Executive Orders, Organizational Realignment to Streamline Acquisition Process 

 When a foreign country seeks a military technology from a defense contractor in the United States, there are two ways for them to acquire that capability: Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) and Foreign Military Sales (FMS). Under DCS, the foreign country negotiates directly with the contractor. Under FMS, the U.S. government manages the sale with training and sustainment included. Which process is used depends on the technology, the partner nation and the policy considerations involved. But a recent surge in demand is challenging the current FMS process, resulting in two recent executive orders aiming to reform and modernize the program. 

“There’s been FMS reform initiatives before, but what’s unique now is the executive orders are coming directly from the President,” said Heidi Grant, Executive Partner at Elara Nova and the former Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force for International Affairs (SAF/IA), and former Director of both the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) and the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA).  

One key advantage of FMS over DCS is what Grant calls the “total package approach,” where the U.S. government ensures the sale includes training and sustainment across the lifecycle of the capability. 

While many critics, including senior U.S. leaders, have characterized the system as “broken,” the reality is more nuanced. The Foreign Military Sales process was deliberately designed to be thorough, ensuring that each transfer aligns with U.S. strategic, security and foreign policy interests. The challenge is not that the system fails to function, but that it was not built for the scale, speed and technological complexity of current demand. 

How the FMS Process Works 

The FMS process begins at U.S. embassies, where trained security cooperation officials, known as military groups or “milgroups,” help partner nations determine whether FMS is required and initiate the process. 

“DSCA — the Pentagon agency that administers the entire FMS enterprise — routes the request to the appropriate implementing agency,” Grant said. “For Air Force or Space Force, that agency is the Secretary of the Air Force for International Affairs (SAF/IA), who coordinates with the defense contractor to add the order to an existing production line, apply any required configurations and manage the delivery.” 

Brad Head, Managing Director of International Partnerships at Elara Nova, saw this process firsthand as Chief of the Office of Defense Cooperation in Brussels.  

“Belgium selected F-35s to replace its F-16s with a 5th-generation capability,” Head said. “DSCA sent that request to the F-35 Joint Program Office, which coordinated with Lockheed Martin to add Belgium’s order to the existing production run with Belgium’s unique configuration. Then the U.S. government took ownership of the jets and transferred them to Belgium with the appropriate training and sustainment package.” 

Belgium acquired a world-class capability with the support needed to sustain it. NATO’s collective defense posture was strengthened, and adding partner demand to the production program helped reduce costs for the United States. 

Why the System is Struggling to Keep Pace 

Allies and partners are seeking not only traditional weapons systems, but also emerging technologies in areas like unmanned systems, cyber and space. The Brussels-based think tank Bruegel found that European FMS cases reached a record $76 billion in 2024, roughly four times the European average since 2008. This surge is challenging the FMS program in several ways. 

First, the Defense, State and Commerce departments must agree the transfer serves U.S. strategic interests. Each brings a different lens, and when they cannot reach agreement, decisions can stall or escalate to the Cabinet level.  

Second, export control regimes add complexity. ITAR and EAR govern defense and dual-use technology transfers, while multilateral agreements like the MTCR impose additional restrictions. These controls protect sensitive technologies, but they can also restrict capabilities that did not exist when the regulations were written. Even a single restricted component embedded in an otherwise releasable system can prevent a sale. 

Third, contractors must balance U.S. production requirements against surging international demand.  

“Industry cannot invest in additional production capacity until a firm order justifies it,” Grant said. “A partner may place an order for a critical system, only to learn the delivery timeline is seven years because the production line is already committed. Munitions offer a clear example — demand has surged beyond what current production lines can support.”  

These challenges compound. Delays in interagency decisions slow export licensing, which creates uncertainty for industry and limits investment in production capacity. Friction at each stage reinforces the next, extending timelines even for cases aligned with U.S. strategic priorities. 

Executive Orders to Reform the Process 

The first executive order, signed in April 2025, targets several of these bottlenecks directly. 

