since the military philosophy

is to “train like you fight,” the sudden loss

of critical information to support war

planning and execution would significantly diminish military effectiveness.

Space will be critical to providing fully

capable operational forces of the future.

We must be ready to operate in an environment with limited or non-existent

communication infrastructure, in areas

where little precision mapping has

occurred, and in vast expanses where continuous overhead intelligence collection

will be key to real-time situational awareness. These operational requirements will

place a premium on commercial satellites

to provide some to all of the communication, remote sensing, imagery, and navigation capabilities.

Unfortunately, the ability to leverage

commercial capabilities for military benefit has both a positive and negative side.

On the positive side, the commercial market allows the military to reduce costs by

acquiring commercially available products

instead of building separate satellite systems for the same purpose. On the negative side, the military must share the

commercial satellites with commercial

customers. Also, there are limited restrictions on commercial satellite company

customers. It is now possible for our

adversaries to have access to similar information and capabilities as our own, thereby decreasing our advantage.

Additionally, commercial satellites can be

more vulnerable because they do not have

the same level of protective measures as

military satellites.

The military increasingly relies on

satellites for the conduct of training and

operations. As the availability of commercial Space products increases, the military reliance on commercial products for

communication, remote sensing, imagery,

and navigation capabilities will only continue to grow. Simultaneously, the military must also strive to ensure that the

quality and durability of the information

meets military requirements and warfighter expectations. In the long run, however, the real challenge will be for the military to maintain its Space edge with the

proliferation of commercially available

Space products to all potential adversaries.

References:

1. Smith, Marcia S., U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and

Commercial. Issue Brief for Congress, February 2003.

2. Cynamon, Major Charles H., Protecting Commercial Space

Systems: A Critical National Security Issue. Maxwell AFB, AL,

April 1999.

3. Carter, Major Sue B., A Shot to the Space Brain the

Vulnerability of Command and Control of Non-Military Space

Systems. Air Command and Staff College, March 1997.

Space Edge ... from Page 40
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 51

spacetechnology

exposure of Soldiers to the effects

of direct combat. It is not surprising then that all future Army operations will include planning for and

influencing Space operations.

Seamlessness and ease of use

will be the signature characteristics

of a well-integrated Space and land

force operation. Support from

Space-based assets must be reliable

and timely. Operational friction

must be minimized. 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 will be to reduce technical

and procedural challenges by developing a seamless integration of

Space capabilities into the Army.

The Army of the future will be

faster, lighter, and deployed around

the globe. Space is the critical link

in the chain, the glue holding the

regionally oriented, specifically

designed, deployed worldwide force

packages together in an “Army of

One.” In an operational environment where infantry and special

operation units require real-time

detailed information and communication, Space assets will be indispensable to accomplish their mission. Understanding how to use

Space is as important as developing

the capability. To accomplish this,

the Army is aggressively educating

its Soldiers on the capabilities that

Space assets bring to the battlefield.

Special courses are now offered to

both officers and enlisted Soldiers

to ensure warfighters at every level

can take advantage of Space as a

strategic force multiplier.

The Army’s use and reliance on

Space assets has evolved exponentially since that first satellite in the

1950s. From a primitive communication capability to today’s global

positioning system to tomorrow’s

single integrated Space picture, the

use of Space has become fundamental to how the Army trains and

fights. The Army’s reliance on

Space products will continue to

grow and will become even more

vital in the dispersed, nonlinear battlefield of the transformed Army.

References:

1. Streland, Major Arnold H., Developing Military Space

Theory Through a Comparative Analysis. Maxwell AFB,

AL, April 1999.

2. TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-14, 11 April 2003

Force Multiplier ... from Page 41 

sarily on teams, but who had the

right qualifications and training.

We also called for volunteers.

There is absolutely no way we

could have met these missions

without our reserve component

Soldiers. This National Guard

team is going to relieve another

Guard team, ARSST 13, that’s

done a terrific job.”

Rivera thanked the members

of ARSST 12, all of whom belong

to the Colorado National Guard.

“Most of you are local,

right?” asked the mayor.

At nods of assent — except

for a Soldier hailing from the

Western Slope, SSG Brett Mills,

who loudly stood up for his

native section with a defiant

hooah — the mayor continued.

“Thank you for making our

city, our state, and our nation

proud. I see some wedding

rings, so I know there are families who will be left behind. We

appreciate your sacrifice more

than I can say. As the son of a

war veteran, and as a former captain with seven years in the service, I have some idea of what you

face, and I honor you for it.

Godspeed, and come back safely

to your families and to us,” said

Rivera.

After the general public

farewell ceremony, the mayor

shook hands with each Soldier.

The six men, Willis; CPT

George O’Neil, Operations

Officer; CPT James Innes,

Intelligence Officer; MSG James

Bunch, NCOIC; Mills,

Topographic NCO; and SSG

Winston Delgado, Communications NCO, expect a six-month

deployment.

The commander of the 193rd

Space Support Battalion,

Colorado National Guard, LTC

Michael Yowell, said, “Through

current operations and exercises,

the Army is finding out what we

bring to the warfighter and

because of that, we face an evergrowing number of requests

from the field. Since 9/11, the

National Guard has stepped up

to the plate and rapidly responded to mobilization requests from

1st Space Brigade. Every mobilization and deployment to date

has capitalized not only on the

space skills of the Guardsmen

but their civilian skill sets as well.

This team, like the teams before

them, will expand the reputation

the citizen-Soldier brings to the

Army team.”

Command In Brief ... from Page 35
52 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

ery of the Earth’s Van Allen radiation

belts.

· Explorer II failed to make orbit

on March 5, 1958, because of a fourthstage failure. The satellite carried a cosmic ray counter, an erosion gauge, a thermometer, and microlock and minitrack

instrumentation.

· Explorer III was launched on

March 26, 1958, and carried a similar

payload to Explorer I. However, it also

included a miniature tape recorder to

record radiation data between ground

stations.

