the Army Space Journal

Fall 2002 A Professional Journal for Army Space Operators

Vol. 1, No 4 Published by U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command

Space Operations

A Growing Mission Area

M

C

O

2

illennium

hallenge

2002
We want you to know This Journal’s for you

I'm sitting here at my desk laughing, thinking about this magazine. But first, there’s a hurdle. I remember

Jim Lea, a great reporter who worked for Pacific Stars & Stripes from the early sixties. 

For at least a brief time, every soldier or civilian stationed in the Pacific gets a touch of Jim Lea. He

bylined articles from Vietnam, Japan, Okinawa and, finally, South Korea over that 30 year or so span. He

wrote about soldiers. Mostly, he cared about them —- and not just soldiers. His was an audience that

spread across the Department of Defense services and ranks. His headlines were far too many to recall,

but if you’ve passed through the region and experienced a cup of coffee with the newspaper there, you’ve

gotten a touch — an emotional tug — from Jim Lea.

My introduction to this hard-nosed, get-the-facts-straight, say-what-it-is-because-the-readers-deserveit kind of guy came in the mid-eighties. It was in a Tokyo restaurant that the intimidating Jim Lea looked

across the table at timid me, telling me it was okay to eat the moving, squiggly things on the plate. Over

the following years as mentor to a young inexperienced journalist, he showed delicate care guiding me to

get-it-right journalism — the same as when he helped me take my first step to eating live foreign cuisine.

He wasn’t always kind. For me, his touch often quickly transitioned from a calm quiet request to rewrite a portion of an article to a blunt slap on the head demanding a total rewrite. “What the hell are you

trying to say in these tortured sentences of yours?” I can still hear him scream. What this politically incorrect civilian journalist taught me though — beyond the words, the thought process for presenting facts, the

nose for news — was this: You can show your concern for the soldiers and sailors and Marines and airmen who work and live in the trenches by what and how you write.

So now, as I sit with this stack of journal articles assembled here as the latest edition of the Army Space

Journal on my desk, I’m wondering what Jim Lea would say. Following his well-practiced form, I think he’d

ask his typical gruff questions — recognizing the ASJ is a professional journal and already knowing the

answers — who is the audience, what is the point, who cares? 

Then, before the answers start, he’d lecture me. Which causes me to say: The Journal provides a

voice for Army Space Operations Officers and others involved in the business of Space operations.

Through their contributing articles and letters — written in their language — they share lessons learned,

build doctrine, and foster a sense of community throughout the Army. “Tip of the Sphere” adds to the effort

with a focus on people.

Say what? Jim Lea would reply, just like he did to a young reporter learning the ropes a long time ago.

At those words, I would always know that he was giving me a guarded approval to print with a string

attached — a string that is important even with this fourth edition of the revised ASJ about finished. That

was the enduring lesson that Jim Lea taught: Always work to get it right, check to see what you say you’re

doing is what you are actually doing. Even after you’re done and gone to press, work hard to write your

next story — print your next publication — better. 

So I’m being prodded by my memory of Jim Lea — as any managing editor ought to be — to find out

if we’re meeting the needs of the readers, the troops in the trenches. The next edition’s theme is "The Role

of Space in Army Transformation" and it picks up from where MC02 leaves off. We will examine the

Objective Force and try to figure out how we are going to integrate the exploitation of Space into land force

operations. With that in mind, let us know what you think. To pass the Jim Lea muster, we need and welcome your contributions. We would like to print your articles and, from readers who want to discuss other

articles or share experiences, letters. 

By the way, Jim Lea died the other day near Seoul.

News came to me in the midst of these deadlines. Typical Lea. That’s why I’m laughing — not irreverently, mind you. It’s because seeds of Jim Lea, faint as they may be, are in this magazine. I hope you

can see them. 

— Managing Editor
Fall 2002 Edition

Contents

Fall Theme — “Space Operations”

Approval: The Commanding General, U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense

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

transaction of the public business as

required by law. Use of funds for printing

this publication has been approved by the

Commanding General, January 2001, in

accordance with AR 25-30.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions

expressed in the Army Space Journal are

not necessarily those of the Department of

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

Defense Command, or the U.S. Army Space

Command.

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

Missile Defense Command. The journal

provides a forum through which Space

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

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

events and lessons learned. It is also

intended to inform the Army warfighter on

Army Space initiatives.

Commanding General:

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

Deputy Commanding General for

Research, Development & Acquisition:

MG John M. Urias

Deputy Commanding General for

Operations:

BG Richard V. Geraci

SMDC Public Affairs Officer:

William Congo

Managing Editor:

Michael L. Howard

Contributing Editors:

Donald Montoya

MAJ Laura Kenney

Richard Burks

Marilyn White

Jeff Welch

Brian Hermes

Graphics Editor:

Sharon L. Hartman

Comments, inquiries and manuscripts

should be sent to the Director, Force

Development and Integration Center

(FDIC), ATTN:

Richard Burks

1330 Inverness Dr., Suite 440

Colorado Springs, CO 80910

Telephone: 719-622-2902

Fax: 719-622-2951

richard.burks@arspace.army.mil

Distribution to Functional Area 40 officers

and associated military officers, civilians,

and contractors. Changes to addresses and

requests for this publication should be

made to the FDIC address listed above.

http://armyspace.army.mil/SpaceJournal

Cover: Top right photo from OPERATION

ENDURING FREEDOM taken by SPC

Kelly Burkhart; bottom left photo by unit

reporter, SGT Christopher Foster, B Co., 1st

Satellite Control Battalion. Foster took the

picture while attending the Primary

Leadership Development Course at Fort

Campbell, Ky.

2

4

6

10

38

24

20

22

32

8

the Army Space Journal

28

CG Comments Space — A Continually Growing 

Mission Area

LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr. 

DCG Comments MC02 Normalizing Army Space:

Key to Supporting Joint Operations

BG Richard V. Geraci

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

COL Glen C. Collins Jr.

Effects Based Shaping and Decisive Operations

GEN B.B. Bell

Fall Theme Millennium Challenge 2002

Kurt C. Reitinger

Space is in the Eye of the Beholder

LTC Brad Baehr

Building TACSPACE: Where Project Management Meets 

Combat Development

MAJ Jeff Souder

Space Experimentation in MC02

Kurt C. Reitinger

Spectral Information Supporting Rapid Decisive Operations

John McMurray and Russ Robinson

Support from the Sanctuary: Exploiting the ARSPOC

LTC Mary J. Miller

The Space Battle Captain: Managing the Future 

of Tactical Space Operations

1LT Bob Barrett and 1LT Angela Johnson

Tomorrow’s Joint Space Support for Today’s Warfighter

Matt Scott

MC02 and the Tactical Exploitation System Family

Robert F. Donohue Jr.

Ulchi Focus Lens

The Global Aspect of Space Exercise Control

Owen B. Carleton

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

Ribbon cutting ceremony marks opening of 

new home for Army Space

MAJ Laura Kenney

Army Space soldiers compete in first ever 

Army-wide SOY/NCOY board

Sharon L. Hartman

Focus on Soldiers

Contributions from the Field

36

34

16

12

26

40
n 1949, American pioneer computer scientist Dr. John von

Neumann stated: “It would appear we have reached the

limits of what is possible to achieve with computer technology, although one should be careful with such statements; they tend to sound pretty silly in five years.” Were

he around to see the power of today’s computers, I am sure

he would agree that the latter half of his statement was

prescient. In a similar vein, any suggestion that perhaps we

have reached the limits of what is possible to achieve with

Space-based capabilities would be met with a more seasoned disbelief today. 

Our first “militarily-useful” satellites were put into orbit

around the Earth in the early 1960s for surveillance and

reconnaissance of our Cold War rival — the former Soviet

Union. Shortly thereafter, we began launching communications and navigation satellites, followed by collection systems for signals intelligence. During the Cold War era, our

Space efforts primarily concentrated on the pre-conflict

aspects of general nuclear war and the military competition

in Central Europe. 

Beginning in the 1990s, the U.S. military sought to redirect its Space efforts toward the real-time enhancement of

ongoing, non-nuclear military operations within the

Earth’s atmosphere. Many of our successes in the 1991

Persian Gulf War must be attributed at least in part to

DoD’s increased use of Space capabilities to enhance terrestrial operations — extensive use of military and civilian

communications satellites for both inter- and intra-theater

command and control as well as long-distance communications; imagery satellites for enemy order-of-battle information, target intelligence and bomb damage assessment

following coalition air strikes; electronic intelligence and

signal intelligence satellites to establish Iraqi electronic

order-of-battle and to monitor such things as Iraqi air

defenses and military communications; digital signal processing satellites for early warning of ballistic missile attack;

and global positioning systems to help us navigate across

the trackless desert and guide our precision munitions. 

Today, in all our military operations — to include the

ongoing Global War on Terrorism — we rely even more

heavily on our Space-based systems to provide the situational understanding and communications needed to succeed at all points along the spectrum of operations.

However, I think we have only just begun to truly leverage

all that Space can do for us as a military. 

The ultimate goal of Army Transformation — the

Objective Force — will consist of lighter but highly lethal,

mobile, and survivable formations that arrive in an area of

operations ready to fight and fully synchronized with other

elements of the Joint Force. Our successful transformation to the Objective Force will depend to a great extent on

our ability to develop and operationalize new and

improved Space-based capabilities. As a Space-empowered

force, the Objective Force will routinely exploit the overhead constellation of national, commercial and military

Space platforms for intelligence, focused surveillance, and

area reconnaissance; long-haul communications; early

warning of missile attack; positioning, timing, and navigation; missile defense; and access to the Global Information

Grid. The infusion of Functional Area (FA) 40 Space

Operations Officers into Army Forces and Joint headquarters will further ensure current and future Space force

enhancement tools and products are integrated into

Objective Force operations.

What exactly the Objective Force will look like is not

yet certain. We know it will be a Space-empowered military force able to deliver precisely calibrated effects, from

taking a picture to dropping a precision munition, at any

time and anywhere on Earth. Beyond the Objective Force?

Perhaps we will have large Space planes ferrying troops,

supplies, and munitions to their Space stations in orbit,

ready to go anywhere within minutes or hours rather than

days and weeks. This Space-based force might have at its

disposal lasers, particle beam weapons, focused electromagnetic pulse devices, and a variety of kinetic energy

devices. Operations may include Space-to-Space and

Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Space — a Continually

Growing Mission Area

I

By LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

CG Column

2

LTG Joseph M.

Cosumano Jr.,

Commanding General, 

United States Army

Space & Missile Defense

Command/Commanding

General United States

Army Space Command.
3

Space-to-ground engagements. 

What is certain is the miniaturization of technology will

allow us to place more capabilities on our Space-based systems, to include on-board processing and a greater variety

of sensors. I think there will soon be a time when we will

be able to look anywhere on Earth at any time — in all

weather conditions. We will be able to “see” things hidden

under camouflage, inside structures, and even below the

surface (both water and land). We should also, from Space,

be able to detect and track objects moving on the ground.

Space-based intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance,

combined with rapid global communications and highspeed information processing, will give us the ability to

find, fix, track, and target anything of significance, worldwide. In the future, there literally will be no place to hide. 

The computing power of yesterday’s room-sized mainframes can now fit on a single computer chip. We can foresee the eventual replacement of our Space-related intelligence, communications, and early warning ground stations

by software programs embedded in military equipment

itself and found at lower user levels, much like global positioning system receivers today. This will reduce our footprint in-theater and support our vision of a lighter, more

deployable and more tactically agile force. This evolutionary process has already begun with our fielding of the

Tactical Exploitation System (TES). This single system

combines all Tactical Exploitation and National

Capabilities functionality into a single, integrated, scalable

system designed for split-based operations. Division-TES

will take us down to a single HMMWV-mounted system,

and our plans call for the entire functionality to eventually

reduce to an easily updated or reconfigurable software

package that will reside within the Army’s Future Combat

System.

Future warfighters will expect Space support on

demand. The miniaturization of Space-related capabilities,

the replacement of large, cumbersome ground stations

with software programs, and the on-board processing of

data by Space-based systems, will go a long way toward

allowing direct two-way links between Space-based assets

and the individual warfighter. Data requests will go straight

from the computerized soldier to the Space-based platforms, and filtering algorithms will allow him to select only

the data he needs so he isn’t overwhelmed. The warfighter will be able to change those filters as his requirements

change so that he gets the information he needs when he

needs it. 

Space-based blue force tracking capabilities, beginning

now with Grenadier BRAT (beyond line-of-site reporting

and tracking), will allow the warfighter to always know

where he and other friendly forces are. This will greatly

reduce the potential for fratricide, as weapons will be programmed to not fire at targets identified as “friend.”

Conversely, as demonstrated in Operation Enduring

Freedom, we are already enabling the warfighter to pinpoint an adversary’s location via triangulation with Spacebased systems, and immediately call for fire via his personal satellite communications link. I think it is inevitable that

we will eventually position weapons in Space, immediately

available for attack of terrestrial targets. And we can

expect to have in-orbit battles to gain and maintain control

of Space — just as we have battles in the air, on land and

on and under the seas. As mentioned earlier, I think we

have only scratched the surface of what Space can do for

us as a military. 

The President’s National Security Strategy, released in

September states: “Innovation within the Armed Forces

will rest on experimentation with new approaches to warfare, strengthening Joint operations, exploiting U.S. intelligence advantages, and taking full advantage of science and

technology.” Through experiments such as Millennium

Challenge 2002 (conducted from July 24 to August 15), we

are able to demonstrate and assess the “values-added” of

innovative capabilities and new operational concepts.

Several Space-based capabilities were included in MC02

(See Mission Area, page 44)

Today, in all our military operations — to include

the ongoing Global War on Terrorism — we rely

even more heavily on our Space-based systems to

provide the situational understanding and 

communications needed to succeed at all points

along the spectrum of operations. 

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
nited States Space and Missile Defense Command participated in Millennium Challenge 2002, the largest,

most complex military experiment/exercise ever

staged, from July 24 to Aug. 15. It involved 13,500 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines operating in 26 locations. The exercise combined computer simulations

and live military activity directed through two headquarters, one in Suffolk, Va. and the other in San

Diego, Calif. Joint Forces Command (JFCOM), which

leads Department of Defense Joint experimentation,

was responsible for the overall experiment.

JFCOM’s overall objectives were to test, experiment,

and validate concepts, technologies, and doctrine for

future Joint operations. Of particular emphasis was the

investigation of Effect-based Operations (EBO.)

EBOs are designed to quickly exploit the weaknesses of

an adversary’s political, financial, civil, and military

infrastructure, using all elements of national power to

essentially neutralize their ability to wage war.

Significant to achieving this is linking together the

Services’ individual information, command, communications, and operational capabilities in a Joint environment. These capabilities, whether supplied by air, land,

sea, or Space assets, must be integrated and mutually

supportable to advance force transformation. MC02

covered the whole spectrum of military operations

from counter-terrorism to major theater war and incorporated lessons learned from Operation Enduring

Freedom.

SMDC had three objectives: to investigate and document any dependency or vulnerability of “Rapid

Decisive Operations” upon Space and missile defense;

to identify any new Space and missile defense doctrine,

training, leader development, organization, materiel,

and soldier (DTLOMS) recommendations for the

Objective Force; and to continue to normalize Space in

Army operations, specifically when operating in a Joint

environment. 

The articles in this issue of the Army Space Journal

highlight comprehensive Army Space participation in

MC02 and the many lessons learned. In general, education and training continue to be paramount in maximizing Space-based capabilities. There are some other

specific observations that I would like to emphasize.

First, noteworthy was the overall extent and character of Army Space play in MC02. Four of the 11 Army

initiatives were sponsored by SMDC, and SMDC’s

Army Space Program Office (ASPO) made a significant

contribution to the Joint intelligence, surveillance, and

reconnaissance initiative. These initiatives were the

result of focused efforts and technological advancements made by the Space and Missile Defense Battle

Lab, Army Space Command, and ASPO personnel.

The planning and execution of the initiatives highlighted the unique capabilities of the command to support

Joint warfighters, as well as the Army’s significant use

of Space-based capabilities to conduct decisive operations. Our participation in MC02 underscored the

Army Space Journal Fall 2002

MC02 — Normalizing

Army Space: 

Key to Supporting 

Joint Operations

U

By BG Richard V. Geraci

DCG Column

4

BG Richard V. Geraci,

Deputy Commanding

General for Operations,

United States Army

Space & Missile Defense

Command/Deputy

Commanding General,

United States Army

Space Command.
5

importance of experimentation, and that to be relevant,

we must remain active in future Joint experimentation.

Lessons learned will cause adjustments to our support

to our current forces (e.g., Army Space Support Team

modernization.) We also gathered insights that will

guide refinements to our work in designing Space support for the Objective Force.

The work at SMDC and Army Space Command

centered on supporting the effects-based planning and

operations of the Army Forces as part of a Joint operation. Army Space Command and Space and Missile

Defense Battle Lab’s Space Division deployed 33 soldiers and civilians, including a complete Space Support

Element (SSE) to the Army Forces headquarters — the

82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C. The Battle

Lab also supported the 32nd Air and Missile Defense

Command (AAMDC) with the Future Operations

Capability/Tactical Operations Center at Nellis Air

Force Base, Nev. ASPO provided Joint simulation support from Navy’s Fleet Center Pacific in San Diego,

Calif. 

We gained new operational perspectives by integrating our processes and products into the larger, more

comprehensive Joint operation. In MC02, we demonstrated that Space capabilities contribute to literally

every aspect of Army operations, emphasizing the fact

that we need to invest more time, effort, and budget

into Space, balanced with other Army capabilities. As

proponents for Objective Force capabilities vie for

funding, it is important that they understand that Space

is a key enabler to Army capabilities. Space is not free,

and its greatest cost is exacted in terms of other Army

capabilities that may be set aside to fund Army Space.

Experiments such as MC02 are important venues to

investigate and demonstrate its value in relationship to

other operational capabilities. Every soldier and piece

of equipment must contribute significantly or risk

being displaced by other, more effective capabilities.

Space assets taken into the area of responsibility

require basing, protection, supply, etc., so they must

substantially contribute to Army Forces mission

accomplishment. MC02 showed that Space expertise

and Space-based capabilities have a key role in enabling

the Objective Force as a part of Joint operations.