The order directs Defense, State and Commerce to create a joint priority list for partners and end-items, establishing shared priorities up front and calls for a review of the MTCR to reclassify certain technologies. 

“The ‘exportability by design’ mandate is significant,” Grant said. “It directs the defense industrial base to build capabilities eligible for export from the outset, rather than requiring costly modifications after the fact.”  

The order also streamlines congressional notifications and creates an electronic tracking system giving foreign buyers and U.S. industry visibility into where a case stands. 

Separately, the Air Force is also accelerating approvals through the “STAR Baseline,” a classified document that pre-determines which technologies the U.S. is willing to export. 

“The STAR Baseline short-circuits the process,” Head said. “It decides ahead of time what we are willing to export to a country, so that the U.S. doesn’t have to start a review from scratch every time an FMS request comes in. Technologies not covered by the baseline still require a broader interagency review that can take weeks or months.” 

A second executive order, signed in February 2026, aims to shape the demand signal that drives sales in the first place.  

“This executive order directs the Defense, State and Commerce secretaries to develop a prioritized sales catalog, or a proactive menu of capabilities reflecting both the industrial and strategic priorities of the U.S.,” Grant said. “This catalog signals to allies what the U.S. would like them to buy, while a new Promoting American Military Sales Task Force and mandatory quarterly performance data will increase accountability.” 

This reflects a broader shift: rather than responding to partner demand as it emerges, the U.S. is signaling preferred capabilities and partners in advance, shaping demand to align with its strategic and industrial priorities. 

Organizational Realignment to Empower Acquisition Officials 

The U.S. government’s reform efforts extend beyond executive orders. DSCA and DTSA — previously under the Pentagon’s policy directorate — will now move under the acquisition and sustainment directorate. This reflects a shift from FMS as primarily a foreign policy tool to a core function of the defense industrial enterprise. 

“The head of acquisition will now be responsible for managing FMS timelines and resolving trade-offs between U.S. and international deliveries against current demands,” Grant said. “This also gives senior leaders from partner nations a single point of entry, rather than having to navigate between the policy and acquisition sides of the Pentagon.” 

The move will carry strategic implications for future military programs that require allied support.  

“The U.S. is acknowledging that it can’t do everything, everywhere,” Head said. “As the U.S. builds global architectures like Golden Dome, allies and partners will be required to contribute systems based in their own countries. Allied acquisition will be central going forward and placing those agencies under the same leadership that manages U.S. acquisition ensures those two tracks can be coordinated.” 

The Unique Challenge of Space Security Cooperation 

These challenges are most acute in space, where demand is accelerating and the supporting processes are least mature.  

“Until recently, space was the exclusive domain of a handful of nations,” Head said. “But with launch costs coming down and the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East underscoring space as a critical component of multi-domain operations, allied demand is surging.” 

Unlike mature FMS programs for fighter jets or air defense systems, the U.S. does not have a well-established catalog of space capabilities it is actively offering to allies. Outside of a few existing programs like Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS), most space cooperation is what Head described as “a handmade wooden shoe” — or a custom-made capability. 

U.S. embassies also lack space-smart personnel to guide partner nations.  

“You either need a list of things you’re selling or you need experts on the front line, and we currently don’t have either one,” Head said. 

Likewise, the space domain also faces a funding challenge. A surcharge on every FMS sale funds the personnel, training programs and institutional support that underpins the security cooperation process. But there is currently not enough space cases to generate the revenue needed to sustain a space-focused workforce, leading SAF/IA and DSCA to identify seed funding to address this problem. 

Grant noted this tension is not without precedent.  

“When we were selling F-15s to partner nations, uniformed pilots were needed in U.S. cockpits and couldn’t be spared for international training missions,” she said. “The solution was contracted training support. It’s the same tension right now with guardians. We need them working U.S. priorities, and at the same time we need to build enough of them to support the international business.” 

In this sense, space is not an exception to the FMS system, but rather an early indicator of where the entire enterprise is heading. As demand for advanced, rapidly evolving technologies grows across domains, the challenges seen in space today are likely to emerge more broadly across the security cooperation landscape. 