· Explorer IV was launched July 26,

1958, and carried four radiation counters. Explorer V failed to make orbit

because of a collision between the first

stage and upper stages.

ABMA continued to provided launch

service to Advanced Research Projects

Agency (ARPA) and the National

Advisory Committee on Aeronautics

(1915-1958 — forerunner to National

Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA)), including the first two lunar

probes.

On Aug. 15, 1958, ARPA Order 14-

59 initiated the Army’s Juno V booster

program. This program started what

became known as the Saturn booster.

On July 1, 1960, ABMA and its facilities at Redstone Arsenal and Cape

Canaveral, Fla., were turned over to

NASA. The Army retained work on the

Pershing and Nike missile systems as

well as the Army Rocket and Guided

Missile Agency that became part of the

Army’s Aviation and Missile Command.

Another Army installation rich in

Space history is Camp Evans (near Fort

Monmouth, N.J.). On Jan. 10, 1946, scientists working on Project DIANA were

the first to bounce radio signals off the

Moon. This experience led the Army’s

Signal Corps and the Signal Research and

Development laboratory (SRDL) team

(which also received German scientists

through Project Paperclip) to become

involved with the operation and maintenance of primary tracking and telemetry

ground stations of the Vanguard minitrack network. SRDL later helped calibrate the minitrack system by using its

Project Diana radar facilities.

The United States was unprepared to

track the Sputnik satellite even though

the Russians had previously announced

the satellite frequency. Fort Monmouth

rapidly found equipment through the

recapitalization of military receivers and

was credited with having provided the

backbone of the entire U.S. tracking and

observation efforts for Sputnik. This

effort became the Signal Corps

AstroObservation Center.

The SRDL tracked solar cell development from its beginnings at Bell

Laboratories in 1954 and pressed the

Navy to include solar cells on the

Vanguard satellite.

Space Force Enhancement

While the Army was very much

involved in the development of Space

support technology, it was also deeply

involved in Space force enhancement.

Space force enhancement operations

improved the warfighting force via Space

capabilities. Traditionally, Space force

enhancement includes command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance

(C4ISR); position/navigation; and meteorological monitoring.

In June 1958, SRDL at Fort

Monmouth initiated fabrication of a

150-pound communication satellite to be

completed in 60 days under Project

SCORE (signal communication by orbiting relay equipment). The ARPA-sponsored project provided for a launch on

an Air Force Atlas intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). On Dec. 18, 1958,

the SCORE satellite was the first to relay,

store, and forward human voice and

data. The satellite also broadcasted

President Eisenhower’s Christmas message to the world.

The work on the SCORE satellite

generated another sophisticated 500-

pound relay communication SRDL satellite named Courier. The first Courier 1A

satellite failed to make orbit (Aug. 18,

1960), but the second Courier 1B satellite was placed in low earth orbit on Oct.

4, 1960. It was the first communication

satellite to be powered by nickel cadmium batteries and recharged by solar cells.

After completing one orbit, it relayed a

message from President Eisenhower to

the United Nations, transmitted from

Fort Monmouth and relayed to Puerto

Rico.

The TIROS (television and infrared

observation satellite) was launched on

April 1, 1960. TIROS evolved from

Major General Medaris’ “eye in the sky”

concept at ABMA. ABMA and the

Signal Corps developed the TIROS I and

II satellites and Fort Monmouth provided satellite control and ground stations

for the TIROS satellites. NASA directed

the overall operational phase after ARPA

sponsorship was transferred.

The Army Advent Management

Agency had the lead for communication

satellite development under ARPA’s

Project Advent. The Army was the lead

in the development of ground stations

and payloads, the Navy was lead on shipboard terminals, and the Air Force was

responsible for launch. After a year, the

Air Force was successfully able to argue

that satellites were part of its mission

and the Army responsibilities were

reduced to ground terminals and ground

support. In 1962, the Army established

the U.S. Army Satellite Communications

Agency.

The Army developed most of the

ground stations and payload control for

the SYNCOM III satellites. From 1964

to 1969, the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers pioneered the development of

a series of very accurate geodetic satellites named SECOR (sequential collation

of range), which related local map data

to a global grid. Position errors were less

than 10 meters and it had similar techniques as today’s global positioning system to deal with ionospheric diffraction.

In the early seventies, the Nixon

administration revised DoD Directive

5160.32 to allow each Service to conduct

Space R&D for “unique battlefield and

ocean surveillance navigation, communication, meteorological, mapping, charting, and geodesy satellites.” This allowed

Beginnings ... from Page 45
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 53

the Army and Navy to once again

start investigating and exploiting

Space capabilities.

During this time, the national

strategic Space systems were providing capabilities used by the

national decision makers and strategic planners. The tactical user had

no, or at best very limited, information from the national Space systems. The Army established the

Army Space Program Office

(ASPO) in 1973 to rectify this deficiency. ASPO developed means to

rapidly exploit national Space information in theater and link this product to tactical users.

The Assistant Secretary of the

Army requested that a technology

manager of Space R&D programs

be established to provide an internal

and external focus to the Army.

The Army Space Technology and

Research Office (ASTRO) was created on Jan. 6, 1988, to fill this role.

The ASTRO mission was later

transferred to the U.S. Army Space

and Missile Defense Command

(SMDC) to consolidate Space-related activities in the Army. ASTRO

efforts later became the Space

Application Technology Program.

The Army Space Institute under

the direction of Vice Chief of Staff

General Thurman initiated what

became the Army Space

Exploitation Demonstration

Program (ASEDP) to be executed

by U.S. Army Space Command

(ARSPACE). ASEDP was able to

demonstrate multiple Space

exploitation capabilities and

research opportunities for the

Army. ASEDP maintained a close

relationship to SATP within SMDC.