Army Space experiments in MC02 were highly successful. ASPO’s efforts highlighted the value-added of

the Tactical Exploitation System and its sister-service

replicas. The Future Operations Capability/Tactical

Operations Center that supported the 32nd AAMDC

demonstrated that fusion of information can significantly reduce the force’s footprint. With this capability,

32nd AAMDC was able to conduct operations and participate in a collaborative planning process in a footprint 50 percent smaller than the one currently fielded. 

The Battle Lab’s TacSpace initiative showcased a significant capability to the Army Forces. This initiative was

designed to address Space support to the military deciIn MC02, we demonstrated that Space capabilities 

contribute to literally every aspect of Army operations and

emphasized the fact that we need to invest more time,

effort, and budget into Space, balanced with 

other Army capabilities. As proponents for Objective

Force capabilities vie for funding, it is important that they

understand Space as a key enabler to Army capabilities.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal

(See MC02 — Normalizing Army page 42)
he theme for this issue of the Army Space Journal is Space

Operations. Operations are the meat and raison d'être (for

those of you who don’t speak French, this means reason

for living) of any organization, and in Space and for those

who function in it, things are no different. Operations are

what it's all about. 

Headlining this issue are the Army contributions to

the Joint Forces Command Exercise Millennium Challenge

2002 (MC02). This was the largest Joint experiment ever

executed, testing new warfighting concepts developed over

the crucible of the past few years. 

Our specific part in that massive undertaking was the

Army Transformation Experiment 02, an exercise that let

us look down the road toward the Objective Force. As an

experimental platform, it permitted us to assemble some

tools that we anticipate using in the future and to see more

clearly the direction we are going in Space in the near term. 

The articles assembled in this issue detail some of

those successes, with their focus on Operations. They

begin the dialogue to field new organizations and capabilities, and they let us ponder what the future has to offer.

This is the first of three editions whose themes will take us

further down the road in Space.

In this Journal, you'll see many articles describing both

the challenges and triumphs of MC02. GEN B.B. Bell,

who acted as Joint Task Force Commander for Task Force

Blue in that exercise, comments on the emerging doctrine

of Effects-Based Shaping. Another article sights in on

Ulchi Focus Lens 02. Battle captains tell tales from the

field, demonstrating how problems are worked out at the

ground level, even when the target is the skies. The hightech “foxhole” of the Army Space Operations Center is

definitively defined. Soldiers out there performing missions send in their stories from around the globe. The full

spectrum of Space operations is addressed by every level

of operative. 

The concepts, organizations, and equipment provided

by Army Space Force into MC02 are all important contributions to Army Transformation. The Space Support

Element (SSE) is the Objective Force link to its Space support, and link to our Space Home Station Operations

Center, the ARSPOC. SSEs will be in legacy and Objective

Divisions, Corps, and Numbered Armies, with fielding to

begin around FY 05. The new Satellite Communications

and command and control systems used in the SSE also

offer exciting new capabilities to forward deployed Space

Operations Officers.

As in all exercises, we are credited with many successes and

have been provided a fair share of problems that still need

to be pondered and analyzed. There are also many issues

that have been analyzed and included in an ever expanding

list of lessons learned which is, of course, accompanied by

a growing list of things that need to be done. 

We have, for example, uncovered areas that lack

approved Space doctrine, discovered Space support functions that need to be fleshed out, and identified a greater

responsibility to educate and expand staff understanding

of Space capabilities. 

Army Space Journal Fall 2002

The View From (Army)

Space ...

Full Spectrum 

of Space Operations

T

By COL Glen C. Collins Jr.

FDIC Column

6
7

Similarly, a shortfall might be found in that, even

today, many in the military are not aware of the many benefits Space can provide the warfighter, with the result that

our facilities were sometimes under-exercised. The old

adage of “advertise, advertise, advertise!” might apply. 

Initially, information operations were not considered a

focal point in the early stages of planning for MC02, but

that changed very quickly due to the emphasis by the staff

of the Joint Task Force Command. 

But this is just the tip of the iceberg -- and for all the

problems that we

have uncovered,

there are many

more yet to be discovered. Good

ideas are our stock

in trade and if we

are to succeed in

solving these problems and accomplishing our tasks,

we need to tap into

the well of knowledge and experience that exists out

there. We need

assistance and feedback from the field.

Which is where you

come in, both the

authors already writing for this fine publication, and for

those reading. Give us feedback!

Speaking of feedback ... recently I handed a copy of

our Army Space Journal to an Air Force Space Officer.

(Advertising!) He read it and told me the next time we met,

"We have nothing like this in the Air Force!" Yet another

milestone in our friendly 'competition' which began with

the Army being first in Space... 

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal

PHOTO BY DEBRA VALINE

SGT Brandi Harris, from

Army Space Command’s

1st Space Battalion looks

over satellite images

taken during Millennium

Challenge 2002, in Fort

Bragg, N.C.
here is healthy doctrinal tension among warfighting professionals regarding the emergence of Effects-Based

Operations (EBO). One major source of this tension

involves implications for the doctrinal concepts of task

and purpose, and the decisive/shaping/sustaining

(D/S/S) construct. The Army embraces our doctrine

of Task and Purpose and D/S/S like parents love their

kids, and that’s good because it works. We are all, therefore, justifiably hesitant to pursue the EBO concept

without further experimental rigor. This professional

concern is healthy. But, it may be unwarranted. Here’s

why — Effects-Based Operations can and should retain

the concept of tasks such as defeat and destroy. More

importantly, EBO should hold subordinate units

accountable for achieving them and their associated purpose through both shaping and decisive operations.

EBO can add clarity to task and purpose and is supportive of, rather than contrary to, D/S/S.

EBO was a hallmark experimental objective of the

recent Joint experiment, Millennium Challenge ’02.

During the experiment the approach was found to have

merit for further concept development and, while it

needs refinement, EBO will most likely find its way fully

into our joint doctrine in the near future. The following

definitions are necessary to lend clarity: 

Effect — A physical, functional, or psychological

outcome, event, or consequence that results from military or non-military actions. An effect is expressed in

terms of an adversary’s behavior. (Rapid Decisive

Operations v. 2.0, JFCOM).

Effects Based Operations — A process for obtaining

a desired strategic outcome through the creation of

effects by the synergistic application of the full range of

military and nonmilitary capabilities at the operational

level. (Rapid Decisive Operations v. 2.0, JFCOM).

The bottom line is described as follows:

Seize Hill 821 1 Effect Enemy no longer occupies Hill

821 = Effect

In layman’s terms, and at the risk of oversimplification, an effect provides a needed quantification of pur8 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Effects-Based 

Shaping and 

Decisive Operations

T

GEN B.B. Bell, previous commander III Corps

and Fort Hood, Texas, and now the Commanding

General U.S. Army Europe and 7th Army, served as

the Joint Task Force Commander for TF Blue during Millennium Challenge 2002. As a combatant

commander with extensive experience during

Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, and in

Operation Joint Endeavor in the Balkans, his perspective on current operations is invaluable.

Additionally, his service as a planning officer for

the Joint Chiefs of Staff and as an analyst for Army

DCSOPS uniquely suit him to see the big picture.

He wrote the following article on emerging doctrine

concerning Effects Based Operations for the Army

Aviation magazine, and it is reprinted here with

permission. 

By GEN B.B. Bell
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 9

pose in terms of the enemy. As an example:

An enemy independent armor brigade is acting as

the reserve for a defending division tactical group. The

U.S. commander determines that this brigade is to be

the target of his shaping operation because it threatens

a planned penetration. Today, the commander would

tell his Deep Operations Coordination Cell (DOCC) to

defeat or destroy the brigade (task) in order to prevent

it from counter-attacking penetrations of the enemy’s

main defense (purpose). 

However, under the EBO concept the commander

would tell his Effects Coordination Cell (ECC) to

destroy the brigade (task) in order to prevent it from

reinforcing penetrations of the enemy main defense

(purpose), and assign an effect or effects to be achieved

as follows: Enemy armor brigade is unable to place

direct fires or observed indirect fires on friendly forces

penetrating the enemy battle zone.

As the example illustrates, task and purpose remain

relevant. The question then becomes, why do we need

effects? Effects provide additional flexibility to a commander, while ensuring the application of combat

power is most efficient and precise. 

By prioritizing desired effects, the commander is able

to rapidly concentrate relevant lethal or non-lethal combat power, and quickly shift from one priority to another. The commander can also better assess the mission

by using effects to measure performance (are we achieving the desired effect?) and effectiveness (is an achieved

effect producing the desired result?). 

Additionally, subordinate commanders are provided

increased freedom of action. In the above example,

assume the brigade in question moved on its own away

from the friendly force point of penetration and is no

longer positioned to rapidly counter-attack. Most commanders given only task and purpose would pursue and

attempt to destroy the brigade to eliminate the possibility of failing to achieve the stated purpose. Those same

commanders, armed with a desired effect, would recognize that the enemy no longer threatens friendly force

penetration and thus have the freedom to direct shaping

assets to a higher priority effect such as the enemy IFC

or command and control capabilities. 

Bottom line — In this case, enemy decision-making

and subsequent actions were central in helping us

achieve our purpose and effect. In this environment,

EBO empowers the commander to shift combat power

to other priority missions.

Now that we have related task and purpose to EBO,

we can examine the relationship between the FM 3.0

capstone concepts of decisive and shaping operations,

Millennium Challenge 2002 successfully tested the ability of U.S. Joint

Forces to conduct rapid decisive

operations in the near future. These

operations will assist warfighters

with many of the situations they currently face. Left: Members of the

108th Military Police Company,

503rd MP Battalion, Fort Bragg, N.C.,

position a tactical satellite communication terminal next to a High

Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled

Vehicle to relay information about

the Albanian and Serbian protest

near the town of Domerovce,

Kosovo. After two Serbian men disappeared, Serbians believed

Albanians abducted the men and

made threats and road obstructions

to prevent safe travel through town

for Albanians. Albanians began to

form a mob to confront the Serbians

until U.S. and Russian KFOR troops

made a wall between the opposing

sides on Aug. 15, 2000.

PHOTO BY SPC ERIC E. HUGHES, U.S. ARMY

(See Effects-Based Shaping, page 42)
illennium Challenge 2002 (MC02) was a congressionally

mandated, Secretary of Defense-directed, U.S. Joint

Forces Command-sponsored large-scale Joint field experiment with live exercise components and demonstrations.

The MC02 experiment execution dates were Jul 24 - Aug.

15, 2002. The purpose of the MC02 events was to

demonstrate and assess the ability of the Joint Force to

conduct rapid decisive operations in this decade. MC02

was a distributed, live, virtual, and constructive event that

incorporated elements of all military services representative of their critical future force capabilities at the operational and tactical levels of war. 

The majority of MC02’s live events occurred in the

Western Ranges Complex (Fort Irwin/National Training

Center, Nellis, Air Force Base, Twenty-Nine Palms

Marine Corps Base, and Naval Pacific Western Ranges). 

Army Transformation Experiment 2002 (ATEx02)

was the Army’s embedded Service experiment within

MC02. ATEx02 showcased the key role that an interim

Army force can play in expanding the ground component

and Joint Force commander’s abilities to seize the initiative, maintain momentum, and exploit success at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels. ATEx02 explored

the hypothesis that if Land Component Commanders are

provided a transforming Army force that employs

advanced enablers across doctrine, organization, training,

materiel, leaders, personnel, and facilities, then they will

have enhanced capabilities to dominate and force early

termination through rapid decisive operations with full

spectrum dominance. 

Scenario

MC02 used a challenging anti-access scenario in the

2007 timeframe, providing the context for a U.S. Joint

Force to conduct military operations (including decisive

combat operations) in a crisis situation. The operational

setting was intended to portray a “high-end small-scale

contingency,” with potential for escalation to a major theater war. The scenario was structured to highlight,

explore, and shape the definition of potential warfighting

concepts, to shape the conduct of future experimentation

efforts, and to achieve MC02 objectives. 

The actors involved as active nation States in the scenario included the threat country of REDLAND, the

neutral and aggression-recipient country of GREENLAND, several neutral nation States (BROWNLAND,

MAROONLAND, PURPLELAND, TANLAND, and

GREYLAND), and the United States as the BLUE

forces operating in the context of a Joint Force-established command. The operational scenario depicted the

use of forcible entry and early entry forces operating in a

Joint maritime, air, and ground environment to conduct

rapid decisive operations. 

As a result of its domestic instability, REDLAND’s

authoritative control was turned over to the military,

which altered the State’s national command authority and

military leadership. The Southern Commander began a

series of aggressive actions clearly acting outside the Red

National Command Authority’s policies and objectives.

The Southern Commander was a hard-line nationalist and

fundamentalist, while the National Commander was a

modern pragmatist. The Southern Commander initiated

occupation of disputed regional territories, expanded the

Red National Command Authority’s regional zone of

influence, and instituted a “security toll” for transit shipping through its zone of influence. The United Nations

condemned the actions of the Southern Commander, but

refused to sanction military intervention. Concerned

about its survival as a nation and wishing to join the community of world nations opposed to terrorism and

aggression, the Red National Command Authority did

not interfere with the United States conducting rapid

decisive operations to prevent the Southern Commander

from destabilizing the region and the world economy.

10 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Millennium 

Challenge 2002

M

By Kurt C. Reitinger

Fall Theme
11

The United States, having significant interests in the region,

authorized military intervention to restore regional stability. 

SMDC Participation

More than 50 U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command personnel provided Space and missile defense

support in multiple continental United States locations

throughout the experiment. Space and Missile Defense

Battle Laboratory (SMDBL) and Army Space Command

personnel supported the Army Forces headquarters at Fort

Bragg, N.C., with the Space Support Element (SSE). The

SSE was an integrated member of the Army Forces staff

conducting effects-based planning. SMDBL personnel

supported the 32nd Area Air and Missile Defense

Command at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., with the Future

Operations Capability/Tactical Operations Center. 32nd

Area Air and Missile Defense Command personnel operated SMDBL equipment to develop required products using

the advance warfare environment architecture. Army

Space Program Office personnel operated the tactical

exploitation of national capabilities multiple unified simulation environment (TENCAP MUSE) in San Diego in

support of the Joint simulation. TENCAP MUSE provided U-2 mission plans as well as U-2 and Global Hawk

imagery into the simulation play via the virtual network.

Army Space personnel served as Space and Information

Operations Element team members at the Joint Task Force

in Suffolk, Va., and at the Joint Force air component command at Nellis Air Force Base. Some of these activities are

highlighted in this edition of the Army Space Journal.

Small Army Space contingent providing

huge impact to field commanders

By Debra Valine

FORT BRAGG, N.C. (July 31, 2002) — From an area

barely larger than the back end of a long-bed pickup truck,

SPC Sabrina Bannister and fellow members of Army

Space Support Team 5 from Colorado Springs, Colo., are

providing Space-based capabilities that enhance commanders’ views of the Millennium Challenge 2002 battlefield at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif.

Bannister, the network administrator, and the group

of 11 civilians and 14 soldiers from Army Space

Command operate and support the Space Support

Element (SSE). While only a small number of people

compared to the 13,500 soldiers, sailors, airmen and

Marines participating in the three-week-long Joint training

experiment, the team is making a huge contribution

through the use of leading-edge technology.

The SSE is providing support to the Army Forces

headquarters element — the XVIII Airborne Corps’ 82nd

Airborne Division — as part of the Army Transformation

Experiment 02, the Army’s contribution to Millennium

Challenge. The capabilities of the SSE allow warfighters

access to Space planning tools and enhanced commercial

satellite imagery.

“The SSE is a one-stop shopping source for Spacebased capabilities,” said BG Richard V. Geraci, the Army

Space Deputy Commanding General. “MC02 is the driver for getting our next seven year’s worth of work.

Success will be determined by how well the SSE concept

is received. The existence of the SSE mitigates risk.”

While most of the U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command’s involvement is at Fort Bragg, substantial support is also being provided at Nellis Air Force

Base in Las Vegas, Nev., where the Future Operations

Capability/Tactical Operations Center is located. The

Army Space Program Office is also providing simulation

support at the Joint level to all services from the Navy’s

Fleet Center Pacific in San Diego, Calif.

SMDC objectives for the exercise include highlighting

the criticality of Space and missile defense in Rapid

Decisive Operations and Army Transformation, as well as

continuing along the path to normalizing Space. A third

objective is identifying Space and missile defense

Doctrine, Training, Leadership, Organization, Materiel

and Soldiers (DTLOMS) solutions for the Objective

Force.

“We’re excited to have the opportunity to demonstrate

the importance of Army Space support in a Joint experiment,” said LTC Brad Baehr, officer in charge of the

(See Field Impact, page 45)

The scenario was structured to

highlight, explore, and shape the

definition of potential warfighting

concepts, to shape the conduct of

future experimentation efforts,

and to achieve MC02 objectives. 

Kurt Reitinger is an experimentation manager for the Space and

Missile Defense Battle Laboratory’s Space Directorate in Colorado

Springs, Colo. Prior to his retirement from the Army in 2000, he

served as the Director of Space Familiarization courses, including the

Interservice Space Fundamentals course. He also served as Chief of

Army and Navy in-theater missile warning with the Joint Tactical

Ground Station.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
he following is an FA40’s view on the integration of the

Space Support Element into an Army division during

Millennium Challenge 02.

Background

It all started back in the summer of 2000 with the

Joint Contingency Force Advanced Warfighting

Experiment (JCF-AWE) conducted at the Joint Regional

Training Center (JRTC) at Fort Polk, La., and Fort Bragg,

N.C. In addition to the experimental initiatives showcasing the newest Space-based technologies and systems

such as the tactical exploitation system, the en route mission planning and rehearsal system, and the mobile processing exploitation and dissemination system, there was

one non-technology concept accepted into the experiment: a single Space Operations Officer — Functional

Area (FA) 40.

The Space Operations Officer worked in the Division

Assault Command Post and provided Space expertise to

the division staff and commander. The lessons learned

and observations from this experiment resulted in the

development of an FA 40 tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP). But there was more. The door had opened

like the proverbial “camel’s nose under the tent flap” for

Space operations at other than corps level. This baseline

of insight and knowledge was the point of departure for

future Space operations and Millennium Challenge 02

(MCO2).

MC02 planning began in October 2000 following the

JCF-AWE. Critical to MC02 was the expansion of Space

operations at echelons other than corps. With the advent

of the Army’s Interim Division design effort and the formulation of a Space operational and organizational plan

for the design, the experimental linchpin for MC02 was

firmly in place.

The cornerstone for an expanded relevant Space presence was the Space Support Element (SSE). Think of the

SSE as “Space central” for the division. Manned by multiple FA 40s and two highly trained noncommissioned

officers, the SSE provides in-depth Space analysis, planning, and product development. The SSE has two parts:

the Space toolset and the supporting infrastructure (e.g.,

HMMWV, Alaska tent, etc.). 