Space Control

Space control, defined as ensuring the freedom of action in Space

for the United States and its allies

while denying the enemy the use of

Space, is another area where the

Army has a long history of significant contributions. When the

Russians threatened the West with

an orbital H-bomb on Aug. 9, 1961,

all three Services initiated R&D

efforts.

The Army’s program, codenamed Mudflap, was based upon

the Nike missile. The missile’s

capabilities were extended via

antiballistic missile (ABM) research

to a Nike Zeus configuration. In

May 1962, the U.S. Army fielded the

first operational anti-satellite

weapon (ASAT) base at the

Kwajalein Missile Range (KMR).

After an ASAT policy meeting in

June 1963, the Army was directed to

complete the ASAT facilities at

KMR, including storage of the system’s nuclear warheads. In 1966 the

program was phased out.

In the late 1980s, the Army initiated a new R&D program with a

kinetic energy (KE) ASAT system

leveraging ongoing ABM development exoatmospheric re-entry-vehicle interceptor system. But by the

mid-1990s, with the fall of the iron

curtain, the requirement for KE

ASAT no longer existed.

The Army conducted a series of

data collection exercises in the late

1990s using the mid-infrared

advanced chemical laser at the High

Energy Laser Test Facility at White

Sands Missile Range, N.M., on

cooperative Space targets.

The Army is now investigating

nondestructive technologies to

secure Space superiority for its

future forces.

Space Application

Space application is the fourth

key area in which the Army has a

rich history of making significant

contributions. Space application

describes the projection of force

(i.e., intercontinental ballistic missiles) and defense from, through,

and in the Space environment.

Accordingly, almost all established

Space launch capabilities in the area

of Space application trace their

beginnings to the nuclear missile

arms race.

Besides the missile developments conducted at Redstone

Arsenal, re-entry-vehicle development was also pursued. The Army

flew the successful nose cone test

on May 15, 1957, with only onetenth of the budget of the Air

Force. On Aug. 8, 1957, a nose

cone was recovered and later displayed by President Eisenhower to

demonstrate that Army scientists

had successfully solved the problems associated with ballistic missile

re-entry.

The work of the Army also led

the Services in missile defense.

Through the 1960s, the Nike family

of missiles evolved with evergreater capabilities (Nike, Nike

Zeus, and Nike X). The Sentinel

system had two nuclear-tipped missiles: the Spartan was exoatmospheric and the Sprint was endoatmospheric. Also during the 1960s,

the Nixon administration reformulated the ABM mission and

renamed it Safeguard. Safeguard

was operational less than a year

when Congress closed the program

in accordance with the ABM Treaty.

ABM activities were limited to

research by the Army Ballistic

Missile Defense Agency. The ABM

mission was transferred to the

Strategic Defense Initiative

Organization (SDIO) in 1985. The

Army still actively conducts missile

research and its current customer is

the Missile Defense Agency, SDIO’s

successor organization.

Conclusion

The Army has been a leader in

Space research throughout the 20th

century as evidenced by numerous

technology firsts and capability

demonstrations. The Army is now

continuing this heritage in the 21st

century in accordance with new

DoD guidance and emphasis on

spacetechnology
54 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Space dominance and operations. Space

has evolved from a mission of achieving

the “high ground” to one of extending

power/might and providing global capabilities to the individual Soldier. It will

be imperative to protect and secure these

Space capabilities for our future national

defense needs. The battlefield has already

been transformed by Space capabilities

such as satellite communications and

GPS. The future battlefield will continue to change as new Army-developed

technologies are applied to Space and

provide capability to both the National

Command Authorities and to the

warfighter.

References

1. “Historical Monograph Army Ordnance Satellite Program,”

by Paul Satterfield and David Akens, published by ABMA

Historian 1 November 1958.

2. “Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, Next Step in Military

Uses of Space,” by Benjamin Lambeth, RAND Corp., sponsored by USAF contract F49642-01-C-0003, 2003.

3. “The Army — A Leader and Partner in Pioneering ‘The Final

Frontier’”, by LTC Patrick H. Rayermann, The Journal of Army

Space Operations Sep 2001.

4. “DCE: Army Leadership at the Cutting Edge of Space

Control,” Special Historical/Lesson Learned, by the SMDC

Command Historian, & SAIC, July 1999.

5. “Radar Echoes from the Moon,” by Jack Mofenson, Evans

Signal Laboratory Belmar NJ, Jan 1946,

www.infoage.org/diamof.html.

6. “Origins of the USAF Space Program 1945-1956” by Robert

L. Perry History of Dep Commander (AFSC) for Aerospace

Systems 1961, Reprinted by History Office SMC 1997.

7. “A Signal Corps Space Odyssey Part I — Prelude to SCORE”

by Dr. Has K Ziegler, The Army Communicator Fall 1981,

www.infoage.org/tac-zig17.html,

8. “A Signal Corps Space Odyssey Part I — SCORE and

Beyond,” by BG H. Mc D. Brown (retired), The Army

Communicator Winter 1982, www.infoage.org/tac-bro58.html.

9. “Geodetic SECOR” by J.E. Howell, International Assoc. of

Geodesy Symposium of Electronic Distance Determination

10. “U.S. Army Space Reference Text” U.S. Army Space

Institute, Fort Leavenworth, KS Jul 1993.

11. “Space Handbook, A War Fighter’s Guide to Space” Vol 1,

prepared by Maj Michael Muolo Air University Air Command

and Staff College, Air University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL, Dec

1993.

12. “Army Exploitation of Space” SMDC Historian (unpublished).

13. “A History of United States National Security Space

Management and Organization” by Joshua Boehm (System

Planning Corp) with Craig Baker Space Commission), Stanley

Chan and Mel Sakazaki (System Planning Corp), Prepared for

the Commission to Assess U.S, National Security Space

Management and Organization.

14. “The Army at Redstone Arsenal: Significant

Accomplishment in Space” www.redstone.Army.mil/

history/airspace/airspace_chronology.html.

l-r, CPT Bob Barrett, SGT Sabrinna Bannister, SSG Greg Singer, and CPT Angela Johnson set up a dish that provided Space

support to the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Photo by MAJ Daniel Cockerham

Space Soldiers in Action
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 55

Troubled SBIRS High Program to Undergo Broad

Review, Again GAO warns of further cost overrun

risks

By Elizabeth Rees, Inside the Air Force, November 7, 2003 

The Pentagon’s troubled next-generation Space-based early

missile warning program will once again undergo a broad

review, the Defense Department says. The statement comes in

response to a recent government audit warning that the SpaceBased Infrared System High is still at risk of dramatic cost and

schedule overruns despite a program restructure just last year.

The SBIRS program began in 1996 with the goal of improving

long-range ballistic missile detection capabilities over those of

the current system now on orbit, the Defense Support System.

SBIRS is divided into two architectures indicating the orbiting

altitude of the Space-based elements — “High” and “Low.” In

the fall of 2001, SBIRS Low management was transferred from

the Air Force to the Missile Defense Agency, where it has had

its fair share of cost overruns and program delays. MDA has

renamed the program the Space Tracking and Surveillance

System. Meanwhile, SBIRS High has been under intense scrutiny since 2001, when officials disclosed they were about $2 billion over budget. The overrun prompted a two-year delay in the

launch of its satellites. SBIRS High was originally slated for

fielding in 2004; the constellation will consist of four satellites

and the Air Force is procuring a launch-ready spare. The

Defense Department convened an independent review team to

unearth the budget problems and recommend program

reforms. Based on the review, the Air Force restructured the

program last year to provide contract incentives and various

oversight measures.

Officials Eye Datalink, GPS Capabilities For Future

AMRAAM Variant

By Elizabeth Rees, Inside Defense, October 31, 2003

As full operational testing for the latest variant of the

Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile draws near, the

Air Force is crafting plans to integrate datalink and Global

Positioning System guidance capabilities for the future version

of the AMRAAM, further improving its range and accuracy,

according to program officials. Both the Navy and the Air

Force use AMRAAM. AMRAAM is currently guided to its target with a seeker and inertial reference unit. Future variants of

the missile will house a combined Global Positioning

System/inertial measurement unit to replace the baseline

AMRAAM inertial reference unit, thus improving accuracy at

longer ranges, according to program officials.

Satellite Security Systems Demonstrates Shut

Down of Tanker Truck Via Satellite Communications 

San Diego, SpatialNews.com Release, November 3, 2003

Satellite Security Systems (S3), a global provider of asset

security and logistics control, in cooperation with the California

Highway Patrol (CHP) and InterState Oil Company, dramatically demonstrated the first wireless remote shutdown of a fully

loaded moving petrochemical tanker truck. From S3’s headquarters in San Diego — 530 miles from the demonstration site

— satellite communications were used to disable the truck in

seconds, proving S3's GlobalGuard(TM) and FleetGuard(TM)

a viable solution to the challenge of controlling rogue hazardous waste vehicles that could pose a threat to homeland

security. The event, conducted on CHP Academy grounds in

Sacramento and administered by the CHP, addresses ongoing

concerns about the affordability of effective security technology, stealthiness of such a security device, and how GPS monitoring can be incorporated safely into law enforcement protocol. The need to secure trucks carrying hazardous waste or

petrochemical products is of paramount concern to trucking

companies, California Independent Oil Marketing Association

(CIOMA) members, and State and Federal departments. While

the California state government may be voting as early as

January on Assembly Bill (AB) 575 (requiring truck disabling

devices, global positioning or other “location reporting systems” on hazardous material haulers), the CHP has been tasked

with researching various technologies to support these regulatory initiatives.

MDA Delays Next Missile Defense Intercept Test To

Spring '04

By Sharon Weinberger, Defense Daily, October 31, 2003

The next full intercept test of the Pentagon's GroundBased Midcourse Defense (GMD) system will take place in

spring of next year, rather than the end of this year as originally planned, according to a spokesman for the Missile Defense

Agency (MDA). Integrated Flight Test-14, or IFT-14, will take

place “in the spring time,” Rick Lehner, spokesman for the

MDA told Defense Daily. The change in schedule was made so

that MDA could eventually choose between the two boosters

under development by Orbital Sciences and Lockheed Martin,

which have not been tested yet from Ronald Reagan Flight Test

Facility on Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific. IFT-14 was originally

planned as a fully integrated flight test with an intercept set to

take place later this year. In that test, the booster, either the one

designed by Lockheed Martin or Orbital, would fly out of

Kwajalein. In addition, the production kill vehicle, which is built

by Raytheon, will be used in that test. MDA may decide to use

the Orbital booster “because that is the one furthest along,”

Lehner said. A final decision on which booster to use will be

made by the BMD program office in Huntsville, Ala. IFT-14

will be the first test of the booster — other than the surrogate

used in previous flight test — designed specifically for the

BMD system. Orbital's GMD boost vehicle is a three-stage system based on hardware that has flown 45 times on missions

carried out by the company's Pegasus, Taurus and Minotaur

space launch vehicles. The other booster design now being

developed by Lockheed Martin for the GMD program is slated

to make a similar test launch from Vandenberg in December.

Space Notes ... from Page 59

The Flipside
years old. The Allans took Poe in under

their care after his mother died the following year — this accounts for the “Allan”

part of his name. Francis Allan raised Poe

as a “Southern Gentleman.” This lifestyle

led Poe to be financially dependent on his

new parents. John Allan, though,

appeared reluctant to provide that support

when Poe went off to college. Arguments

with John Allan eventually led Poe to leave

home and join the Army. John Allan was

upset with Poe over $2,500 in extra

expenses during Poe’s brief attendance at

the University of Virginia. Poe said the

money was needed to maintain the same

standard lifestyle as his classmates while

the elder claimed the money was needed

to pay gambling debts. In any case, Poe

came home from college and John Allan

put him to work in the family store. They

could not settle the dispute, so eventually

Poe left home for Boston.