The Space and Missile Defense Command Battle Lab

Space Directorate sponsored the “umbrella” Tactical

Space Initiative. The umbrella sheltered these separate

Space-based initiatives:

· The embedded national tactical receiver that

allowed the SSE to receive national Space broadcasts

directly into a SPARC or peripheral component interface

class computer (e.g., personal computer).

· Broadcast Imagery Request Technology

Experiment that allowed the SSE to receive near real-time

national imagery.

· Spectral Imagery Initiative that allowed the SSE to

produce complex commercial imagery products.

· The Space operations system that allowed the SSE

to perform Space analysis and planning on a small

ruggedized transportable computer.

Additionally, the SMDC Battle Lab sponsored three

“internal” experiments:

· Space Tactical Utility Research Network (SATURN)

gave the SSE access to a Space-based Transmission

Control Protocol — Internet Protocol network with

downlinks of up to 2 megabytes per second.

· Vocality 100 provided multiplexing capability for

the International Maritime Satellite Network.

· Wireless Web-Based Warfighting (W3), a partnered

effort with the National Reconnaissance Office, allowed

the SSE to access a Web-based Space mission planning

system that included national imagery.

With the determination of the technology and assets

12 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Space is in the Eye of the

Beholder...

T

By LTC Brad Baehr

Fall Theme
13

available for experimentation and how the SSE would

support the division, the stage was set to conduct the

experiment. The 82nd Division (Airborne) was the Army

Forces headquarters for MC02 that operated under a

Joint Task Force and Joint Forces Land Component

Commander. Just how did the Space Support Element

and Space Operations Officer become an integrated

member of the Army Forces team? 

Integration Efforts 

Because the SSE is scalable, modular, and flexible, the

keys to successful integration are education, advocacy,

and literacy. Two months before MC02, prior to the “spiral train-up process,” a Space team visited Fort Bragg to

brief the division commander, brigade commanders, and

primary staff on the “value-added” benefits of the SSE

for rapid decisive operations. The initial briefings included the MC02 Joint Forces Land Component Commander

and key staff. The concept of Space operations was well

received and SMDC was off and running.

The “down and dirty” Space education was conducted with the division’s battle captains. The Space team

worked carefully to educate and advocate Space operations while not becoming zealots. The one-on-one, faceto-face meetings that followed the group “spin up” were

the real foundations for future MC02 success. The battle

captains from each battlefield functional area were shown

how Space could act as an enabler for that particular

functional area (e.g., imagery for Intelligence, targeting

for Artillery, planning support for the G3, etc.).

Considerable time was spent discussing SSE involvement

in the concept of operations, TTP, products, planning

cycles, dissemination. The Army Forces not only quickly

and easily grasped the benefits of Space operations but

they also welcomed the chance to experiment with technology and concepts and get a look at the near future

(MC02 simulated 2007) that could ultimately lead to

Army Transformation goals and objectives. The ready

acceptance of the SSE team into the effects-based planning process was gratifying.

Effects-Based Planning for Rapid

Decisive Operations

The relationships between the SSE and the Army

Forces Battle Management Center primary staff officers

and battle captains allowed for timely effects-based planning. While coordination and planning occurred with

almost all battlefield functional areas and staff elements,

the strongest links developed by the SSE were with the

following: G2 and airborne command element, G3 Plans,

G5 (especially information operations), fire

support/effects cell, air defense cell, long-range reconnaissance surveillance detachment, attached special operations forces element, and the digital terrain support system element.

The SSE worked a 24-, 48-, and 72-hour planning

cycle that directly supported Army Forces operations and

synchronized with the Joint Forces Land Component

Commander’s and Joint Task Force’s overarching missions (sometimes this was expanded to 120 hours). A

critical planning function was Space control operations

that could occur in 2007. While higher echelon headquarters worked advanced planning issues, the SSE focused

on how Army Space assets could best support rapid decisive operations. Once tactical planning was completed,

the SSE relayed requests through the Army Forces and

directly to supporting Joint higher headquarters. 

Annex N (produced by the SSE), the Space Annex to

the Operations Order, was refined and used as a baseline

source for Army Forces enabling Space capabilities.

Army- and Joint-produced threat assessments provided

great insight into the threat’s robust Space capabilities.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
14 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Besides indigenous Space capabilities, the

threat had access to civil and commercial

Space assets from neutral and allied countries. 

The SSE routinely identified these

threats and provided courses of action on

how to mitigate them. These courses of

action were included in the daily battle

updates to the commander and to Joint

Force headquarters. 

An extremely strong staff relationship

grew between the SSE and the information

operations (IO) element. Each element

spent large amounts of time and resources

to continually keep each other updated and

to incorporate the other’s capabilities into

its own plans. The IO campaign plan fully

integrated Space operations.

Further, the increasing presence of

trained Space officers throughout the

Army was taken advantage of during planning. One or two officers on the Army

Forces staff were either 3Y (Space operations skill identifier) qualified or had served

in a Space-related assignment. They were

extremely receptive to the SSE as a Space

enabler and could easily articulate how

Space could benefit their planning process

to their senior officers and commanders.

SSE Battle Rhythm

How does a future concept Interim

Division SSE function in a tactical environment with no precedents to follow? 

The observations and lessons learned

from the 2000 JCF-AWE provided a nice

point of departure for SSE concept of

operations and TTP development. These

were then augmented by current Joint and

Army Space Support Team concept of

operations and TTPs. Added to this was

the approved doctrine and requirements

found in the Army Space Master Plan,

Field Manual 100-18 (Army Support to

Space Operations), TP 525-66 (Future

Operational Capabilities), and Joint

Publication 3-14 (Joint Doctrine for Space

Operations). From these sources, a detailed

experimental SSE TTP publication was

written and used for MC02.

The TTP publication was invaluable,

but was not the only source of information

used. The Joint Task Force, Joint Forces

Land Component Commander, and Army

Forces Web sites had valuable planning and

operational information. Jane’s Space

Directory and the Internet provided opensource information. The SMDC Space

Operations Network and Army Space

Operations Center (ARSPOC) provided

a backbone for requests for information

and communications with the Space community.

All these information sources and “oncall” subject matter experts back at Army

Space Command allowed the SSE to tap

into a vast knowledge bank to answer any

questions.

The information was woven into the

battle rhythm of the SSE along these lines.

(See sidebar on opposite page.)

Equipment and Products 

Imagery products were very valuable

for the Army Forces. The SSE had an

attached forward deployed section from

the MoPED (two soldiers) that provided

superb imagery support beyond the SSE’s

organic capability. Products included twodimensional (2D) and three-dimensional

(3D) maps and photos, 3D perspectives of

terrain, interpretation of digital terrain elevation data, 3D fly-throughs, multispectral

data and imagery. Spectral imagery products were used by the G2, G3 Plans, G5,

long-range reconnaissance surveillance

detachment, Special Operations forces,

digital terrain support system, aviation element, and engineers.

The commercial SATURN system provided a direct data link (up to 2 Mbps

downlink) back to Army Space Command’s

ARSPOC and the Army Space Command

Remote Sensing Branch’s Spectral

Operations Resource Center (SORC). The

“heavy lifting” imagery work was done at

the SORC. The SORC was then sent to the

SSE for further annotation. SATURN also

provided a link to the Engineer Brigade

deployed to the National Training Center,

Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. Imagery was

sent from Fort Leonard Wood, Mo. to the

Topographical Support Team supporting

the maneuver force. The SATURN feed

was also provided, upon request, to the

Army Forces digital terrain support system

element as a system enabler.

SATURN also provided video teleconIf a future brigade or mission-tailored task force needs local 

Space expertise/assets, a Space Operations Officer with a 

Space operations system could be sent to support as needed.
ferencing capability between the SSE and

ARSPOC. This communications link was

used by the Commanding General, SMDC

and Deputy Commanding General

Operations, SMDC during their visits to

the SSE.

The Space operations system was the

primary Space planning tool; there were

four of them in the SSE (two portable and

two rack mounted in the SSE shelter). The

portable Space operations systems allowed

for potential Space operations “down

range.” If a future brigade or mission-tailored task force needs local Space expertise/assets, a Space Operations Officer with

a Space operations system could be sent to

support as needed. Through SECRET

Internet Protocol Router Network connectivity, Space functional and mission areas

were continually updated. These data were

then applied to the military decision making process and used in planning and

courses of action development. Besides

global positioning system accuracy updates,

weather terrain environmental monitoring

and a host of other new capabilities in

standard Space planning considerations

were demonstrated. 

For example, SMDBL developed software that allowed a Space Operations

Officer to import Space Battle

Management Core System ephemeris data

into the BattleScape 3D visualization environment. This allowed the SSE to show the

commander in 3D how a satellite’s field of

view could help or hinder his operations.

For example, it was demonstrated that if

Army Forces occupied a given piece of terrain, a threat satellite could not see them

since other terrain (between Army Forces

and the satellite) masked their position.

This provided a good opportunity to conduct deception operations.

Another example was the use of W3.

W3, developed as a Web-based prototype

system, allowed the SSE to “build” a 3D

visual picture of a given area of operations

by importing national imagery and various

communications broadcast data to show a

fused picture of the operational area, to

include Space. 

The SSE also integrated the Advanced

Warfare Environment (AWarE) capability,

an Edgeview/BattleScape NT based visualization tool, with the ability to import communications and Space feeds with the 32nd

Army Air Defense Command command

post at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. The

result was a “one over the world” fused

picture of Space, air, and ground (with

some sea visibility). 

The embedded national tactical reader

(ENTR) card provided direct receipt of the

tactical related applications data dissemination system broadcast to the SSE. This link

provided some targetable data and visibility of threat emitters. 

The SSE also provided this feed to the

Army Forces advanced computing environment when they had radio equipment

malfunctions. The ENTR is compatible

with the Space operations systems and can

provide a self-contained tactical receive

equipment capability to the Space

Operations Officer.

BRITE provided near real-time national imagery to W3 and AWarE as well as

stand-alone products. This “raw” data provides an early quick look at potentially relevant imagery of a given area of operations.

Continual Space analysis, estimates, and

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 15

(See Eye of the Beholder, page 44)

0700: System and communication checks with ARSPOC and the Army Forces.

0800: SSE battle captain reviewed outstanding requests for information, upcoming

taskers and briefings, daily planning events, reviewed classified messages, and identified

Space specific tasks.

0830: SSE officer in charge (OIC) attended battle update briefing with Army Forces

commander.

0900: Update of Space functional areas (e.g., Satellite communications, positioning, navigation, and timing , etc.), post updates to SSE Web site (accessible by Army Forces on

their tactical local area network). Situation reports sent to ARSPOC.

0930: SSE Space officers attended course of action development sessions with the

Battle Management Center.

1030: SSE OIC and officers identified key Space mission area requirements for next 24,

48, and 72 hours (sometimes as far out as 120 hours).

1300: SSE “all-hands” briefing, information exchange, issuance of taskers, etc.

1400: OIC and officers worked to maintain habitual staff relationships with Army

Forces, visited each staff element, reviewed Space-enabling capabilities, assisted with

planning and courses of action development for each battlefield functional area (if

appropriate).

1600: OIC or senior available officer review of Space-related customer products (time

permitting), update on which battlefield functional areas and staff elements sent

requests for information to the SSE.

1700: Attend Army Forces planning and targeting meetings (times shifted fairly often on

these planning meetings).

1830: Reviewed and closed out requests for information that had suspense for that day,

updated Web site.

1900: End of shift unless products were still due to Army Forces.

Note: MC02 did not do continuous operations outside of the maneuver box.

BATTLE

RHYTHM

OF THE

SSE
he key focus of any project manager, regardless of his or

her task, is well known and consists of three simple

words: performance, cost, and schedule. Typically, the

project manager will seek to meet or exceed the performance specifications set out in the applicable requirements document, stay within the budget established by

his customer, and stay on or ahead of schedule, ticking

off the milestones on the road to product delivery.

However, as the manager in charge of the Tactical Space

Initiative project for the Space and Missile Defense Battle

Lab (SMDBL) during the course of the last year, my

focus needed to be slightly wider than is typical and needed to include a fourth word: insight. As a project manager working combat developments in a battle lab, the

insight gained through product development, training,

testing, and experimentation is as important as performance or cost — for insight is a battle lab’s product. 

Background

The first draft of the Operational and Organizational

Plan for the Interim Division Space Support Element

(SSE) was written in September 2001 as a component

document to the Interim Division Operational and

Organizational Plan. It was written according to the concepts laid out in other Space concept documents, such as

TRADOC Pamphlet (TP) 525-5 (Force XXI

Operations), TP 525-60 (Concept for Space Support to

Land Force Operations), and according to TP 525-66

(Future Operational Capabilities).

The SSE Operational and Organizational plan

describes the operational functions and organizational

structure of an element within the Interim Division

responsible for providing Space support to the Interim

Division commander. The SSE provides “assured access

to Space products and services, and integrates and synchronizes the Space capabilities available” to the Interim

Division in order to ensure the commander is enabled

with “information superiority and full-spectrum dominance across the entire range of Interim Division operations.”

The Operational and Organizational plan describes

the SSE as being composed of Space support professionals, including Functional Area (FA) 40 Space

Operations Officers and military occupational specialty

74B information systems specialists and sergeants working as a special staff element. Although primarily associated with the G5 section, each of the SSE staff officers

is loosely aligned with another primary staff section in

order to better support the military decision making and

deliberate and hasty planning processes. 

According to TP 71-9 (Force Development

Requirements Determination), battle labs are responsible

for producing “insights, impacts, and recommended

changes to DTLOMS (Doctrine, Training, Leaders,

Organization, Materiel, and Soldiers) ... as well as emerging technologies and materiel initiatives to support

Functional Operational Capabilities.” The Space and

Missile Defense Battle Lab, Space Directorate, does so

with a focus on Space technologies through experimentation in various Joint and Army experiments, exercises,

demonstrations, and tests.

Since the SMDBL had already been testing and experimenting with a shelter-mounted set of Space support

tools in support of Army Space Command’s Army Space

Support Teams in late 2001, it was only a natural extension of those endeavors, fully in keeping with TP 71-9’s

definition of the battle lab mission, that SMDBL experiment with the materiel component to the SSE concept as

well. The SSE personnel defined in the SSE Operational

and Organizational plan would require a set of tools and

16 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Building TACSPACE:

Where Project Management Meets 

Combat Development

T

By MAJ Jeff Souder

Fall Theme
17

a place in which to work, in order to provide the prescribed support to the Interim Division commander. The

director, Space Directorate, SMDBL, Kirby Brown,

decided that we would build a toolset to support the SSE,

train an experimental SSE, and experiment with the concept in Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02). Mr. Brown’s

vision was that with the DTLOMS insights gained

through experimentation, and in conjunction with the

work done to develop the SSE Operational and

Organizational plan, SMDBL Space Directorate could

provide much of the foundational data and information

needed to write an operational requirements document

for an SSE. 

The TACSPACE Initiative

Work began on the Tactical Space Initiative less than

one year from the start of the MC02 experiment. At that

time, SMDBL was already experimenting with most of

the materiel components that would later be incorporated into the toolset solution for the experimental SSE, but

we had very little doctrine, no training, no leaders, an

organization described on paper only, and no integrated

materiel. From a project manager’s standpoint, the challenges were significant. Performance had to be in keeping

with the requirements described in the SSE Operational

and Organizational plan. We had a very limited budget

and a tight schedule determined in part by the ramp-up

exercises, or spirals, designed to prepare participating

organizations and initiatives for the experiment. Our

overriding objective, of course, was to gain insight. We

had seven months before the first spiral to prepare. Work

began immediately on two fronts: doctrine and materiel. 

Although SMDBL is not responsible for writing doctrine, we found it necessary because of the conceptual

nature of the SSE to derive from various doctrinal and

nondoctrinal sources the specifics of what the SSE

would do and how it would function in order to develop

some of the training. The rest of the training would be

decided by the materiel solution. This concept of operations, which we defined as the SSE tactics, techniques,

and procedures (TTP), was derived from 12 different

sources of information that included Army field manuals, various TRADOC pamphlets and concept documents, locally sponsored Space studies, a Chief of Staff

of the Army white paper, and various training plans,

briefings, and draft documents dealing with Space operations. 

The core documents used in developing the TTP,

however, were those associated with the SSE Operational

and Organizational plan. Along with this plan, the Space

and Missile Defense Command’s Liaison Office to the

Combined Arms Command at TRADOC also developed

a high-level operational architecture and a set of information exchange requirements. These products defined

much of what the SSE would do for the commander and

his staff, from whom it would receive information, to

whom it would provide information, coordination and

synchronization linkages, and the products it would produce. 

The 255 page TTP document was refined as we prepared for the experiment and it became the heart of the

initiative. It defined the SSE and the Toolset, known as

the SSE-T, the SSE division of labor, 30 different tasks,

the SSE battle rhythm, and the various subsystems that

constitute the SSET. This document was the determinant

of many of the training requirements and drove the data

collection plan for the experiment as well. 

The SSE Operational and Organizational plan, operational architecture, and information exchange requirements, and the derivative TTP, became our requirements

The SSE provides “assured access to Space

products and services, and integrates 

and synchronizes the Space capabilities

available” to the Interim Division in order to

ensure the commander is enabled with

“information superiority and full-spectrum

dominance across the entire range of

Interim Division operations.”

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
18 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

for the materiel solution for the SSE-T.

The tasks defined in the TTP, the entities

and organizations with which the SSE

must communicate, and the reports and

products that the SSE must provide, all

required a set of tools and a place from

which the SSE could operate.

As mentioned above, because SMDBL

had already been experimenting with a

number of Space support tools, devices,

and communication capabilities, we faced

primarily an integration effort to get these

disparate items working together in an efficient and effective manner.

The SSET became a self-contained system that was integrated into an S-787 shelter mounted on a HMMWV with on-board

power generation, backup, and conditioning capability. For additional workspace,

two Alaska-brand tents were erected and

connected to the shelter. The SSET is

composed entirely of commercial off-theshelf and government off-the-shelf

automation and communication hardware

and software and can be connected to both

classified and unclassified data networks

through local area networks or satellite

communication systems. 

Army Space Command assigned an

Army Space Support Team to be the

experimental SSE and released them to

participate in training, experiment preparation, and the experiment itself for the better part of five months, beginning in April

2002. We developed training based upon

the TTP, the hardware and software making up the SSET, and experimental considerations, such as data collection, the conduct of MC02, and the various organizations involved in the experiment. 