Another factor in Poe’s enlistment

was Poe’s interest in literature and initial failure as a writer. Poe

possibly took on the name Perry with the Army to hide from the

embarrassment of being an enlisted man. Or he simply wanted a

new identity and personality. There are indicators that Poe wanted to show his parents that he could succeed without their support

or influence. Until his death in 1849, Poe made up and maintained

elaborate stories of living in Russia and elsewhere during the timeframe covering his enlistment. The public accepted these until

biographers checked with the War Department and discovered the

“Perry” connection. Prior to enlisting, Poe used the pseudonym

“Henri le Rennet” and published his first book under the byline

“A Bostonian.” The book, Tamerlane and Other Poems, appeared in

print around the time he enlisted. The book ultimately failed and,

since he invested his own money to publish it, Poe likely entered

the Army without money or any other place to go.

Poe’s natural military inclination probably combined with

these factors to lead him into enlisting. “General” David Poe,

Poe’s grandfather, served under Washington as a quartermaster

officer in the Revolutionary War. As a 15-year-old, the junior Poe

showed his interest in the Army by becoming second-in-command as a lieutenant in the Junior Morgan Volunteers. The unit

formed in Richmond, Va., to serve as honor guard for General

Marquis de Lafayette’s October 1824 visit. It appears this interest

continued, because he joined the cadet company and volunteered

for military drill classes while attending the University of Virginia.

Many Poe biographers portray his military life in degrees of

his own dissatisfaction and as a clear mismatch to his actual character. Even the most critical writers describe Poe’s performance

in terms such as “successful,” “prospered,” “distinguished himself,” “pleased his superiors” and promoted to sergeant major “for merit.”

Another writer on Poe even gave him

a backhanded compliment by saying

that Poe’s making rank showed that he

was not a “dipsomaniac” — alcoholic

— at this point in his life. But Poe’s

own words may be most revealing:

“... . My desire is for the present to be

freed from the Army — since I have

been in it, my character is one that will

bear scrutiny and has merited the

esteem of my officers — but I have

accomplished my own ends — and I

wish to be gone.” He wrote that to

John Allan in a letter dated Dec. 22,

1828.

Poe’s achievements show a clear

drive for success. Because of the

enlisted structure then, it is difficult to

establish Poe’s actual position in

Company H when House selected

him from the regiment’s nearly 500

authorized enlisted men to become his sergeant major. Artillery

regiments did not have first sergeants in those days, so there was

no clear career path to sergeant major as there is today. We do

know that Poe rose to the rank of “artificer” within his first year,

promoted on May 1, 1828. This rank was actually a special ranking reserved for expert artillerymen who prepared and oversaw

the company’s ammunition supply. This appears to have been a

natural progression since Poe had both artillery and quartermaster

skills. His promotion to artificer made him at least the 11th ranking enlisted soldier, outranking nearly 400 regimental privates in

the unit at the time. Poe’s salary as an artificer was $10 a month,

one dollar more than what he would get as a sergeant major.

Another aspect of Poe’s Army behavior matches positive

observations about his performance. As an artificer, Poe apparently established relationships of trust and respect. A sign of this

is seen in Poe writing to John Allan on Dec. 1, 1828. This was his

first letter written home since enlisting in the Army. The letter

indicates that Poe admitted to Lieutenant Joshua Howard, his

company commander, that he had falsified his enlistment documents. Poe seemed to be seeking Howard’s assistance in gaining

a discharge by telling him that arguments with John Allan led to

his enlistment. It appears Howard took on a mentoring role as he

told Poe to first reconcile with John Allan. Howard introduced

Poe to House so they could discuss the discharge and, on Dec. 20,

1828, House reassigned Poe to the regiment’s headquarters for

duty in the adjutant’s office.

Because a commander had complete authority in choosing his

sergeant major, it is unknown why House “unexpectedly” chose

Poe as sergeant major a short time after meeting him. Poe him56 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

Seeds ... from Page 60

The Flipside

Edgar Allan Poe
self wrote that House knew him only as a soldier in the

regiment before their meeting. Poe reported that he and

House had discussed his grandfather. Descriptions of

House show he was a student of literature and, from that,

may have chosen Poe because they had similar interests.

House was probably also familiar with Poe’s grandfather.

The elder Poe was a popular quartermaster officer who,

although he was actually a major, people referred to as

“General” because he spent his own money to purchase

supplies for his soldiers during the American Revolution.

Traits of Poe’s people and leadership skills as a soldier

can also be seen during this timeframe as he reunited with

his family, came clean with the Army, and worked to find

his place in the Army. Poe developed relationships based

upon apparent hard work, honesty, trust, and mentorship

with his officers. He was able to do that despite entering

the Army using false information. If House’s intent in

promoting Poe was to encourage him to remain in the

Army, it is possible the strategy briefly worked. In

December 1828, Lieutenant Colonel William J. Worth,

(later the famous General Worth for whom Fort Worth,

Texas, is named) returned to the regiment from his job at

the Military Academy as the commandant of cadets. He

had a great deal of influence on Poe.

Needing to show Howard proof that he and John

Allan had reconciled, Poe informed his parents that he had

spent the last 18 months in the Army. John Allan responded indirectly that Poe should stay in the Army, so Poe

eventually shifted by stating he wanted a discharge so that

he could apply to West Point. Whether it was the idea of

Poe going to West Point or the fact that Francis Allan died

in February 1829 and John Allan felt some sympathy for

Poe, John Allan requested that the Army grant Poe a discharge.