All told, there were 16 training events

conducted over a six-week period and concluding with a three-day dry run exercise.

Training included technical instruction on

how to operate the various pieces of computer hardware and software, how to install

and operate the communication systems,

and how to emplace and road march the

SSET itself. There were classes designed

specifically for the SSE officer in charge to

ensure that he or she understood the battle

lab mission, and the objectives and conduct of the experiment. All SSE members

attended classes focusing on the TTP, the

32 products they were to provide the staff

they were supporting, and the information

they would need to gather from other

organizations and staff sections. Each SSE

member was also trained as a data collector. Each would be responsible for providing feedback at the conclusion of the

experiment regarding his or her particular

role. We also provided training that

instructed the SSE as to the mission, roles,

and functions of some of the other Space

support organizations, such as the Army

Space Operations Center and the Spectral

Operations Resource Center.

The three-day dry run event was

designed to simulate as closely as possible

the conditions, tasks, and standards that

would be expected of the personnel and

equipment during the actual experiment, in

order to ensure that we were ready to execute the following month at Fort Bragg,

N.C. The dry run was a success in that we

recognized some training shortfalls, identified a number of technical problems or

oversights, and were able to practice collecting some of the data we would need to

provide DTLOMS insights later on.

MC02

The SSE, the SSET, the subcomponents, the data collectors, and the support

team were ready to participate in Spiral 3 at

Fort Bragg in May 2002. The spiral, as

intended, revealed some integration hurdles between the SSET and its supporting

and supported elements that we needed to

overcome as well as a few hardware and

software problems within the SSET that

we needed to work out. Overall, however,

the spiral demonstrated to SMDBL that we

had a workable experiment and that the

SSE and toolset would most likely provide

value-added to the division staff.

By MC02 STARTEX in mid-July 2002,

we had completed modifications to the

SSET necessitated as a result of Spiral 3,

conducted sustainment training and new

equipment training (because of modifications) for the SSE, polished up some of

the details in the TTP, and improved the

mechanism by which the SSE would communicate with the division staff. By all

accounts, the Tactical Space Initiative participation in MC02 that followed was an
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 19

overwhelming success. From a program

manager’s perspective, it was equally successful because we had met our performance objectives by building, testing, training, and delivering a team and a toolset that

functioned according to the doctrinal mission. We had done it on time and within

our budget. But we have not yet completed

the SMDBL mission. We still need to provide DTLOMS insight.

The Very Near Future 

During the next few months, SMDBL

will reduce and analyze the data collected

during the experiment and the training and

development leading up to that experiment. One of the ways in which we will

provide DTLOMS insight is by providing

the results of experiment analysis back to

SMDC and TRADOC CAC. Another way

is by participating in a workgroup associated with the Space Integrated Concept

Team that will write an operational requirement document for the SSET.

Much of the information required to

start an operational requirements document and to serve as the core of the document has already been produced in one

form or another. Since the SSET will not

be an Acquisition Category 1 program, a

mission needs statement is not required.

However, the work that has been done by

SMDC and CAC in developing the SSE

Operational and Organizational plan might

be likened to a mission area analysis as

defined by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of

Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 3170.01B.

According to the instruction, the mission

area analysis should identify capability deficiencies and the timeframe that these deficiencies will exist and use a “strategy-totask” methodology (e.g., National Military

Strategy to individual mission tasks) to

identify the operational and support tasks

needed to meet mission objectives. The

mission area analysis must assess strategy,

policy, threat capabilities, doctrine, technology, and budget to identify capability deficiencies and the timeframe to correct

them. In comparison, the first two paragraphs in an operational requirement document describe the operational capability

required of the system and the threat it is

designed to counter. Much of this content

exists in the mission area analysis.

A mission needs analysis as defined in

the same instruction is designed to assess

one’s ability to accomplish the tasks identified during the mission area analysis. The

mission needs analysis uses a task-to-need

methodology to identify mission needs. It

can also highlight technological opportunities and identify reliability and maintainability improvements that enhance

warfighting capability. These elements of

information will include many of the

insights that the battle lab can provide as a

result of our data reduction and analysis of

MC02 data. In collaboration with the Space

Integrated Concept Team workgroup, we

can formulate this mission needs analysis

in such a way that it fits well into paragraphs three and four of the SSET operational requirement document

(Shortcomings and Capabilities Required),

thus completing the core of that critical

document. 

Conclusion

In less than one year, SMDBL took a

draft concept and designed and built a

complex hardware and software system,

trained an organization, wrote and refined

a detailed set of TTP, and formed the

Tactical Space Initiative. After in-depth and

iterative testing, we successfully participated in the Joint Millennium Challenge 2002

experiment. We faced significant performance, cost, and schedule limitations, restrictions, and challenges, much like any organization involved in project management

will face. But by keeping focused on a

fourth project management principle, that

of insight, during every step of the way, we

will be better able to ensure that we are successful in meeting a greater objective: that

of providing insights, impacts and recommendations regarding Space DTLOMS as

the Space and Missile Defense Battle Lab.

MAJ(P) Jeff Souder currently serves as project

manager, Army Space Exploitation and

Demonstration Program and as Deputy Chief,

Experiments Division, in the Space and Missile

Defense Battle Lab, Space Directorate, in

Colorado Springs, Colo. An Acquisition Officer with

both Signal Corps and Air Defense Artillery experience, Souder has previously served as Deputy

Product Manager, Tri-Band Satellite Terminals, and

as Chief, Modeling & Simulation Branch,

Directorate of Combat Developments, U.S. Army

Signal Center. 

The mission area analysis must assess

strategy, policy, threat capabilities,

doctrine, technology, and budget to

identify capability deficiencies and the

timeframe to correct them.
he purpose of this article is to describe the role of Space

experimentation in Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02)

and the primary lessons learned for application in future

experiments. Overall, Space and Missile Defense

Command (SMDC) played a significant role in MC02 by

providing Space support and experimentation to multiple

echelons. 

Initial Planning

Though Army planning started a few months earlier,

Headquarters (HQ) Army Training and Doctrine

Command (TRADOC) kicked off the main MC02 effort

with an Initial Planning Conference in March 2001.

Several SMDC representatives participated in the early

stages of planning, including the meetings of several integrated process teams. The process teams that were established met at periodic intervals for the next several

months to refine plans. The primary teams for SMDC

interaction were the Management Oversight and the

Initiatives integrated process teams.

SMDC Objectives

SMDC’s overarching objectives included three main

elements: document the criticality of Space in future

operations (specifically in rapid decisive operations under

the microscope in MC02); identify Space and missile

defense solutions for Interim and Objective Forces; and

continue along the path to normalize Space. Underneath

these objectives, the command developed specific objectives by mission area. The next layer of objectives detailed

specific objectives for each initiative.

Initiative Approval

Initiatives make up one of the two categories of

information explored during advanced warfighting experiments; the other category is issues. Initiatives are generally materiel-based solutions to warfighter-identified

shortfalls. Issues are generally nonmateriel areas of interest or concern. Given Space and Missile Defense Battle

Lab’s (SMDBL’s) historical approach in applying technology to solve warfighter challenges, SMDC’s primary focus

was on initiatives. 

For MC02, the Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) and

TRADOC requested that each battle lab provide nominations of initiatives for review. These submissions were

then evaluated for their appropriateness in this venue.

SMDC major subordinate elements pulled together 22

unclassified initiatives and two classified initiatives. While

most of these were service level only, there were a few

Joint nominations. Unfortunately, the JFCOM deadline

for initiative packets was prior to the Army’s internal

deadline, so TRADOC did not establish a process for

review of Army-nominated Joint initiatives. Moreover,

because TRADOC did not effectively facilitate any Army

nominations to JFCOM, SMDC had to submit Joint initiatives directly to JFCOM — and SMDC was the only

Army unit with Joint initiatives.

SMDC’s initiatives were briefed at the TRADOC

Issues and Initiatives Review Board (IIRB) in May 2001.

The board was hosted by Joint Venture of HQ

TRADOC; representation included HQ Army Forces

Command and HQ Department of the Army. Of the initial 24 SMDC initiatives, the IIRB fully approved five and

conditionally approved 11 for inclusion in MC02. These

20 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Space Experimentation

in Millennium Challenge

2002

T

By Kurt C. Reitinger

Fall Theme
21

16 represented nearly half the Army’s total number of

initially approved initiatives. SMDC’s success with initiative inclusion was due primarily to preparation: 

· The concept for each initiative was well-explained.

· Initiatives addressed an existing need.

· Initiatives were linked to Army experiment objectives.

· Initiatives were sufficiently mature.

Initiative Coordination

After IIRB approval, each initiative team — consisting

of a government representative and contractor support

— entered a detailed coordination and preparation

process for the event. Throughout the planning process,

the proposed initiatives were modified or withdrawn to

reflect experiment configurations, evolving objectives,

readiness for experimentation and the aftermath of

September 11, 2001. The final initiative count left SMDC

with four of the Army’s 11 initiatives.

One major category that required initiative team coordination was analysis. In each experiment, TRADOC

charged the TRADOC Analysis Center to develop a

study plan, which includes a system assessment plan for

each initiative. 

The Army Test and Evaluation Command had overall

responsibility for the system assessment plan’s data collection and management effort. The plan contains information categories and questions that must be answered

about each system’s suitability, effectiveness, and survivability. 

Thus, for MC02, a system assessment plan was developed for each approved SMDC initiative. Each SMDC

initiative team provided all information for these plans

and, in some cases, even wrote the draft plan. These plans

were primarily focused on effectiveness, that is, the valueadded to the supported unit.

In addition to the TRADOC, TRADOC Analysis

Command, and the Army Test and Evaluation Command

analysis and data collection effort (referred to as external), SMDBL established internal data collection plans.

Initiative teams gathered detailed quantifiable data and

observations that included each system’s suitability, effectiveness, and a degree of survivability. The insights collected by a host of SMDBL personnel will be reflected in

revisions to the Space and missile defense categories of

doctrine, training, leader development, organization,

materiel development, and soldiers (DTLOMS).

Throughout the months preceding MC02/AT Ex02,

in-process reviews became commonplace. Initiative

teams conducted such reviews both internally and with

other initiative teams, while SMDBL conducted them

with participants as well as command leadership. These

in-process reviews provided a formal and effective means

to keep the entire team updated, informed and focused

on key milestones, activities, and suspense dates.

Initiative Training

SMDC provided initiative orientation training to supported units during a visit to Fort Bragg, N.C., in April.

During these sessions, SMDBL leadership briefed 82nd

Airborne Division key leaders and staff while initiative

action officers provided more detailed training to staff

officers.

(See Experimentation, page 46)

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal

MC02 was a big success for SMDC experimentation

with more than 50 personnel deployed throughout the

continental United States in support of multiple echelons

of command. The experiments conducted will be key to

the next several years of initiative development. Overall,

MC02 was a great example of achieving the command’s

motto to “secure the high ground!”
s part of Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02), the

Spectral Information Initiative applied advances in

remote sensing technologies to create timely, high-resolution battlespace visualization for Army Forces

engaged in tactical operations. Army Space and Missile

Defense Battle Lab planned and sponsored the initiative

to examine the impact of a system of spectral information systems on the ability of an Army Forces staff to

sense the battlespace and perform intelligence preparation of the battlefield, when provided timely spectral

products. Army Space Command executed the initiative

using spectral tools and analysis personnel from its multiservice Spectral Operations Resource Center (SORC).

Insights from this experiment will refine Army requirements for Space, airborne, and ground spectral systems,

including near-term tools for the SORC and Army

Space Support Teams, and longer-term components of

the tactical exploitation system, the distributed common

ground station, and the digital topographic support

system.

Technical Background

Ongoing remote sensing technology advances

include spatial resolution, timeliness, and spectral discrimination of materiel types. Commercial satellite

imagery providers have begun to deliver Earth images

with spatial resolutions at or below one meter, containing sufficient detail to provide significant intelligence

and situation awareness value. Direct downlink systems

can capture images moments after the commercial satellite overflight, making the images valuable for military

missions. Spectral imagery includes color information

in the visible and nonvisible spectra, which offers sufficient information content to enable machine assisted

image and signature analysis. Such automated assistance can greatly increase productivity of intelligence

analysis, accelerate detection of targets and materiels,

and extend our ability to rapidly produce map information. 

Initiative Concept

The Spectral Information Initiative integrated nine

civil-commercial imaging satellites, a regional support

enclave containing direct downlink and image processing tools, high data rate communications, and a small

support element at the Army Forces headquarters to

generate and deliver battlespace visualization products.

Components of the initiative all exist today, and were

organized in a package tailored to anticipate expected

capabilities in 2007. Key elements were panchromatic,

multispectral, and hyperspectral imaging sensors, accelerated satellite tasking methods, direct downlink to

mobile ground stations, advanced data processing systems, and access to high-data-rate commercial communications capabilities. This concept was built upon lessons derived during the FY 2000 Joint Contingency

Force Advanced Warfighting Experiment in which a

spectral support cell provided valuable augmentation to

a deployed tactical exploitation system at the corps

level.

Initiative Execution

Spectral information support must be agile to handle

a variety of possible geographic, organizational, and

mission contingencies. The architecture chosen for

MC02 appears in Figure 1. A regional spectral support

enclave consists of an Eagle Vision II, commercial

imaging direct satellite downlink ground station, and a

22 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Spectral Information

Supporting Rapid Decisive

Operations

A

By John McMurray and Russ Robinson

Fall Theme
23

Mobile Processing, Exploitation and Dissemination

Van, performed data acquisition, analysis and production. The regional enclave supported a two-person

spectral imagery support team operating a spectral

workstation within the Space Support Element at the

Army Forces headquarters. Figure 2 depicts these

assets. A high-data-rate commercial satellite communications system allowed product delivery across echelons

without taxing tactical networks.

Initiative Results and Products

Results of the Spectral Information Initiative were

very positive. The spectral systems succeeded in delivering 15 new image sets over the battlespace and more

than 40 individual battlespace visualization products tailored to meet Army Forces Information Requirements

during the exercise. Direct downlink, in-theater processing, and satellite communications enabled spectrally

analyzed battlespace images to be in the hands of the

G-2 within 2 1⁄2 hours of the image collection time.

Spectral images used as display backgrounds on Army

Battle Command Systems improved battlespace awareness and allowed the G-3 to more confidently place

phase lines and unit boundaries on features, which soldiers could recognize on the ground. 

The Spectral Support Enclave concept effectively

delivered the advantages of timely direct data downlink

while not burdening the headquarters with a large

equipment and personnel footprint. Key emerging

insights involved methods for ensuring that image processing efforts expended at the Spectral Support

Enclave are synchronized with the Military Decision

Making Process ongoing at the Army Forces headquarters. These insights will support future improvement in

tasking, processing, and usage procedures for imageryderived information.

Products created by the Spectral Operations

Resource Center and delivered to Army Forces by the

Space Support Element enhanced timely battlespace

awareness. Figure 3 depicts Army Forces battlespace

prior to the airborne insertion. It was created from a

SPOT satellite spectral image downlinked through the

Eagle Vision II ground station, and was delivered to the

Army Forces staff less than three hours after the image

was taken. The equipment indicated was detected using

spectral information in the data. 

Figure 4 depicts an operating site within the same

Army Forces battlespace, based on a separate Ikonos

satellite image. Cross-hatching indicates spectral detection of camouflage materials. Capturing this level of

detail over broad areas with direct downlink is a goal of

Eagle Vision II.

Figure 5 portrays a three-dimensional perspective

view of a small village site. Combining spectral images

and NIMA elevation data created such perspective

views. Participants valued this type of product for planning and mission rehearsal. Spectral information allows

discrimination of roofing types among the buildings.

Lessons Learned

Feedback from participating units indicated that

timely, rapidly processed spectral images showing

potential military targets were very useful. Army Forces

commented that clear drop zone images generated

using high-resolution commercial sources would help

soldiers overcome disorientation experienced upon initial insertion. Staff personnel frequently sought situa-

(See RDO, page 46)

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
ith a “snip” from a pair of oversized scissors, the starspangled ribbon was divided in two, marking the opening of the long awaited ‘home’ for Army Space

Command.

Officiating at the ceremony held on Peterson Air

Force Base, Colo., Oct. 9 were two senior officers, signifying the importance and weight of the event. ADM

James O. Ellis Jr., commander, U.S. Strategic Command,

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

Army Space and Missile Defense Command and U.S.

Army Space Command, did the honors.

They symbolically opened the new headquarters by

cutting the red, white, and blue satin ribbon at the start

of the sidewalk leading to the building. That walkway

was lined with flags representing each of the 50 states

and American territories. 

The new Building Three, with its soaring, futuristic

architecture evoking limitless horizons, is obviously

symbolic of the future, but also representative of a substantial past. Its unique coloration, a silvery, metallic

green, immediately marks it out among its peers in the

Space Complex as “the Army building,” the exact intent

of its designers. Conceived of in 1989, and undergoing

numerous transitions in design since due to the burgeoning nature of the Army’s role in Space, ground for

the 103,000 square foot building was broken in July

2000. It was completed on time and within budget July

2002. 

Cosumano welcomed the large crowd composed of

local dignitaries, former commanders of Army Space,

service men and women from all branches, and

reporters.

“Today, which seemed a long time in coming, is a

very significant day in the history of Army Space

Command,” he said. “The two things that are of the

most import about this magnificent facility are that,

first, we are now physically located on a secure military

installation. Secondly, we are now co-located within

this Joint Space Complex alongside those other members of the Joint Space team charged with providing

Space support to the warfighter and our nation.” 

Cosumano traced the history of the Army’s involvement in Space, going back to 1943 with the establishment of the Ordnance Rocket Branch to manage the

development of rockets. He cited the Army’s many

accomplishments, which have earned it the justified

fame and slogan of “First in Space.”

Bringing that history into modern times, Army

Space’s commander spoke of contributions during the

Gulf War, through and including the Global War on

Terrorism. Cosumano described the development of

the concept for the building, which closely mirrored the

growth of the Army’s increasingly larger role in Space.

“Army Space soldiers have supported the full spectrum of military operations. Today, the soldiers and

civilians of Army Space are on the cutting edge of normalizing Space support, serving the warfighter around

the globe.

“Though small in number, approximately 600 soldiers and civilians — compare that to the five who started things back in 1986! — Army Space is there, 24/7,

365 days a year, to provide the warfighter and others the

Space support they need to effectively carry out their

mission of defending this great nation, its allies and

friends from all enemies.

“From this location, we will continue providing

Space capabilities to the Objective Force. Space provides a global quality and element to any Force using it,

24 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Ribbon cutting ceremony

marks opening of new home

for Army Space

By MAJ Laura Kenney

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

W
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 25

and without Space, any military is just a regional force.

We will continue to ensure our nation’s security with

these capabilities so vital to the prosecution of warfare

in the 21st Century.

“Today is the dawn of a new day for Army Space, as

we cut the ribbon for this superb facility. This headquarters facility will have connectivity with all our Space

Forces deployed around the globe, and assist in integration with our sister commands and higher headquarters.”

On that note, the narrator introduced STRATCOM

Commander Ellis. 

In gleaming gold and striking black dress uniform,

the naval admiral addressed the crowd.

“To the people of this exceptional command, and all

those who went before you pioneering in Army Space,

I say, ‘First indeed.’ I challenge you to maintain and

hone the edge that Space capabilities give our nation. 

“The technological innovations of modern times

allow us to fight on our own terms and decisively control the battlefield. The synergy created by the recent

command restructuring adds to the global perspective

of the domain of Space. Strong component relationships will allow us to be both flexible and rigorous in

the face of new challenges.

“These challenges are not unique to our times.

Heavy armor, once the deciding factor in battle, fell to

the creation of the longbow. Our challenge is to use the

new technology in bold new ways, and Army Space

Command is uniquely suited to do just that. 

“You will meet the challenges. The future is ours, as

long as we, using a naval saying, ‘Steer by the stars, and

not by the wake behind you’.”

The admiral and the general then led the crowd into

the new headquarters for another ceremony. This one

honored a deceased Space pioneer, MG John B.

Medaris, who oversaw much of the early Space program. He became the first inductee to the Pioneer

Conference Room, a space designated to honor those

men and women who furthered the efforts of the Army

in Space.

A portrait of Medaris was unveiled in the spacious

lobby of Building Three by his daughter, Mrs. Marta

Smith. It was then carried into the Pioneer Room and

hung, with the assistance of the Army Space and Missile

Defense Command Soldier of the Year, SGT Robert

Orndoff.

“My father had a real sense of history, and I can definitely speak for him when I say that he would be so

very proud of all Army Space has accomplished, and

proud that his portrait will hang here in this incredible

building. He was very passionate about the defense of

the nation, and what Space could do toward that goal,

and I salute each and every one of you for carrying on

that goal,” said Smith.

A reception followed.

The huge lobby of the new building was created

with vast areas of space and light. A backup version of

the first U.S. satellite, Explorer 1, built by the Army and

launched by an Army rocket, the Jupiter C in 1958, is

suspended from the ceiling. An immense photograph of

that rocket launching dominates the lobby, with the

gleaming rocket trailing a vivid stream of fire. 

From the exterior, the building arches to a sharply

angled point, drawn from the serrated spear in the

Command’s crest, as a metaphor for Space travel.

Geometric cutouts of the building’s front entrance

(See Ribbon Cutting, page 31)

Left: ADM James O. Ellis Jr., commander of the new U.S. Strategic

Command, center, and LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr., Commanding

General U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command with the help

of other dignitaries, cut the official ribbon marking the opening of the

new U.S. Army Space Command headquarters building. Below left: ADM

James O. Ellis Jr. and LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr. stand at attention

during the ribbon cutting ceremony. The new building, below right, is

located in the Space Complex on Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado

Springs, Colo. U.S. Army Space Command is part of the U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command.

PHOTOS BY SHARON L. HARTMAN
wo Army Space soldiers, representing the entire U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command, became a

part of history when they competed in the first ever

Department of the Army level Noncommissioned

Officer and Soldier of the Year Competition Sept. 23 -

27.

SSG Darrick Noah from Army Space’s Regional Satellite

Communications Support Center in the Pacific, and SGT

Sherman Johnson of B Company, 1st Satellite Control

Battalion, vied against 11 NCOs and 10 soldiers for the

titles of DA Noncommissioned Officer and Soldier of

the Year, respectively. 

The inaugural event got under way Sept. 23 at Fort

A.P. Hill, Va., with an early morning Physical Fitness Test

and a written exam. 

After that, the action was non-stop through

Wednesday, with competitors performing a myriad of

Common Task Tests, such as day and night land navigation, M-16 qualifications, first aid, camouflage, chemical

decontamination, and, to top it off, a mystery event featuring two more CTT tasks. 

The mystery turned out to be a 5.3 mile road march

with loaded rucksacks into a chemical environment. 

During the events at Fort A.P. Hill, the “man behind

the competition,” Sergeant Major of the Army Jack Tilley,

visited competitors.

“That mystery event sounds pretty simple, right?

They had to walk five miles with 40 pounds on their

backs. No problem. Any soldier can do that. But at the

end of that test they got hit with “gas” (smoke). They had

to put on their protective masks, run about another quarter of a mile, drop into a fighting position and engage targets and qualify. Then they had to clear mines. Think

about it. That was really hooah stuff. That’s what soldiers do,” said Tilley.

Tilley offered words of thanks and encouragement.

“Look at these soldiers that are here today. The Army is

1.3 million people. These 23 had to go past 1.3 million

others to get here. Now that’s an accomplishment,” he

said.

The competition continued in Arlington, Va., with

competitors going before a board of seven command sergeants major — Tilley chairing the board. Most competitors agreed that it was quite different from boards

they’ve gone to before.

“The format of the board was interesting,” said SFC

Robert York, sponsor for Noah from RSSC Pacific.

“I’ve never seen that rapid-fire question after question. It’s a neat way to run a board. You’ll probably see

a lot more of that soon. Start looking at brigade and

MACOM boards next year and I’ll bet they start looking

just like them.”

With the events over, competitors were treated on

Friday morning to breakfast at the MCI Center with

Tilley. Breakfast was followed by a performance of the

highly acclaimed show “Spirit of America” featuring the

3rd U.S. Infantry (The Old Guard) and The U.S. Army

Band (Pershing’s Own). Of special note was an

announcement at the beginning of the performance

naming Tilley as the host, and the competitors as cohosts of Friday’s show. With spotlights streaming across

the competitors, the audience gave a resounding round of

applause.

A formal dinner provided the setting for announcing

the winners. The Secretary of the Army Thomas White,

Chief of Staff of the Army GEN Eric Shinseki and

26 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Army Space soldiers compete

in first ever Army-wide

SOY/NCOY board

By Sharon L. Hartman

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

T
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 27

SMDC’s Commanding General, LTG Joseph M.

Cosumano Jr. were in attendance.

“This is the first ever Army-wide Soldier/NCO of the

Year competition,” said Cosumano.

“It has been a long time coming because we’ve really

never recognized the best of the best. This competition

allows us to focus as an Army on those NCOs and soldiers who represent the vast differences that are put

together in one army. SGT Noah and SGT Johnson represent the best that we have at SMDC. They’ve gone

through tough competitions just to be here representing

Space Command.”

“Everybody’s a winner here at the competition. It

doesn’t really matter how they did. They are two of 23 in

the whole United States Army of over a million people,

so no matter how they came out, they’re winners.

Everybody here tonight is a winner.”

In agreement with Cosumano was Command

Sergeant Major of SMDC, Wilbur Adams Jr. who said,

“I’m proud of them regardless of the results. That part

doesn’t matter to me. They are very, very sharp. They

have a lot of energy, and they’re the type of young sergeants you want your brand new privates, PFCs and specialists to identify with and gravitate towards when they

show up at the units. They are positive. They know

what’s required to develop young soldiers. The example

they set lets young soldiers know that, if these guys can

do it, so can they.

“Don’t be afraid to go out there and take a chance on

a competition,” Adams said.

“Johnson, Noah, the training cadre who went down to

Fort A.P. Hill and we sergeants major — we’re all better

because of the things that we learn from each other.

They might say they learned a lot from the sergeants

major, well, we learned equally from them. When we go

back at the end of the day smarter than we were at the

start, I think the unit becomes a better unit.”

As competitors, Noah and Johnson added a bit of

advice from their perspective. 

“Do it,” said Noah.

“Don’t get discouraged into thinking that because

you’re not in a tactical or high speed MOS, you’re not

going to be a competitor. Just because somebody may

have an edge doesn’t mean you can’t compensate for it in

some other event.”

“Have a good attitude when you come here,” added

Johnson.

“It’s a lot of work, but we learned about other parts

of the Army we’re not normally exposed to. We really

enjoyed ourselves. It was an amazing experience.”

The winners, announced after much anticipation,

were SFC Jeffery Stitzel, an infantryman with the Old

Guard at Fort Myer, Va., and SPC Justin Brown, a measurement and diagnostic equipment specialist from

Baumholder, Germany. The two were given the titles of

the first ever DA NCO and Soldier of the Year, respectively. Prizes included an all-expense-paid trip to Disney

World, a five-minute shopping spree at the commissary,

and the opportunity to choose their next assignments.

“It would have been great to win. But just being here,

and playing a part in history being made was prize enough.

I’d recommend the experience to anyone,” said Noah.

Sharon L. Hartman, a civilian contractor, has served in the Army

Space Command Public Affairs Office for almost three years. She

is a computer graphics designer, journalist, and photographer.

Above: SGT Sherman Johnson of B Company

1st Satellite Control Battalion lends a hand to

SGT Darrick Noah of the Regional Satellite

Communications Support Center — Pacific,

while preparing for the mystery event at the

first ever Department of the Army NCO and

Soldier of the Year Competition. The two

Army Space Command soldiers proudly represented U.S. Army Space and Missile

Defense Command at the competition, which was held Sept. 23-27 in Fort A.P. Hill

and Arlington, Va. Center: l-r SGT Noah and SGT Johnson receive words of wisdom from SMA Jack Tilley during a break in the competition. Right: SGT Noah 

stays focused as he starts the mystery event.

PHOTOS BY SHARON L. HARTMAN
Space soldier makes connections

for Red Cross in Afghanistan

BAGRAM, Afghanistan — For service members

deployed to various “hot spots” around the world, the

Red Cross is a critical lifeline leading back to loved

ones. 

“For the Red Cross, the most critical thing is connectivity,” said Vera Kellar, Red Cross Station manager

for Station 1 in one of the “hottest” — literally and figuratively — spots of the world today, the virtual “headquarters” of the Global War on Terrorism.

No soldier wants to get that emergency phone call

from the Red Cross — unless the news is joyous as it

would be with a birth announcement — but the alternative, not hearing at all, or hearing days after a sad

event, is unthinkable. 

An Army Space Command soldier was able to help

get that critical “connectivity” up and running in record

time. 

Red Cross Station 1 had begun setting up its essential mission of providing emergency services to the soldiers, airmen, Marines, and sailors deployed here in

support of Operation Enduring Freedom.

According to Kellar, SGT Sean McGrane of Army

Space Support Team 4, from Colorado Springs, Colo.,

“got us an ETHERNET connection so we could share

messages between our computers” a few days before

the direct connections were installed in the building. 

“The folks at Bagram really helped us, but he gave

us that extra piece that enabled us to use two computers at once, making us operational long before we had

expected to be,” said Kellar.

Kellar added, “SGT McGrane is a true ‘friend of the

Red Cross.’ He’s always very attentive and asks if we

need anything. He’s an excellent young soldier who is

committed to what’s going on around him.”

Of his assistance, McGrane said “By helping the

Red Cross, I’m really helping myself and my fellow soldiers. Before I came here, I had no idea that they did

so much to help the American service member. The

quality of life in Bagram has increased exponentially

since the Red Cross Station opened.” 

Submitted by MAJ Robert N. Zaza, 1st Space

Battalion (See photo on page 30 RED CROSS)

National Guard director visits 

Army Space soldiers

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. — LTG Roger

C. Schultz, director of the U.S. Army National Guard,

visited mobilized soldiers of his component when he

toured Army Space Command on Halloween day.

Accompanied by Colorado’s National Guard leadership, the Adjutant General, Air Force MG Mason

Whitney, and the Commander of Colorado’s Army

National Guard, BG Ronald Crowder, Schultz toured

Army Space’s new facilities here to include the Army

Space Operations Center, and received mission briefs

and updates. These included examples of Space-based

products and imagery that are provided to the warfighter. But the highlight of his visit was definitely lunch

with soldiers of the 193rd Space Support Battalion, a

National Guard battalion mobilized after the tragedy of

Sept. 11, 2001.

The 193rd has sent three Army Space Support

Teams on overseas deployments during the past year in

support of Operation Enduring Freedom, to Korea

and Southwest Asia. Teams deployed with a mission of

integrating satellite-enhanced capabilities into daily military operations, such as communication, navigation,

intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, environmental monitoring, and missile warning operations.

BG Richard V. Geraci, deputy commanding general

for operations, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command, and deputy commanding general, U.S. Army

Space Command, hosted the National Guard digni28 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Focus on Soldiers

Contributions from the Field

Tip of the ‘Sphere’
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 29

taries.

Schultz enjoyed a buffet luncheon at the NCO Club here

with members of the 193rd. The horseshoe table format

enabled open conversation, with specialists sitting next to

colonels, and sergeants rubbing elbows with generals.

The director spoke at length in the informal setting, thanking the soldiers for their “stepping up to the plate” when their

nation called.

“I am totally aware of what this mobilization meant to you,”

said Schultz.

“The same issues that confront you are the ones facing the

nation today. You soldiers have been on an expanded tour of

duty, and your families have been there right along with you. We

might as well have had them there raising their right hands when

you enlisted. 

“In today’s world, we have to ask for readiness in not only

our soldiers, but in your families, and in your employers. I recognize the sacrifices that all three groups have made in this

marathon mission. This is volunteering at its finest.”

Schultz remarked on the significance of the Space mission

that 193rd soldiers perform.

“Current operations demonstrate just how critical the mission you perform is. Daily, the importance of Space is brought

home. A steady flow of communication to and from the

warfighter is absolutely essential, and that’s one of just many

many areas in which you soldiers are absolutely essential. Keep

up the good work, your Army and your nation depend on you.

I have total confidence in you.”

By MAJ Laura Kenney, Army Space Command

(See photo on page 30 NATIONAL GUARD)

Army Space soldier shines in 

Thailand’s Cobra Gold exercise

OKINAWA, Japan — A soldier from E Company, 1st Satellite

Control Battalion, Army Space Command, had the opportunity

recently to return to the exotic land of his birth, and perform

an important mission at the same time. 

SPC Pratan Ratanapinta, a 22-year-old satellite network

controller, originally from Thailand, returned there when he

deployed for this year’s Cobra Gold Exercise. Sent as a Ground

Mobile Forces Network Control liaison and equipment operator, Ratanapinta assisted the Kadena Air Force Base 353rd

Special Operations Group in achieving its mission and much

more. 

During the two weeks of deployment, Ratanapinta was

responsible for operating and maintaining the AN/USC-60A, a

light transportable satellite communications terminal. The terminal provided Defense Secure Network (DSN) and Secret

Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) services as

direct support for the Combined Joint Special Operations Task

Force. 

“Everyone there was very impressed with our systems, and

excited about their future potential,” said Ratanapinta. 

In addition to duties as an operator and network control liaison, Ratanapinta assisted with language translations to help

overcome communication barriers between the Thai and U.S.

Forces. He had the distinguished opportunity to provide a brief

for the Thai Special Warfare Commander on the terminal equipment.

Military officials from more than 18 countries observed the

annual Joint exercise this year, in hopes of future participation.

They toured the training areas to observe what was going on,

what it looked like, and how the exercise ran.

Ratanapinta had opportunities to enjoy his time outside of

duty.

“The Thai Signal soldiers invited us out for dinner. They

wanted us to experience several Thai dishes and to understand

more about each other.”

Soldiers in E Company are hopeful that Ratanapinta’s excellent service during his deployment laid a foundation for a solid

relationship with the units participating in Cobra Gold, and that

future opportunity for cross-training will become more common.

Submitted by SSG Franklin Barrett, E Co., 1st Satellite

Control Battalion

(See photo on page 30 COBRA GOLD)

Army Space soldiers take Ranger-style

challenge

LANDSTUHL, Germany — Rangers are no longer the only

ones who get a competition to determine the best among the

best at soldier skills. Soldiers at C Company, 1st Satellite

Control Battalion, Army Space Command, recently organized

and participated in their first “Best Soldier” Competition. The

competition — modeled after the famed “Best Ranger”

Competition — pitted individual soldiers against one another as

they sought to complete an arduous five-mile course with various tasks in the fastest time possible. 

“It was rough. I definitely broke a sweat, but overall I had a

great time,” commented SGT Glen Shockley after completing

the ordeal. Shockley took third place in the competition.

The trial was arranged along a five-mile path at the top of a

nearby mountain and included several points where competitors

were required to stop and test their soldierly skills. The points

included: M-16/A2 assembly/disassembly, land navigation and

(See Ranger Style, page 31)
30 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Tip of the ‘Sphere’

Focus on Soldiers

Contributions from the Field

RANGER STYLE

RED CROSS NATIONAL GUARD

COBRA GOLD
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 31

seem to provide space for docking starships, a design

similar to TRADOC’s training barracks which are

dubbed “Starships.” 

A headquarters building for Army Space

Command was officially requested in 1987, and the

original concept called for it to be built on Fort

Carson, Colo., with a 35,000 square foot design. The

building “grew” to its present dimensions of slightly

more than 100,000 square feet due to the ever-increasing number and size of missions that the Army performs in Space.

“We’re very proud of this new building,” said

Hugh Mason, Director of Public Works, Army Space

Command. 

“It is without a doubt the most modern building in

the Army inventory. And everything about it, from its

design, to its color, to its location — make it a fitting

home for a command that is of increasing importance

to the Army and to the nation.”

Mason has been with the command since 1989,

and has been a driving force on the new building project practically since its conception.

“Without a doubt, this is my ‘career project.’

People are very excited about moving into this building, and I am personally very very proud to have been

a part of it from the beginning. Now, to finally see it

opening ... ”

At a cost of $26 million, the building will house all

operational and administrative elements of Army

Space located in Colorado Springs.

“One of the greatest aspects of this building is

that we will be able to train, prepare, and deploy operational assets, either for training or actual operations,

right from the building to the airfield,” said Mason.

Tim Lynch, deputy operations officer for Army

Space, who also has been with the building project

since its inception, summed it up.