After Poe left the Army in April 1829, he began a successful yearlong lobbying effort, asking then Secretary of

War John Eaton for a class seat. Armed with letters of

recommendation from Worth and other officers, John

Allan, and Virginia politicians, Poe gained a cadet appointment from President Andrew Jackson. Worth’s example

of swiftly rising from private to lieutenant in 1813 was

probably the genesis of an idea that gave Poe an incorrect

view of his upcoming Academy time. Poe believed his

enlisted training would help him receive a commission

within six months at West Point. He later learned he’d

need to attend the entire four years.

Most symbolic of Poe’s ability to influence was his

final act of shaping both his military and personal futures.

Poe excelled as a “model cadet,” ranking third in French

and 17th in math while recording no disciplinary problems

from July 1830 to January 1831. In the end, it was his

failed relationship with his father — the same factor that

led him to the Army — that caused him to leave the Army.

Two critical events made Poe realize he would never

retrieve his relationship with John Allan. First, Poe insulted John Allan over some rekindled money issues and, second, John Allan took Poe out of the family inheritance.

Poe told John Allan in one of his final letters to his father

that he would get out of West Point with or without the

elder’s permission. Poe then purposely set out to gain a

discharge. Poe’s last efforts ironically ensured the relationship’s end.

That is Poe. And, in Poe, we find seeds of today’s soldier and Army.

Allan died in 1834, and is only remembered for his

relationship to Poe. And, while the name of Regimental

Sergeant Major Edgar A. Perry (Poe) is perhaps familiar

only to military history and literature buffs, Poe’s successes and failures are intrinsic to the fact that the name Edgar

Allen Poe resonates to this day.

Many criticisms exist among Poe biographers. Maybe

Poe received a gratuitous promotion to sergeant major to

add dignity similar to the way people promoted Poe’s

grandfather to “general” years earlier. Maybe Poe used

whatever means to get out of the Army because he

despised it and was bored with it. Motives and exact circumstances are unknown. Comparing Poe as a soldier to

a soldier of today is tough. Poe’s superiors, though, clearly recognized desired traits. He was intelligent, influential,

resourceful, driven for success — an apparent standout.

He also mastered basic soldier traits at the time.

One undisputed fact does remain. Poe outranked

more than 400 regimental soldiers when the U.S. Army

promoted him to its highest enlisted rank nearly 175 years

ago. His failures — in his personal life with his father, and

at West Point — do not change this fact.

References

1. Arthur, Robert. History of Fort Monroe. Fort Monroe, Va.: Coast Artillery School

Printing Plant, 1930.

2. Allan Carlisle. “Sergeant Major Perry and Cadet Poe.” Infantry Journal, Nov. 1942, 70-78.

3. Duane, William. A Handbook for Infantry. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Printed for the author,

1814.

4. Fisher, Jr., Ernest F. Guardians of the Republic: A History of the Noncommissioned

Officer Corps of the U.S. Army. NY: Ballantine, 1994.

5. Haskin, William L. The History of the First Regiment of Artillery. Portland, ME:

Thurston and Co., 1879.

6. Helfers, Melvin C. Military Career of Edgar Allan Poe. Diss. Duke U. 1949.

7. Lindsay, Phillip. The Haunted Man: A Portrait of Edgar Allan Poe. NY: Philosophical

Library, 1954.

8. Ostrom, John W., ed. The Letters Of Edgar Allan Poe. 2 Vols. NY: Gordian, 1966.

9. Quinn, Arthur H. Edgar Allan Poe, A Critical Biography. NY: Appleton-Century Crofts,

1948.

10. Russell, J. Thomas. Edgar Allan Poe: The Army Years. West Point, NY: USMA, 1972.

11. Silverman, Kenneth. Edgar Allan Poe: Mournful and Never-Ending Remembrance. NY:

HarperCollins, 1991

12. Spaulding, Oliver T. United States Army in War and Peace. NY: Putnam, 1937.

13. Symons, Julian. The Tell-Tale Heart: The Life and Works of Edgar Allan Poe. NY:

Harper, 1978.

14. Von Weis, Susan A.T. “The Last Days of Poe.” Scribners Monthly Magazine, Mar. 1876,

707-716.

15. Wallace, Edward S. General William Jenkins Worth: Monterey’s Forgotten Hero. Dallas,

Tx.: SMU P, 1953

16. Woodberry, George W. “Poe’s Legendary Years.” Atlantic Monthly, Dec. 1884, 814-828.

Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 57
58 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

A new section in the Journal is introduced in this issue. “Space Notes” excerpts professional articles of interest to Space professionals. The section will attempt to present a broad spectrum of newsworthy items, with references to the full article for those

who wish to read further. Suggestions and submissions for this section are solicited, and should be forwarded to the Managing Editor at

richard.burks@arspace.army.mil.

IFF Systems Needed To Complement Blue Force Tracking, Officials Say

By Nick Jonson, Aerospace Daily, October 22, 2003

More Blue Force tracking units will have to be deployed with ground forces for the system to be completely effective, a panel

of military leaders told members of Congress Oct. 20. Vehicles equipped with Blue Force tracking systems also need to have a

complementary identification friend or foe (IFF) system to guard against friendly fire, the officials said. Testifying before the

House Armed Services’ subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats & Capabilities, Army Lt. Gen. William Wallace said

the Blue Force tracking system “performed very well” in Iraq. But due to the number of systems deployed, battle commanders

could only “see” the location of units, not individual vehicles, Wallace said. If a system malfunctioned, determining the unit’s location and identity could be difficult, he said.