“The whole concept of a Space complex, in which

we work closely with our Air Force counterparts, the

Navy Space elements that we’ll also house in our new

building, plus our colleagues at NORTHCOM in

Building Two, and the great Space technology base of

this area, is now come to fruition, with the opening of

Army Space Command’s new home,” said Lynch.

Ribbon Cutting ... from Page 25

MAJ Laura Kenney is a mobilized reservist currently serving in the

Army Space Command Public Affairs Office in support of

Operation Enduring Freedom. She served five years Active Duty

as an enlisted journalist with Air Defense Command in Germany.

As a commissioned Reserve officer, she performed in Public

Affairs in the Gulf War theater, and served as deputy public affairs

officer for the American sector in Kosovo in 2001. 

Clockwise from top left: SSG Sean McGrane,

Photo by MAJ Robert Zaza; LTG Roger C.

Schultz, director, Army National Guard,

spends time with mobilized soldiers of his

component, CPT Angie Tofflemeyer and CPT

Andy Riordan, both of the 193rd Space

Support Battalion, Army Space Command,

and serving in support of Operation Enduring

Freedom. Photo by DJ Montoya, Army Space

Command; SPC Pratan Ratanapinta, Photo by

SSG Franklin Barrett; SSG Kenneth Demars,

Photo by CPT Lan Dalat.

map reading, buddy carries, grenade throwing,

M-40 Protective Mask usage, and employment of

the M-18 Claymore Mine. Soldiers were evaluated on their ability to perform the tasks properly

and complete the course in the shortest possible

time.

“It was fun, challenging, and an excellent way

to spend a German morning,” said SSG Kenneth

Demars. Demars took top honors in the contest

by finishing all the points and the five miles in 51

minutes. Second place went to SPC Cosme

Lavalle, with a time of 54 minutes, and

Shockley’s 55 minutes netted third place.

The competition was a precursor to more

intensive tasks that C Company will implement

next year. 

“I love the ideals, the competitiveness, and

the sharpened soldier skills that are fostered by

the ‘Best Ranger’ competition, said CPT Lan

Dalat, C Co. commander.

“I want to import some of the same ideals

into this unit and garner similar results. This has

the potential to be an excellent team building

tool, as it increases a soldier’s proficiency at

wartime tasks and promotes a high degree of

fitness — all under the guise of fun.”

Submitted by SPC Bradley D. Morrow, C

Company, 1st Satellite Control Battalion

(See photo on page 30 RANGER STYLE)

Ranger Style ... from Page 29
rack vehicles crunching over rocks, rotor blades slicing

the air, blistering sun, and freezing nights — a typical

scenario for an Army exercise. But not in the Army

Space Operations Center (ARSPOC). 

The ARSPOC is the operations center for the Army

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

Defense Command. From its foxhole, a high-tech center in Colorado Springs, Colo., the ARSPOC provides

24/7, real-time command and control of Army Space

Command assets and situational awareness through

global and regional communication resources. It brings

Space expertise to the fight from the sanctuary of a

home station.

The ARSPOC is manned by a talented crew of 21

people: soldiers from the Active Army, the Reserve

Component, and a Department of the Army civilian

technical adviser. Together they maintain situational

awareness on the 15 permanently forward-stationed

Army Space Command elements and all deployed

assets, which varies regularly with real-world operations

and various training exercises. They maintain regular

contact with the U.S. Space Command’s Space

Operations Center, Cheyenne Mountain Operations

Center, the operation centers for Navy Space

Command and the Air Force Space Command, Joint

Task Force Computer Network Operations, the Joint

Information Operations Center, and the Army

Operations Center. 

The ARSPOC provides reachback for the Space

Operations Officers stationed around the world, offering around-the-clock availability for resolution on any

request for information the officer may have. This

intensive level of support is provided for real-world

operations and exercises alike. The ARSPOC maintains

a parallel set of databases and Web sites for recording

and tracking both real-world and exercise events and

requests for information. This process facilitates information flow and timely responsiveness and reduces the

possibility of confusing real-world events with exercise

events.

As Millennium Challenge 2002 (MCO2) planning

conferences advanced, the SMDC Battle Lab (SMDBL)

approached the ARSPOC about advanced play in this

exercise. In our discussions with them, we quickly realized the benefits to be gained by participating in more

than the traditional exercise role normally assumed by

the ARSPOC. This operations center is charged with

managing a vast amount of information in a technologically rich environment that is rapidly evolving.

MCO2 offered an excellent opportunity to experiment

with new systems and methods for better managing the

missions. We agreed and invited them in to see how the

ARSPOC could improve reachback support to field

users.

The four crews of ARSPOC soldiers would participate in MCO2 alongside their Joint Service brothers,

but their weapons would not be the traditional major

end-items. Instead, they would wield the Space Battle

Management Core System, Global Command and

Control System, Terrestrial Critical Command Circuit,

and the Defense Satellite Communications System

Network Planning System. They would maintain communications with deployed Army Space Command elements, Space Operations Officers, and the exercise

control group. Most importantly, they would incorporate new technologies into the mix that could prove to

be valuable in the future as real-world missions

increase.

Before the exercise kicked off, all ARSPOC crews

received briefings from SMDBL personnel on exercise

32 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Support from the Sanctuary:

Exploiting the ARSPOC

T

By LTC Mary J. Miller

Fall Theme
33

and experiment objectives, and training on equipment

to be tested on the operations floor. The ARSPOC

would test a new method of pushing imagery to field

users, which would shorten response time for imagery

requests. A common operating picture software package would be tested that would give them parallel visibility on the exercise while maintaining real-world situational awareness and mission control. A Space operations system program identical to the ones in use by

fielded Space Operations Officers and the experimental

Space Support Element was loaded on a laptop computer. It would be positioned in the ARSPOC to test it

as a possibility for more streamlined communications

with forward Space support personnel instead of the

traditional Space Battle Management Core System.

Finally, a previously unexplored video conferencing

capability was installed in the operations center to be

tested and evaluated for possible purchase and permanent installation in the ARSPOC.

All of these experiments were carefully designed to

support four of the seven Army Space Command goals

for this exercise: (1) evaluate Space operations in the

transformation force model; (2) provide the SSE with

command and control and battle management in order

to supply supported forces with Battle Mountain

Command, Control and Communications capabilities

(not just force enhancement); (3) enhance appropriate

command and control for Army Space Command supporting a theater combatant commander; and (4) evaluate virtual collaboration and reachback.

A small video camera was set up on the Non-Secure

Internet Protocol Router Network computer to give us

the ability to hold direct video conferences with

SMDBL, forward at Fort Bragg, N.C., using Microsoft

Net Meeting. This popular device is common in corporate America and quickly demonstrated its value to

Army Space Command. This capability was tested successfully on many occasions and proved to be a tool

worth incorporating into the ARSPOC for permanent

use. 

The imagery-handling experiment also was successful, although more in concept than in practice. While

imagery was pushed from spectral operations teams to

the ARSPOC, we did not feel the entire process, from

requests for information to retrieval to response, was

sufficiently tested. There were not enough requests for

imagery to the ARSPOC, which we believe was a result

of requesters not realizing they could go to the

ARSPOC for this type of reachback support. This is

an area that could benefit from better advertising of the

capability before further testing of the concept in

future exercises. 

As the exercise progressed, the ARSPOC handled

numerous requests for information from a wide variety

of players. As requests were received, the soldiers

answered the queries or called upon the on-call subject

matter experts to provide the correct information.

They forwarded the responses in a timely manner

through the exercise control group to the requester.

The software application that was loaded on the Space

Battle Management Core System provided ARSPOC

operators a common operating picture which was

shared with SMDBL, located more than 700 miles away

at Fort Bragg. This gave crews a complete picture of

the exercise to set side by side with real-world operations. Filters were employed to ensure that the two were

not confused. This tool proved to be very valuable

from the standpoint of event deconfliction. It significantly reduced the possibility of erroneously confusing

(See ARSPOC, page 46)

From its foxhole, a high-tech center in

Colorado Springs, Colo., the ARSPOC provides

24/7, real-time command and control of Army

Space Command assets and situational

awareness through global and regional 

communication resources.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
TG Joseph Cosumano’s above statement summarizes the

mission given to the Space Support Element (SSE) during

Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02). To accomplish this

mission, the soldiers from Army Space Support Team 5

(ARSST 5) were transformed for MC02 to an SSE with

the responsibility to provide full-time presence and Spacerelated tactical support to the Army Forces headquarters

(HQ). Ensuring a smooth and effective transition from an

ARSST to an SSE was one of the main duties of the battle captain during MC02. The battle captain was one of

the key integrators and managers of information for the

SSE during MC02 and shared the SSE mission to increase

the situational awareness of the Army Forces HQ. 

In order to appreciate how the SSE and the battle captain accomplished this mission, it is necessary to understand the reason why the SSE participated in MC02.

Doctrinally, the SSE is the primary U.S. Army Objective

Force headquarters staff element responsible for providing full-time presence and Space-related tactical support

to the division. The SSE is also the subject matter expert

for Space planning, capabilities, and operations at the

division level. The SSE was utilized by the Army Forces

HQ not only to support its mission, but also to gain

insights and determine requirements for the future Space

support element. In order to gain these insights, six soldiers from the ARSST 5, from 1st Space Battalion out of

Colorado Springs, Colo., were transformed into an SSE. 

An ARSST is normally composed of six soldiers that

provide capabilities, expertise, and products in support of

the warfighter for planning and executing the full spectrum of today’s military missions, from exercises to realworld operations. ARSSTs normally deploy from 1st

Space Battalion, Colorado Springs, Colo., to a corps HQ

with a standard suite of equipment consisting of a Space

support platform, a plotter, a precision lightweight global

positioning system receiver, and three laptops that have

imagery, Space modeling, and analysis software loaded

onto them. In order to transform into an SSE, ARSST 5

had to learn nine new and experimental software programs on two different platforms. The battle captains

were key to accomplishing this transition as they helped

schedule training on the new equipment and software.

The battle captains helped write the tactics, techniques,

and procedures (TTP) that switched a chief function of

an ARSST from providing products (producing maps,

three-dimensional (3-D) fly-throughs, global positioning

system accuracy reports) into an SSE that provided

expertise, advice, and liaison on Space-related issues

while aggressively including Space in the Army Forces

parallel planning process. The position was identified for

MC02 because of the difference in mission focus between

an ARSST and an SSE. The requirement for the battle

captain as an information manager also was identified and

allowed the SSE to better accomplish its mission. 

The SSE’s mission during MC02 was to provide fulltime presence and Space-related tactical support to the

34 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

The Space Battle Captain:

Managing the Future of 

Tactical Space Operations

L

By CPT Bob Barrett and 1LT Angela Johnson

Fall Theme

“All the products of Space — navigation, 

communication, warning, and intelligence — will be

key products for the U.S. Army Objective Force, which

will be a much lighter and more lethal force. And for it

to accomplish this mission, it must be able to see first,

understand first, decide first, and then finish decisively.

And Space will enable that force to do that.”

— LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr., commanding general of the U.S.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command, Aug. 03, 2001, Colorado

Springs, Colo., speaking to the first graduating class of the Functional

Area 40 (Space Operations Officer) Qualification Course.
35

Army Forces that centered on subject matter expertise for

Space planning, capabilities, and operations. The battle

captains were key to this mission as they were involved in

writing a division-level Space intelligence estimate as well

as a Space annex. The battle captains also helped provide

other services to the Army Forces including analysis of

Space weather effects, 3-D fly-throughs, 3-D perspective

images, and analysis of enemy Space capabilities. The

services provided by the SSE contributed to the ability to

see first, understand first, decide first, and finish decisively. 

The SSE and the battle captains also educated Army

Forces staff about available Space-based capabilities — an

important part of the mission. Oftentimes, the battle captains were the first to greet visitors into the Space Support

Element Toolset and give them answers or direct them to

someone who could answer their questions or product

support requests. The battle captains usually set up or

assisted in the set-up of briefings to Army Forces staff

and distinguished visitors. Educating the staff and visitors

was essential to supporting the Army Forces in gaining

the situational awareness to be the first to understand

what was happening on the battlefield, thereby allowing

the Army Forces to act first.

Once the simulated campaign began, the SSE was split

into two shifts that had a battle captain always on duty to

maintain control over the information that drove the

SSE’s current operations. The battle captains received,

reviewed, and assessed all requests for information and

products from the various Army Forces staff members.

It was their responsibility to ensure that all requests were

routed to the appropriate personnel to address and

resolve the request for information in a timely manner. It

was not unusual to see the on-duty battle captain talking

to higher headquarters on the headset via the information

work station while reading an e-mail, and logging in a visitor’s walk-in requests for information. In addition to

tracking and quality-checking incoming requests for information, the battle captains were responsible for submitting the SSE’s requests to the various higher headquarters.

The request for information process that the battle captains maintained helped the Army Forces gain greater situational awareness of the battlefield. 

The battle captains were responsible, along with the

noncommissioned officer in charge, for the day-to-day

operation and maintenance of the Space Support

Element Toolset. The battle captains were responsible

for maintaining the SSE status board, which listed the

communications status within the SSE and externally.

Because the communications status was probably the

most important piece of information on the status board,

it was vital for the battle captains to ensure that the SSE

was connected. The battle captains were not experts in

many of the communication systems themselves, but

were familiar enough with them to identify a problem and

find someone capable of resolving it quickly. One of the

ways the battle captains maintained situational awareness

over the status of communications was to go through a

list of the systems at the daily updates and ensure that

experts in those systems were present to answer questions

in case a link in the communications network was down.

This communications network was vital to the battle captains, as they had to check three different e-mail accounts,

four types of phone lines, and secure and nonsecure

Internet connections. Without this connectivity, the SSE’s

ability to support the Army Forces would have been

diminished. 

The battle captains were also responsible for enforcing

the daily battle rhythm. This battle rhythm was valuable in

providing day-to-day guidance and reminders on information and products that had to be produced at a certain

time each day in order to parallel the planning rhythm of

the Army Forces. The daily battle rhythm was a minor,

(See Battle Captain, page 47)

A Space Support Element is partially

concealed during Millennium Challenge

2002 at Fort Bragg, N.C.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal

PHOTO BY DEBRA VALINE
he U.S. Space Command recently was given an unprecedented opportunity during Millennium Challenge 2002

(MC02) to test and validate a new design that provides

Space, computer network operations (CNO), and information operations (IO) support to the warfighter. This

new design is called the Space and Information

Operations Element (SIOE) and is designed to be a team

of experts staffed to support combatant commanders

during times of hostility. 

MC02 was the largest Joint experiment of its kind ever

carried out and was intended to test various new warfighting concepts developed over the last couple of years.

MC02 involved more than 13,500 military and civilian

personnel, live field maneuvers, and computer simulations

for a three-week-long experiment. It was held at 26 different sites, 17 computer simulations and nine live action

sites, throughout the United States. The live sites ranged

from the Command Ship USS Coronado located off the

coast of California, to the sands of the National Training

Center, Fort Irwin, Calif., to the high tech environment

located at Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) in Suffolk,

Va. 

MC02 offered U.S. Space Command a chance to

experiment with an innovative construct for the command and control of Space, CNO, and IO forces within

the Combatant Commander and Joint Task Force (JTF)

Headquarters (HQ). An 18-person SIOE was embedded

into the staffs of the combatant commander and the Joint

Task Force Commander (CJTF) to provide enhanced support for the following concepts: rapid decisive operations,

effects-based operations, and operational net assessment.

These concepts were tested by JFCOM during MC02.

U.S. Space Command had a number of experimental

objectives for its SIOE concept during MC02:

· Validate the SIOE concept in support of rapid decisive operations and effects-based operations in a collaborative environment.

· Refine goals, objectives, and the way ahead for

Pinnacle Pathway and other transformation events.

· Expand visibility for CNO and IO within the Joint

experimentation process.

· Provide the supported commander a focal point

for Space, CNO, and IO.

Centralize command and control for disparate Space,

CNO, and IO elements.

Additionally, it was key that U.S. Space Command

interests were represented at the Joint Coordination

Board and that Space, CNO, and IO were synchronized

with traditional fires. U.S. Space Command wanted commanders to be presented with Space/CNO/IO effects

equivalent to air, land, and sea effects.

U.S. Space Command had members located in three

different locations. There were IO and Space planners

located with the JTF HQ in Suffolk, Va.; Space planners

located with the air component at Nellis Air Force Base,

Nev.; and a reachback cell located at Peterson Air Force

Base, Colo. The SIOE team members were made up of

military and civilians from all four services. They were

experts in their respective fields of Space operations, IO,

intelligence, and CNO. Two Army Space Command personnel were members of the SIOE: one was deployed to

Suffolk, VA as a Space planner working in the JTF plans

cell and the other was deployed to Nellis Air Force Base

as a Space planner. 

The experiment used a new construct for the organization of Space and IO. Space, IO, and intelligence were

all placed under the JTF information superiority group.

The idea behind this grouping was to allow these groups,

all of which are information intensive, to better synchronize their plans and execution and thereby reduce redundancy, decrease planning time, and prevent different

organizations from working at cross-purposes.

At the JTF level, the Space planners worked in two different cells. Two planners worked in the plans cell under

36 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Tomorrow’s Joint Space

Support for Today’s Warfighter

T

By Matt Scott

Fall Theme
37

the lead air planner. Their task was to integrate Space

operations into the CJTF’s overall plan, provide a Space

operations perspective during various collaborative meetings, and provide Space operations information to other

plans cell personnel. Two other Space planners worked in

the JTF Operations Center where they kept track of current Space-related operations such as missile attacks, satellite communications jamming, etc., and provided Space

operations perspective to the JTF Operations Center. 

The majority of the SIOE members located with the

JTF were IO planners. Their primary tasks were to synchronize IO activity and tasks with organizations outside

of the JTF, maintain and update the operational net

assessment, assist in the development of the effects tasking order, integrate information effects into the overall

mission, assess the effects of IO actions, and identify

intended, and possible unintended, reactions. 

To allow the SIOE to have visibility at the highest levels, the SIOE team chief was made a brigadier general and

assigned as a member to the combatant commander’s

staff in Suffolk, Va. 

The SIOE team members located at Nellis Air Force

Base were critical liaison officers with the Joint Force air

component commander Space and information counterparts. Under the Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment

02, the Air Force looked at the doctrinal role of the Joint

Force Air and Space Component Commander (JFASCC).

The JFASCC is an Air Force service concept. The

JFASCC concept, as well as the JTF commander, assigned

all Space missions to the JFASCC. SIOE personnel at

Nellis formed a bridge between Space/IO planning at the

JTF and Space/IO planning at the JFASCC. Examples

included coordinating Joint IO assets into the air tasking

order and Army Space assets into the Space tasking order.

In accordance with the recently approved Joint

Publication 3-14, Joint Doctrine for Space Operations,

the functions executed by the SIOE at Nellis in the future

will occur under the designated Joint Force Space

Operations Authority.

The SIOE reachback cell was located at Peterson Air

Force Base. This cell allowed the deployed SIOE members to have access to U.S. Space Command’s component

expertise. If a Space planner with the JTF HQ at Suffolk,

Va., had a Space-related question, he could contact the

reachback cell with the question. The reachback cell then

would answer the question from the knowledge base

located at U.S. Space Command or, if the answer was not

available, the cell could engage a U.S. Space Command

component for the answer. This design kept the number

of deployed SIOE team members relatively small, but still

retained the ability to access the entire scope of Space

expertise throughout the U.S. military. 

On multiple occasions the JTF commander was

briefed on Space issues and what Space assets could do to

help the CJTF achieve his desired effects. This in turn

allowed the CJTF to gain visibility on the complexities of

Space operations. Numerous JTF members (Army and

Marine Corps combat arms types) who had never been

exposed to Space capabilities other than navigation and

communication support also were given a chance to see

what Space could do for the JTF as a whole. 

Information operations were not considered a focal

point by experiment planners prior to MC02, but became

important early on because of CJTF emphasis. The IO

side of the SIOE team was involved in the planning and

execution of an elaborate IO campaign plan that was critical in reaching the desired JTF effects and showed great

promise in reducing the length of future campaigns. The

CJTF was briefed twice daily on the IO campaign and was

very engaged in the development and execution of the IO

plan. 

MC02 was designed as a spiral process. The spiral

process is a series of ever more complex scenarios culmi-

(See Joint Space Support, page 48)

The Information Operations side of the Space

and Information Operations Element team

was involved in the planning and execution

of an elaborate IO campaign plan that was

critical in reaching the desired JTF effects

and showed great promise in reducing the

length of future campaigns.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
magine Navy imagery analysts peering at a U-2 image on

their workstations. They are onboard the USS

Coronado docked in San Diego, speaking to Air Force

imagery analysts at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., about

the mission profile. Both have the same image on their

workstations. Was this only possible as a simulation

product during Millennium Challenge 2002 (MC02)?

The Army Space Program Office doesn’t believe so.

It has envisioned such a real-world capability ever since

the development and fielding of the tactical exploitation

system (TES). With the services beginning to field TES

equivalents (TES-N for the Navy and ISR-M for the Air

Force), a truly interoperable intelligence, surveillance,

and reconnaissance system is now close to reality. This

conclusion became very apparent to many interested in

intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance because of

a Joint collaboration between the Army, Navy, and Air

Force during MC02. How did this happen?

The story begins in 1998 with the Army Space

Program Office initiating work to inject tactical

exploitation of national capabilities (TENCAP) systems

into simulations and exercises. Working with the Office

of the Secretary of Defense’s Joint Technology Center,

System Integration Laboratory out of Huntsville, Ala.,

the Army Space Program Office designed such a system

called TENCAP multiple unified simulation environment (MUSE). TENCAP MUSE was patterned after the

System Integration Laboratory’s unmanned air vehicle

simulation just called MUSE. The laboratory and the

program office worked to refine the capabilities of the

simulation to emulate theater and national platforms

and the Army’s real-world TENCAP capabilities. The

Air Force joined this collaboration afterwards, and a

multiservice partnership was formed. Today the simulation can emulate several theater and national platform

intelligence products and push these products to the

TES, or as MC02 proved, to the entire TES family of

systems. For MC02, the two main platforms that the

simulation emulated were the U-2 and the Global Hawk.

Initially, the Army proposed operational play of its TES

during MC02 supplemented by TENCAP MUSE.

Because of Operation Enduring Freedom needs, the U2 and Global Hawk play for MC02 fell to simulation

only using TENCAP MUSE and the Air Force’s duplicate model called Air Force synthetic environment for

reconnaissance and surveillance.

Following current doctrine, the Air Force used the

synthetic environment as the primary feed for the U-2

and the Global Hawk. Its system operated from

Hurlburt Field, Fla., and fed its ISR-M at Nellis and the

TES-N. The Army Space Program Office system was

located in San Diego to feed the Navy’s TES-N and simulated Army TENCAP systems that would ordinarily be

available. Because of operational needs, no Army TENCAP systems were available and TENCAP MUSE fed

the Global Hawk-Maritime for the Coronado and performed the backup role for the U-2 and the Air Force’s

Global Hawk. When technical problems were encountered at various times at Hurlburt, the ASPO system was

used to drive the real-world TES family of systems until

38 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

MC02 and the Tactical

Exploitation System

Family

I

By Robert F. Donohue Jr.

Fall Theme
39

these problems could be worked out. 

Whether in a virtual environment such as MC02 or

in real-world operations, the complementary capabilities

of the TES family of systems exist, as demonstrated

during the exercise. Additionally, the Army and Navy

desired that Joint Forces Command emulate passing of

U-2 sensor control during the exercise. This was an

additional role for TENCAP MUSE. It was planned

and tested, but not played during MC02. The figure

above portrays the virtual intelligence, surveillance, and

reconnaissance integration concept planned for MC02. 

Since MC02 did not play the important role of Joint

sensor handoff, what was proven? First, U.S. Army

Space and Missile Defense Command proved when

technical problems were encountered that the simulation could support doctrinal experimentation. Although

we virtually generated the imagery from two different

“locations” in MC02, the same thing could happen in

real-world operations between the TES and the ISR-M

should something happen to one of the systems.

Second, in discussions prior to the exercise, the model’s

capability forced questions regarding sensor control and

how to develop Joint tactics, techniques, and procedures. 

This development will continue in Terminal Fury 03,

a not-too-distant Joint exercise in the Pacific, where sensor control will be a critical task to exercise.

Importantly, MC02 also demonstrated how a TES family of systems could form the basis for the services’

Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) concept.

All DCGS systems can share products from forward as

well as “rear” locations. Finally, by generating imagery

that required analysts in the exercise loop, the simulation

also demonstrated the need for federated (system of

systems) exploitation and continued needs for training

in those processes. 

Too often, in exercises, staffs incorrectly learn that

they can expect an overwhelming amount of intelligence detail almost instantaneously. Analysts and commanders learned quite a bit about their capabilities to

read-out this data. One might ask, could MC02 have

exercised some of these concepts with national systems? The answer, as we have demonstrated in numerous other exercises, is yes.

As demonstrated in MC02, the tactical warfighter

does not belong to a single service, but to several. The

TES family of systems, as SMDC’s contribution to the

service’s DCGS concept, will lead to development of

Joint tactics, techniques, and procedures that will

enhance the battlefield commander’s ability to exploit

our nation’s Space capabilities. By using already developed simulation tools to train our staffs now, we can

pave the way for the Services to optimize how they

interact and move toward the goal of an interoperable

DCGS concept. 

Rob Donohue works as a Northrop Grumman contractor for the

Army Space Program Office. He has been working Tactical

Exploitation of National Capabilities (TENCAP) simulation efforts

since 1998 and has been a driving force in its development.

Prior to his work with Northrop Grumman he spent more than 12

years in Air Force modeling and simulation activities. 

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
his year’s Ulchi Focus Lens-02 (UFL-02) exercise, conducted by U.S. Forces Korea, provided an excellent

opportunity to integrate and coordinate all Space activities in support of a major theater Joint warfighting

event. This exercise was truly unique from the Space

perspective in that the U.S. Space Command, Army

Space Command and Air Force Space combined their

abilities and resources into a cohesive Joint Exercise

Control Group. Each command provided Space

expertise within its core mission areas while manning

the Exercise Control Group in Korea. We simultaneously exercised reachback capabilities at home station

to support request for information requirements from

the field. Exercise updates were posted to Air Force

Space Web page using the Space Battle Management

Core System (SBMCS) exercise database. This gave

Space forces in the field a location on the SIPRNET for

current Space status and realistic Space order of battle,

thereby furthering Space situational awareness. 

At first glance, one might not consider interservice,

Joint coordination and cooperation a significant milestone in exercise management. That is, not until one

realizes the global and interservice effects of Space scenarios during a theater-level exercise. Over the past

three to four years, there has been a steady increase in

the amount of Space play during theater-level exercises.

However, while Space play has increased, it was

parochial in nature with each of the separate services

doing their own thing. This created inter-service

stovepipes within Space scenario events causing confusion and misunderstanding on the part of the Joint

warfighting staffs. 

On a number of occasions in the past, a Space event

was not thoroughly coordinated across the Joint Space

community, resulting in confusion as to the purpose

and desired outcome of the event. 

An example of an uncoordinated event might follow this typical scenario. The 7th Air Force in Korea

desires to exercise the staff communications planning

officers. Exercise controllers determine that the injection of a solar flare event will cause sufficient disruption of communications, specifically the loss of a

transponder on a commercial satellite, warranting corrective action. The intended training objective and

audience for the solar flare event was to get the 7th Air

Force staff to initiate a request for reallocation of

affected channels. 

In order to accomplish this action, the staff must

request a change of channels or, if necessary, a change

of satellites from the higher headquarters, U.S. Forces

Korea in this instance. This will require the staff to

deconflict channel allocations, thereby involving the

Regional Satellite Communications Support Center and

the Defense Information Systems Agency. This in turn

will affect other 7th Air Force units in-theater. It could

also affect communications if there is a shortage of

Satellite Communications channels in the region. 

This example could easily affect other systems in40 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

The Global Aspect of

Space Exercise Control

T

By Owen B. Carleton

Ulchi Focus Lens
41

theater or around the world. We will halt the example

at this point. However, one can see through this example that if a Satellite Communications event is not

coordinated with other exercise controllers and/or

staffs, confusion sets in. No one except the initiators

of the event are truly aware of the ramifications and

the intended outcome. 

The inherent global nature of Space makes it impossible to exercise Space events in an isolated environment. Having the three major Space commands synchronize their Space master scenario event requirements, and then execute the scenario injects from a centralized location, greatly decreases confusion to exercise

Space player cells and warfighting staffs responding to

the events. The centralized control of Space inject

events also encourages the coordination and actions of

all Space forces deployed in-theater, which is a tremendous side benefit.

From an exercise controller perspective, having the

opportunity to tap U.S. Space Command strategic planning expertise and Air Force Space Command’s Space

operations background helped establish stronger relationships for future operations and exercises. In addition, having the ability to utilize a coordinated Space

order of battle and global positioning system accuracy

predictions proved invaluable to the deployed Space

forces as well as the exercise controllers. 

Air Force Space provided a realistic Web page which

they updated daily with the status of our Space support

enhancement and control systems, the current enemy

Space situation, and terrestrial and solar environmental

data. Rolling all of this into one package gave the

deployed Space forces one place to get all the relevant

Space information. This will cut down on miscommunication and misrepresentation of the Space situation

to the warfighter, making Space forces a more valuable

asset.

Clearly, U.S. Space Command, now U.S. Strategic

Command’s contributions to this exercise were significant. It will be interesting to observe the transition U.S.

Strategic Command will make as it applies lessons

learned to the new command, its missions, and organizational structure. However, the desire from this analyst’s perspective is to make the Joint Exercise Control

Group, established during UFL-02, the standard for

future theater exercises. Planning for the incorporation

of other Space assets should include representation

from Joint information operations and the integration

of air and missile defense. Incorporating all Space

capabilities in these critical mission areas will allow the

Joint Exercise Control Group to exercise all Space mission areas in an integrated, synchronized manner. 

Owen Carleton works for the G2, Army Space Command, as the

chief of the Integrated Air and Missile Defense Division. He retired

from the Army as a CW4 after 28 years in the Military Intelligence

Corps. His professional experience includes Army Space G2 exercise specialist, the senior intelligence analyst in the Army Space

Theater Missile Defense Tactical Operations Center, and numerous positions on intelligence staffs from division to Theater Armies. 

PHOTO COURTESY U.S. ARMY

Joint exercises of the magnitude

of Ulchi Focus Lens 02 allow the

testing of interservice effects of

Space scenarios on the theater

level. From individual soldiers

using Space products for land

navigation purposes, as shown in

the picture to the left, to the larger

'picture' of interservice communications, Space plays a critical

role.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
42 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

as they would co-exist with EBO (the

length of this article precludes a discussion of sustaining operations for now).

The word “co-exist” is critical because no

element of EBO precludes the Army concept of decisive and shaping operations.

In fact, the JTF headquarters for MC02

used a decisive and shaping construct for

the operational design of the experiment.

This design not only had no negative

impact on the experimental objective

regarding EBO, but also actually facilitated its use and improved its application by

lending clarity of purpose and providing

unity of effort among components. This

is particularly true in terms of operational

fires. 

For now, EBO is primarily a joint doctrinal concept. As a high-end tactical and

operational organization, the Army Corps

is the first Army echelon to be potentially

impacted by EBO. This is important

when one considers that the Army Corps,

as the operational headquarters at echelon

above division, focuses enormous energy

on the fires component of combat power.

The Corps can employ extremely

effective fires (FA, ATK AVN, JFACC,

nonlethal, etc.) as a decisive operation,

shaped by maneuver forces to enable fires

asset positioning and target acquisition.

Fires can also be employed by the Corps

to shape the depth and breadth of the battlespace in order to move divisions to

positions of advantage for decisive

maneuver. 

The experimental concept of EBO is

mutually supporting of the capstone

Army concepts of Task and Purpose and

the Decisive, Shaping and Sustaining construct. Under EBO, units can and will

continue to be given destroy, defeat, and

other doctrinal tasks. The supremacy of

purpose will be retained and strengthened

through the quantification added by the

stating of desired effects. The construct

of D/S/S operations is completely compatible and interoperable with EBO and

there is emerging evidence that EBO will

provide opportunity for significant

enhancement to future Army operations. 

We are a doctrine based Army, and our

transformation to the Objective Force will

require new and innovative doctrinal

approaches. EBO provides a potential

path for harnessing the power of

Objective Force capability, and, as such,

additional Army and Joint warfighting

experiments should aggressively pursue

the transformation of our doctrine to an

effects-based approach. 

Healthy skepticism regarding new concepts is good for our Service and our profession. In regards to EBO, we will be

well served by focusing our energy on

ensuring that the best of our doctrine

shapes this future Joint doctrinal concept.

Resisting EBO outright as new and

unnecessary would be a disservice to our

Army, the Joint community, and our profession. 

As we move forward in Objective

Force development, let’s take a good hard

look at EBO. And, as we pursue EBO,

we’ll inevitably have to consider the

Effects Tasking Order (ETO), but that’s

another story! 

sion making process using a six-man

Space Support Element and their toolkit.

During the experiment, the composition

and tactics, techniques, and procedures of

Space asset support to the Army Forces

were closely examined. The SSE brought

tremendous value-added to Army Forces

effects-based planning and became an

integral member of the planning community and effort. The SSE toolkit’s internal

wideband satellite communications provided reliable, effective reach back capability as intended. Additionally, the development and operation of the Space

Applications Technology Utility Research

Network (SATURN), the Wireless Webbased Warfighter, the Space Operations

System, the Embedded National Tactical

Receiver, and Broadcast Request Imagery

Technology Experiment provided

enhanced capabilities to the Army Forces. 

The Spectral Information Initiative was a

standout performer, receiving high praise

from many senior leaders. This capability applied commercial/civil high-resolution satellite imagery, indirect field tasking, direct downlink, and advanced processing to provide greater battlespace

visualization for tactical and operational

users.

While Space is inherently Joint, each

Service leverages Space-based capabilities

to enhance its own Service’s warfighting

capabilities. MC02 provided an excellent

opportunity to leverage Space in a Joint

environment for the benefit of the Army

Forces commander. We successfully

integrated Space operations into Army

operations and learned some valuable lessons about Space contributions to Joint

operational concepts. Clearly, making

Space operations a “normal” part of

Army operations is transformational.

MC02 — Normalizing Army ... from Page 5

Effects-Based Shaping ... from Page 9
Fall 2002 Army Space Journal 43

The largest joint exercise in history, Millennium Challenge 02, tested all facets of the warfighters' repertoire. Key among

them were Space capabilities, as pictured in these photographs taken during actual operations. Above: In southern

Bosnia-Hercegovina, — SPC Matt Cohen and SGT Willie Davis prepare to call back to Stabilization Forces Headquarters

via the Portable Satellite Communication System. Below: Deployed soldiers use portable satellite links to communicate with

their headquarters.

PHOTO BY TSGT JOHN E. LASKY, USAF

PHOTOS BY SARA M. WOOD 
planning were the critical factors that led to

the SSE’s success with the Army Forces

and MC02 in general. The FA 40 had to be

able to continually articulate (in English,

not Space speak) how Space operations

and, particularly, Army Space Command

assets could augment and force-enable

Army Forces and ultimately Joint

Operations.

“Can you please move that

satellite for me?”

During MC02 there were no questions

like the above sub-title. The powers that be

at Army Forces had open minds and a

desire to use all available assets to better

their operations. Their inherent level of

technical and tactical competence was

impressive and made the SSE’s job that

much easier. The smattering of Space

smart officers assigned to the Army Forces

was a huge asset for the SSE and hopefully, a precursor of things to come.

Recap FA 40 insights

· Conduct face to face advocacy,

education, and literacy as early as possible.

· Build habitual relationships with

the supported headquarters, staff, and

commander.

· Plan within the supported unit’s

planning/decision cycle, then expand the

planning cycle to be as proactive as possible.

· Seek out the G5 IO element —

Space operations are entirely complementary to IO.

· Stress Space as an enabler and

supporter to the battlefield functional

areas.

· Follow up on services and products, never stop improving and refining

them.

· Get Annex N done early, develop

an appendix to the intelligence annex (if

applicable).

· Use the ARSPOC.

· Use the SORC.

· Learn and understand the Joint

Space assets available for the area of

operations.

· Continually market Space technology, systems, and capabilities.

· Normalize Space operations.

MC02 provided a near future (2007)

venue to test, experiment, and validate

concepts, technologies, and doctrine on

how the Army will most likely use Space

operations for the Interim Force, and

clearly showed why the Army will

increase reliance on Space capabilities for

the future Objective Force. 

44 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Mission Area ... from Page 3

and are discussed in detail elsewhere in this

publication.

Finally, I want to address the recent

changes to the Unified Command Plan that

impact those of us working Space-related

issues. As part of the ongoing transformation of the U.S. military into a 21st Century

fighting force, on Oct. 1, 2002 the

Department of Defense disestablished U.S.