U.S. General Sees Space as Future Battlefield

By Tabassum Zakaria, New Orleans, MSNBC.com, October 16, 2003

Space may become a war zone in the not-too-distant future, a senior U.S. military officer said Wednesday, hours after China

became only the third country after the United States and former Soviet Union to put a man in Space. “In my view it will not be

long before Space becomes a battleground,” Lt. Gen. Edward Anderson, deputy commander of U.S. Northern Command, said

in response to a question at a geospatial intelligence conference here. The United States operates spy satellites in Space. Earlier

in the day, Rich Haver, former special assistant for intelligence to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, said he expected battles

in Space within the next two decades. “I believe Space is the place we will fight in the next 20 years,” said Haver, now vice president for intelligence strategy at Northrop Grumman Mission Systems. “There are executive orders that say we don’t want to do

that. There’s been a long-standing U.S. policy to try to keep Space a peaceful place, but ... we have in Space assets absolutely essential to the conduct of our military operations, absolutely essential to our national security. They have been there for many years,”

he said. Responding to a question about the implications of China sending a man into Space this week, Haver said: “I think the

Chinese are telling us they’re there, and I think if we ever wind up in a confrontation again with any one of the major powers

who has a Space capability we will find Space is a battleground.” Haver added that he was not implying that China was the next

great competitor or enemy of the United States.

Plan For Space-Based Radar To Ensure Joint Commanders Have Access

By Anne Plummer, Inside the Army, October 27, 2003

The Pentagon’s plan to build a Space-Based Radar system is on track to ensure theater commanders will have access to the

future satellite constellation when they need it, defense officials tell Inside the Army. SBR is envisioned as the first Space-based

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) system that will meet the needs of both theater- and national-level users. On

Sept. 29, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council agreed that the constellation of radar satellites should provide a “dynamic

tasking capability” that will give priority access to any user whose needs are most urgent at the time. In other words, Defense

Department requirements for the system now stipulate that officials must be able to change the path of SBR satellites to accommodate a theater commander or other user who might request specific ISR data. The move is considered a win for the joint commander, according to one defense official.

Next Test Of GMD System Delayed, MDA Says

By Marc Selinger, Aerospace Daily, October 24, 2003

The next test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system has been delayed, according to the Missile Defense

Agency.

The test, the first launch of the Lockheed Martin interceptor booster, already had been postponed from September to

October and will now likely take place during the last two weeks of November, MDA spokesman Rick Lehner said Oct. 23.

Space Notes

The Flipside — Professional Reading
Fall 2003 Army Space Journal 59

Lehner attributed the two-month delay in Booster Verification-5 (BV-5) to Lockheed Martin’s desire to do more

ground testing of components and subcomponents, and to the need to carefully document work done on the

booster. GMD program officials are eager to avoid repeating testing problems that occurred with its old booster,

which twice failed to separate from the interceptor’s exoatmospheric kill vehicle (EKV). MDA is developing two

new interceptor boosters for GMD. The Orbital Sciences booster had a successful first launch test, BV-6, in August

(DAILY, Aug. 19). Tests involving simulated and actual intercept attempts are expected to occur in 2004. Despite

the delay in BV-5, the Defense Department still plans to begin fielding GMD in September 2004.

Weather Intelligence High-fidelity weather-sat sensors will enhance forecasts, improve combat mission planning

By William B. Scott, Denver, Aviation Week & Space Technology, November 10, 2003

Next-generation weather satellites will give military commanders a wealth of “environmental intelligence,” significantly improving effectiveness of tactical operations that often hinge on the quality of forecasts. Pentagon planners already are altering their concepts-of-operation and battlefield strategies to maximize the impacts of advanced

weather spacecraft now in development. Air, sea, and land forces have always depended on accurate forecasts of

cloud cover, storms and winds, but visible-light imagers, infrared sensors and microwave sounders flying on NASA’s

Terra and Aqua satellites have taken “weather” beyond basic atmospheric phenomena. Operations in Afghanistan

and Iraq were highly dependent on weather “knowledge” gleaned from data acquired by NASA’s environmentmonitoring satellites. And military commanders were quick to recognize the impact of advanced sensor systems on

these spacecraft — and take advantage of them. “In the first three months of (the war on terrorism), 15 percent

of the targets ... and 30 percent of the weapons were changed as a result of what the weatherman said,” Brig. Gen.

David L. Johnson, Pentagon’s director of weather operations, noted last December. But the next generation of

joint civil-military spacecraft will “allow military users to go from coping with weather to exploiting it for tactical

and strategic purposes,” according to a Northrop Grumman official. To that end, Northrop Grumman and

Raytheon are developing the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), a

constellation of low-Earth satellites and a ground data network that will replace aging civil and military systems.

U.S. Monopoly On Satellites To End

By Anthony Browne, in Brussels, London Times, October 30, 2003

China will today formally join forces with the European Union to put an end to an American monopoly on

one of the world’s most commercially, strategically and militarily important technologies: satellite navigation. China

is investing 200 million (£140 million) and pledging scientific co-operation with the Galileo space project, which

rivals America’s Global Positioning System (GPS), the technological foundation stone of its global military dominance. China has set up a research center dedicated to help develop Galileo, which should by operational by 2008.

Russia, India and Japan are also thought to want to join the Galileo project. Galileo, which will be based on 30 satellites circling the globe, should be more technically advanced than the American system, with greater accuracy. It

will allow users such as tankers, tractors, lorries, ambulances and motorists to fix their position to within just one

meter, against ten meters for the U.S. system. The U.S. is developing a new version, GPS-M, which will be as

advanced as Galileo, but which will not be operational until 2012. It has opposed the establishment of a rival system and its satellite-guided missiles, bombs and jets would be impossible to use without GPS.

Boeing Awarded $147 Million to Build Next Three GPS IIF Satellites First IIF launch planned

for mid-2006

By Hampton Stephens, Inside the Air Force, November 7, 2003 

The Air Force has awarded a $147 million contract to Boeing to produce three more Global Positioning System

IIF satellites, the Defense Department announced last week. The contract, announced Oct. 31, authorizes production of satellites four through six of the 12 planned GPS IIF Space vehicles. The IIF satellites will add new

capabilities to the GPS constellation, including new signals for military and civilian use and up to 10 decibels of

additional power to specific signals for protection against jamming. The GPS satellites now on orbit are a mixture

of blocks I, IIA and IIR spacecraft. Lockheed Martin has built 21 IIR satellites for DoD and 10 of those are now

on orbit, according to the company.