Space Command and U.S. Strategic

Command and created a new U.S. Strategic

Command at Offutt Air Force Base, Neb.,

combining the missions of both into one

headquarters. Additionally, the Unified

Command Plan assigns the four previously

unassigned mission areas of globally integrated missile defense, global strike, information operations and Command, Control,

Communications, Computers, Intelligence,

Surveillance, and Reconnaissance to the new

U.S. Strategic Command. The fact that

Space ties these mission areas together was

clearly a factor in placing them all under this

new command.

The new U.S. Strategic Command provides the nation a single combatant command with global perspectives, focused on

exploiting the strong and growing synergy

between strategic capabilities and the

domain of Space. In fact, its commander,

Admiral James O. Ellis Jr. says: “I submit to

you that what are often described as Space

capabilities can easily be viewed as part of

the nation’s strategic capabilities.” 

What we are witnessing and participating

in is a change in outlook — a change in the

way we think about, prepare for, and conduct war. For the first time, most every

capability of modern warfare will be resident within one command — this is a decidedly bold, new idea, one that has the potential to serve the nation well for decades. 

The next few years will be an exciting

time in the Space mission area. Each day

brings with it new revelations of the vast

potential Space holds. During the Oct. 9

ribbon-cutting for our new Army Space

Command Headquarters facility on

Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado

Springs, I quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson,

the American essayist, poet, and philosopher, who eloquently captured the essence

of new beginnings when he wrote — “I had

an almost intolerable awareness that every

morning began with infinite promise. Any

book may be read, any idea thought, any

action taken.... On a day no different from

the one that has just begun, Shakespeare sat

down to begin writing Hamlet.” As you read

through the articles in this edition of The

Army Space Journal, I hope you will think

about what you are doing today, and what

you are going to do tomorrow to leverage all

that Space can do for our military. 

SECURE THE HIGH GROUND 

Eye of the Beholder ... from Page 15

LTC Brad Baehr serves as the chief of concepts and

initiatives for the Space Directorate of the Army

Space and Missile Defense Battle Lab. His professional experience includes Field Artillery MLRS

Battalion Executive Officer and multiple firing battery

commands in the Continental U.S., and Korea. He

served as Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff of the

Army and as liaison officer to the French Army. He

is a qualified Space Operations Officer. 
45

Field Impact ... from Page 11

Space Support Element. Baehr is the

senior Functional Area 40 officer for

Millennium Challenge 02. “Army

Space, the Space and Missile Defense

Battle Lab and Force Development

Integration Center have formed a

strong team of soldiers and civilians

coupled with leading-edge technology

and operational concepts to support

the SMDC MC02 initiatives.”

This idea of a Joint Force having

the rapid access of gathered and

stored information to predict an

adversary’s actions would dissuade

potential enemies and implement

diplomatic solutions before events

escalate to war.

“These initiatives will lay the

groundwork for Space operations in

the future,” said Kurt Reitinger, the

Space and Missile Defense Battle Lab

experiment manager. “The experiments we are conducting here are key

to the next several years of development. It’s great that SMDC can play

such an important role.”

Overall, four of the 12 Army initiatives are being sponsored by

SMDC. The Tactical Space Initiative,

which includes the Broadcast Remote

Imagery Technology Experiment

(BRITE) and the Embedded National

Tactical Receiver (ENTR), examines

the composition of tactics, techniques, and procedures of Space asset

support to headquarters. TacSpace is

an umbrella initiative that includes

numerous concepts and initiatives.

The centerpiece of TacSpace is the

Space Support Element, which

includes a six-soldier team of Space

operations soldiers. This team, which

is designed to be an integral part of

the future division staff, provides key

input to the development of the supported unit’s plan. The team uses the

Space Support Element Toolset,

which is a collection of hardware systems and software applications, to

accomplish this mission.

Other initiatives include the

Spectral Information Initiative which

provides mobile, commercial, highresolution satellite imagery; indirect

field tasking of sensors; direct data

downlink; and advanced processing of

spectral data to create improved battlespace visualization for tactical users.

This initiative will evaluate Eagle

Vision II, Mobile Processing/

Exploitation/Dissemination

(MoPED) platforms, and the Spectral

Operations Resource Center. The

Army Space Program Office is sponsoring the National Imagery Client

and Tactical Exploitation of National

Capabilities, Multiple Unified

Simulation Environment (TENCAP

MUSE) initiatives.

What the SSE operators do is not

“sexy” as far as Army operations go.

It’s not as glamorous as an airborne

drop or a live-fire event, but it’s just as

important to the success of the mission.

“We are integrating new and

emerging technology into the tactical

environment, such as wireless Internet

connectivity,” said Bannister, a member of the 1st Space Battalion. “I am

responsible for ensuring voice, data,

and fax communications, as well as

maintaining the computer hardware

and software.” Bannister also produces global positioning system accuracy charts and over-fly reports from

satellite imagery.

SGT Brandi Harris, a topographic

analyst for the Spectral Operations

Resource Center, makes maps of the

battlefield from raw images she pulls

down from satellites.

“We take a high-resolution image

from the satellite and then draw in

annotations that will help the decision-makers,” Harris said. “For this

exercise, we took an image of the

drop zone at the NTC and drew in the

flight path. We included elevation and

other information that showed the

warfighters in the field what they

needed to know about the area.”

Harris is assigned to Headquarters

and Headquarters Company, Army

Space Command. The SORC supports the G-3.

Behind the scenes, 1LT Angela

Johnson, the team’s communications

officer and co-battle captain, verifies

that the external networks are working.

“The first thing I do is check all

the phones,” Johnson said. “Then I

check with G-6 to see if there are any

problems with their system that might

affect us. We check e-mail to see if we

are getting operational updates.

“The team provides warfighters

with Space-based capabilities such as

near real-time imagery, satellite constellation health and notional Space

control,” Johnson said. “This is the

first time we have been part of the

decision-making process at the division level. We provided more visibility with our Space Support Element.

We can add value to just about every

staff element because they can use the

information we provide to make better decisions.”

“All the products of Space —

navigation, communication, warning,

and intelligence — will be key products for the U.S. Army Objective

Force, which will be a much lighter

and more lethal force,” said SMDC

Commanding General LTG Joseph

M. Cosumano Jr. “And for it to

accomplish this mission, it must be

able to see first, understand first, and

then finish decisively. And Space will

enable that force to do that.”

Debra Valine is a public affairs specialist in

the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense

Command and functions as the editor of

The Eagle. She retired from the Army in

1997 after a tour as the chief of Army newspapers at the Pentagon. Following retirement, she worked for three years as the

editor of the only weekly newspaper in

NASA before accepting her current position

in SMDC.

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal
46 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

an exercise event with a real-world event.

Given that the ARSPOC continues its

wartime mission in support of Operation

Enduring Freedom and Operation Noble

Eagle regardless of exercises, this tool

became vitally important.

Due to real-world events, we were

unable to position a Space operations systems in the ARSPOC. The Space

Operations Officers in the field needed

the computer, so there were no spares for

test purposes in the operations center. As

more systems are procured, we will be

able to secure one for test and evaluation.

This experiment is at the top of the priority list for testing in future exercises. We

believe that this capability could be the

shortest new path from field Space officers to sanctuary for reachback support.

These experiments provided valuable

insight in how to modernize the technologies in the ARSPOC. Our work with

SMDBL brought to light concepts we had

not considered possible before. As Army

Space Command stands ready to assume

increased missions with the establishment

of the U.S. Northern Command and the

new U.S. Strategic Command, the need to

expand our command and control capabilities is clear. We are compelled by our

responsibility to the Space community

and to those who use Space products to

evolve into an operations center that can

rapidly turn around requests for any

Space-based product. MCO2 was the

first step in the long-term transformation

of the ARSPOC as we strive in the near

term to remain equipped, trained, and

ready.

Experimentation ... from Page 21

Initiative teams also had to plan, coordinate, and execute training for system

operators. This training was completed

during the months leading up to the main

experiment in July-August.

Logistics

Coordination of logistic planning

proved key to obtaining appropriate support at Fort Bragg for SMDC initiatives.

Initial requirements were passed to the

XVIII Airborne Corps lead exercise planner several months prior to execution. 

A reconnaissance of the experiment

site in January proved critical to understanding exact needs. SMDC requirements

then were formally requested by memorandum and they included transportation,

storage, work areas, power, and maintenance support.

Lessons Learned

Multiple insights — in experimentation

management and in tactical arenas — were

gained by SMDC’s Space experimentation

in MC02. In terms of experimentation

planning and management, several items

were identified as vital to success:

· Initiative objectives must be specific

and realistic.

· Objectives must be linked to Army

experiment objectives.

· Planners must develop for each initiative a solid concept of operations and a

simple chart with which to communicate

(referred to as a synopsis chart).

Lessons learned range across Space functional areas and echelons of command in the

DTLOMS categories. Analysis of data gathered will proceed for several months while

follow-on implementation of insights may

take even longer. In the near term, however,

SMDC’s Force Development and

Integration Center (FDIC) is charged with

providing a quick-look report to the commanding general, SMDC in September that

requires significant input provided by

SMDBL. Both FDIC and SMDBL will publish final reports by the end of the calendar

year that will serve as documentation for

specific DTLOMS actionable items.

Conclusion

MC02 was a big success for SMDC

experimentation with more than 50 personnel deployed throughout the continental

United States in support of multiple echelons of command. The experiments conducted will be key to the next several years of

initiative development. Overall, MC02 was a

great example of achieving the command’s

motto to “secure the high ground!”

RDO ... from Page 23

tional information, which was less than

three hours old. Intelligence staff personnel stated that spectral information

was a great capability that should become

complementary and enabling to the intelligence effort.

The initiative assessment examined

the value of having a user-focused,

warfighter-friendly, spectral imagery system that integrates spectral information

into the ground and Joint Forces C4ISR

(Command, Control, Communications,

Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance,

and Reconnaissance) architecture. The

assessment examined the effectiveness of

tasking, collecting, processing, exploiting,

and disseminating intelligence information related to the use of spectral information. 

Spectral information proved to be an

advanced enabler that enhanced battlespace knowledge for the ground component and Joint Forces. Benefits included

improvements in situational awareness,

ARSPOC ... from Page 33

LTC Mary Miller is a mobilized reservist currently

serving in the Operations Division of Army Space

Command G3. She served eight years on active

duty and the last 13 years in the reserve component, with assignments including the 372nd ASA

Company, 125th Military Intelligence Battalion, the

U.S. Army Intelligence Center and a tour with Joint

Task Force Six in support of the U.S. Marshal’s

Office in Denver. 
47

Battle Captain ... from Page 35

but invaluable tool that the battle captains maintained daily in order for the

SSE to support the Army Forces in

accomplishing its mission and finish

decisively. 

Finally, the battle captains conducted numerous other duties that

enhanced the SSE’s ability to accomplish its mission. The battle captains

assisted the team leader in briefing the

rest of the SSE on battle updates and

in ensuring that everyone knew their

place in the common operating picture. Battle captains also conducted the

shift changeover brief. This brief

updated the incoming SSE shift on all

significant activities that had occurred

during the last shift. The last task of

the day for the battle captains was to

write and submit the situational report

to the Army Space Operations Center.

Battle captains performed these tasks

because they usually had the best grasp

on the battlefield situation and the

most information on what everyone

was working on in the SSE.

In summary, ARSST 5 was given

the mission to enable the Objective

Force to see first, understand first,

decide first, and then act decisively. In

order to accomplish this mission,

ARSST 5 had to transition to become

a Space Support Element and learn

new and different ways of supporting

the warfighter. One of the new duty

positions created by the SSE was the

battle captain position. They proved

invaluable in helping to set up this

transition and then in managing the

enormous amounts of information

that the SSE received during MC02.

Valuable insight was gained by the battle captains that helped determine

future requirements for Space support

elements based on the lessons they

learned during MC02.

John McMurray is the spectral imagery program

manager at L-3Com Analytics Corporation and

supports Army Space and Missile Defense

Command in Colorado Springs, Colo. Retiring

from the Army in 1995, he served as Senior

Engineer for the Sinai Peacekeeping Force and

as Director of Current Operations for Army

Space Command. He performed Army demonstrations of Global Broadcast Service, and

coordinated ground operations for the Air Force

Research Lab Warfighter-1 hyperspectral satellite program.

Russ Robinson serves in the Concepts and

Initiatives Division of the U.S. Army Space and

Missile Defense Battle Lab in Colorado Springs,

Colo. A Vietnam veteran, aircraft maintenance

officer, and rotary wing aviator who retired from

the Army in 1992, he also served as Assistant

Program Manager in the Aircraft Survivability

Equipment Program Office and the Apache

Program Office, as Operational Test Officer in

OTEA and as an International Research &

Development Coordinator in Germany.

CPT Bob Barrett is the operations officer for

Army Space Support Team 5 and currently

serves in Kuwait in support of Operation

Enduring Freedom. He served two years at

Fort Hood, Texas, as a platoon leader in B/2-

7 CAV and a member of brigade staff in

3BDE, 1st Cavalry Division, before joining

U.S. Army Space Command. 

1LT Angela Johnson is the communications

officer for Army Space Support Team 5 and

currently serves in Kuwait in support of

Operation Enduring Freedom. She was

enlisted in the Minnesota Army National

Guard for six years prior to accepting an

active duty commission. She served for one

year as the executive officer for A Company

122D Signal Battalion on Camp Red Cloud,

Korea, before joining U.S. Army Space

Command. 

Fall 2002 Army Space Journal

common operating picture, military

decision-making process, intelligence

cycle, targeting, and battle damage

assessment. Such improvements yield

information superiority, and help enable

the agile decision making required to

conduct rapid decisive operations, seize

the initiative, maintain momentum, and

exploit success. Initial results of the

MC02 experience indicate that spectral

information can enable Army transformation by improving the information

superiority of an extended, light and fast

ground force.
48 Army Space Journal Fall 2002

Joint Space Support ... from Page 37

nating in the main exercise. This process

gave the SIOE members a chance to test

various procedures to get a feel for what

worked and what needed improvement.

Between the spirals, the SIOE team members refined their procedures and then went

into the main exercise with a better idea of

the path they needed to take to be successful.

Part of the experiment of MC02 was to

have all the major components (air, land,

maritime, special operations, psychological

operations, and the JTF) geographically

separated. The components still were able

to carry out planning and synchronization

of efforts by using collaborative planning.

The collaboration was done by using Info

Work Space. 

Since the SIOE had some of its members geographically separated, the Info

Work Space was instrumental in allowing

the SIOE to complete its mission. Using

the Info Work Space and e-mail allowed the

SIOE members at the components, the

JTF, and reachback cell to stay in real-time

contact for more effective synchronization.

The Info Work Space also allowed the

Army Space Command Space Support

Element (SSE) located at Fort Bragg, N.C.,

to communicate in real time with all of the

other Space players participating in MC02.

The Info Work Space is a series of

servers and workstations designed to produce a virtual office environment. There

are meeting rooms, file cabinets, white

boards, etc. Everything found in a normal

office building is accessible. This allows

geographically separated components, or in

this case the SIOE, to do collaborative

planning. All one has to do to have a meeting is pick a room and a time and notify the

desired participants. The attendees can talk

back and forth, share slides, and use a white

board to demonstrate concepts. Info Work

Space allowed the components and the JTF

to plan in parallel. This parallel planning

produced for a greatly reduced planning

cycle. Any difference between the overall

JTF campaign plan and the component’s

plan for execution could be quickly ironed

out in real time using Info Work Space.

This successfully demonstrated that the

need for all of the components to be collocated could be eliminated. 

U.S. Space Command developed an

assessment plan for MC02. This plan was

used to document lessons learned and

shortfalls in techniques, tactics, and procedures; highlight the successful areas; and

assess the overall success of the SIOE concept. As with any new concept, its testing

produces necessary refinements and modifications. While the assessment plan designated some changes in the way SIOE support is provided, but U.S. Space Command

determined that the SIOE concept added

greatly to the JTF staff and the success of

MC02 operations.

So how does this impact the Functional

Area (FA) 40/SSE in the field? By design,

the SIOE will provide a focal point across

the JTF for the coordination of Space

activities and information. The SIOE will

be the conduit for the FA 40/SSE to comprehend the strategic plan for the employment of Space/IO assets in support of

effects-based operations. Any questions,

concerns, or ideas that the FA 40/SSE may

have about the Space/IO campaign will be

directed to the SIOE.

Senior mentors and senior experiment

officials agreed that Space/CNO/IO are

combat multipliers and will be in great

demand in future operations. MC02 provided a good starting point for U.S. Space

Command forces as they plan for support

in future real-world operations and participation in future series of experiments.

MC02 allowed U.S. Space Command to

show to the rest of the military how

Space/CNO/IO are crucial to achieving

desired effects on the modern digital battlefield.

Matt Scott serves as an action officer in G-3 Plans,

Space Branch, Army Space Command. His professional experience includes satellite command

and control operations for Lockheed Martin

Technical Operations on several different satellite

systems and seven years as an Air Force Space

Operations Officer in the missile warning and

Space surveillance fields.

MC02 allowed U.S. Space Command to show

to the rest of the military how Space/CNO/IO

are crucial to achieving desired effects on the

modern digital battlefield.
MC02 showed that Space expertise and Space-based

capabilities have a key role in enabling the Objective

Force as a part of Joint operations.

— BG Richard V. Geraci

Above: A Stryker combat vehicle goes through its paces. The Stryker was one of many pieces of equipment

involved in MC02. 

PHOTO COURTESY U.S. ARMY

Our participation in MC02 underscored the importance

of experimentation, and that to be relevant, we must

remain active in future Joint experimentation. ...
UPCOMING JOURNAL THEMES

Winter 2003 — “The Role of Space in Army Transformation”

Spring 2003 — “The Army’s Future in Space”

Summer 2003 — “Space Technology — Where is it Leading 

Ground Forces?”

Fall 2003 — “Focus on Space Operations”

Through experiments such as Millennium Challenge 2002 (conducted

from July 24 to Aug. 15), we are able to demonstrate and assess the

“values-added” of innovative capabilities and new operational concepts. 

— LTG Joseph M. Cosumano Jr.

Army Transformation Experiment 2002 was an Army segment

of the larger joint experiment Millennium Challenge 2002, held

at Fort Bragg, N.C. In the next issue of the Army Space

Journal, we will focus on the Army’s Transformation and the

role Space will play within it.