(See Space Notes, page 55)
60 Army Space Journal Fall 2003

By Michael L. Howard

Seeds of a Soldier

The true story of 

Edgar Allan Poe — 

the Sergeant Major

Recommendations for topics or submissions for the Historical feature segment of the Army Space Journal are welcomed and

encouraged. Submission may be sent to the Managing Editor via email to richard.burks@arspace.army.mil

dgar Allan Poe wore U.S. Army sergeant major stripes.

Using the name Edgar A. Perry, Poe enlisted in the U.S.

Army on May 26, 1827. Poe climbed from private to regimental sergeant major of the 1st Artillery Regiment, promoted on Jan. 1, 1829. He served nearly two years of a

five-year enlistment before the Army discharged Poe April

15, 1829, so that he could begin a yearlong effort to attend

the Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. He began his

studies at the Military Academy on July 1, 1830. The

Academy dismissed him March 6, 1831, after a court martial for neglecting duties and disobeying orders.

But is this failure to ultimately succeed at the

Academy an accurate portrayal of Poe’s military performance? His later notoriety as a writer makes him a revealing

example of an early-day sergeant major and soldier. While

many people may disregard Poe’s Army experience, letters

from his officers he worked for and from Poe himself

imply something very different. Even circumstances leading to his dismissal from the Academy indicate deep personal conflict with his foster father — circumstances

which had led him to enlisting in the first place — more as

the root of his problems than with discipline, academics or

military life. In fact, there are indicators that Poe’s performance as an enlisted man contains similar traits to

those expected of modern day NCOs and Soldiers.

Army documents show that, along with faking his

name, Poe claimed to be a 21-year-old clerk from Boston

when, in fact, he clerked in Virginia and was 18. Little is

known about Poe’s enlisted days, but a critical look at his

circumstances and actions before and while serving in the

Army provide an interesting perspective on the forming of

today’s modern-day soldier.

The Army assigned Poe to Company H, 1st Artillery

Regiment, at Fort Independence, Mass. A malaria outbreak caused the Army to move Poe’s unit to Fort

Moultrie, S.C., in October 1827 and to Fort Monroe, Va.,

one year later. Poe’s unit was one of 51 artillery companies in four artillery regiments placed at 30 sites along the

East Coast during this timeframe. Except for briefly in

1828, Company H and the regimental headquarters were

co-located throughout the moves. Colonel James House,

the regiment’s second commander, was in command of

Fort Monroe when he promoted Poe to be the sixth regimental sergeant major since the unit formed in 1821.

Poe’s role as sergeant major was probably very similar

to that established in William Duane’s Handbook of

Infantry, which the Army used as its official regulation at

the time. In this 1812 handbook, Duane established that

the sergeant major owned the responsibility to “conduce ...

discipline.” He also gave sergeants major “charge of sergeants, corporals, privates and musicians ... .” Most

notably, though, Duane established that a sergeant major

“should be a complete master of all exercises of the battalion from the first drill to the movements in line of battle.” The origin of the sergeant major rank goes to 1775

when General George Washington included the sergeant

major position in organization tables of battalion and regimental headquarters.

Poe’s reasons for enlisting appear similar to those of

soldiers throughout the years. For Poe, he had no money,

job, marketable skill, or college diploma, and mostly, a

strained relationship with his adoptive father. Gaining

favor in the eyes of John and Francis Allan probably provided additional motivation for Poe to ultimately succeed.

Poe’s biological father disappeared when Edgar was 3

E

(See Seeds, page 56)

Author’s Note

The catalyst for this article came in a lone picture and caption printed in

an NCO history book written by Earnest J. Fisher Jr. There is no mention

of Edgar Allan Poe in the book’s text, only a reproduced portrait and statement that Poe was a sergeant major. 

The thought of Poe walking through his regiment in 1829 while officers

and enlisted men said “Good morning Sergeant Major” stirred a boyish

interest. Questions: 1) Was Poe’s court martial at West Point an accurate

and complete indication of his soldiering and leadership abilities? 2) What

circumstances led to Poe reaching regimental sergeant major in less than

two years? 3) Are there similarities between qualities he possessed then

and those required now that tell a story in the development of soldiers,

NCOs and sergeants major?

The photo in Fisher’s book led to a West Point library publication by J.

Thomas Russell that briefly told Poe’s military history prior to his becoming

a cadet. His bibliography introduced Melvin C. Helfers’ 1949 unpublished

dissertation at Duke University. Collectively, these sources led to biographies which collectively shed light on Poe’s Army life. Helfers’ dissertation

provided invaluable information and original conclusions on Poe’s military

career. His work included what appears to be a complete bibliography on

the subject and, in many cases, included copies of original handwritten letters and documents for review.

The Flipside — Historical Feature
The Army of the future will be faster, lighter, and deployed around

the globe. Space is the critical link in the chain, the glue holding the 

regionally oriented, specifically designed, deployed worldwide force 

packages together in an “Army of One.”

— Adam Aberle

Don’t forget, the new 

Space Operations Web site 

is up and running!

www.army.mil/fa40
I am continually impressed by the advantage given to our warriors by 

Space capabilities. Space is still amazingly new years later in the sense 

that we are not yet fully integrated, but the capabilities we have are truly

impressive, as is the professionalism of our military members that are 

bringing Space to the front. 

—The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld

U.S. Secretary of Defense

U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld responds to a question during a town hall meeting held

at Fort Carson, Colo. Oct. 7. More than 40 Soldiers, civilians, and contractors from U.S. Army Space

and Missile Defense Command's Colorado Springs office attended the event. Photo by Sharon L. Hartman