How Elara Nova Supports the Process 

As the FMS system evolves, the challenge will be translating reform into execution across government, industry and international partners. Elara Nova brings experience from within the security cooperation enterprise, including leadership roles at DSCA, SAF/IA and on the front lines of defense cooperation. 

For the U.S. government, the firm helps fill capacity gaps where the security cooperation workforce is stretched thin. For allies and partners, it translates requirements into cases the system can act on. For industry, it maps the export control landscape before companies invest in markets they may not be accessible. Elara Nova provides the insight to navigate the system and the experience to deliver results. 

Elara Nova is a trusted guiding partner that builds tailored teams to illuminate unseen opportunities and deliver impact across every domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/ 

An Upgraded Network to Better Integrate Emerging Technologies, Counter Evolving Threats 

The Department of War (DOW) kick-started the year with a series of steps to enhance the resiliency and reliability of the digital infrastructure underpinning military operations. In early January, the United States Space Force announced it will be overhauling computer networks at all 14 of its bases under the Base Infrastructure Modernization program. Then the National Security Agency released the first two products of its Zero Trust Implementation Guidelines, while the DOW launched its Artificial Intelligence Acceleration Strategy. Altogether, these actions demonstrate the growing imperative to prepare the DOW’s digital infrastructure to take advantage of emerging technologies and counter evolving threats. 

“Space and cyberspace are inextricably linked: the foundation of warfighting in space is dependent on having a secure digital infrastructure on the ground,” said Gen (Ret) Tim Haugh, a Senior Principal Advisor at Elara Nova and the former Commander of United States Cyber Command. “Digital infrastructure is the computing infrastructure that every Guardian and Airman leverages when they connect to the Department of War networks. If the Department doesn’t upgrade these systems, they can become vulnerable where a vendor can no longer support them, which adds risk through technology debt, less functionality and an inability to integrate weapon systems into national security architectures.” 

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, “digital infrastructure” is defined as ​​”the ability to store and exchange data through a centralized communication system.” As such, the Base Infrastructure Modernization program aims to create a unified and secure network and communication system across all Air Force and Space Force bases worldwide.  

“Whether it’s to conduct space operations or air operations on the flight line, those capabilities require a digital infrastructure that is powerful enough to win the fight and provide a user experience that enables success,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “This investment is critical because it sets a clear set of standards for the defense industrial base to build and field new capabilities as the threat environment changes. Modernizing the digital infrastructure will also lay the foundation for integrating future capabilities like artificial intelligence and establishing the compute power required at the network edge.” 

The Vulnerabilities of an Aging Digital Infrastructure 

Space Force leaders recognize that threats in cyberspace are constantly emerging and evolving, heightening the imperative for resilient and reliable systems. General Stephen Whiting, Commander of United States Space Command, once referred to cybersecurity as the “soft underbelly” of space operations. 

“One of the key elements adversaries would exploit are vulnerable and aging systems, and that’s why upgrading them is critically important,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “China has shown that if vulnerabilities exist, they will take advantage of them. We would likely see similar attacks on our military bases that we’ve seen China take against critical infrastructure in the United States: going after infrastructure like water treatment, energy generation and critical functions inside of telecommunications or networks.” 

The task order for the Space Force’s modernization efforts, to the tune of $12.5 billion, follows a similar task order for Air Force bases to receive advanced wired and wireless technology upgrades that will enhance connectivity, cybersecurity, interoperability and data readiness at bases across the Pacific theater. It will be processed as an Enterprise-IT-as-a-Service solution through an Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity contract designed to streamline modernization to adapt to a quickly and constantly evolving threat. 

“The idea behind Enterprise-IT-as-a-Service is to leverage industry expertise to bring in current technology to build and maintain our digital infrastructure, allowing Airmen and Guardians to focus on other critical warfighting operations and missions,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “The first component to these upgrades is to provide the foundation to meet the mission needs of the Space Force and the Air Force and ensure the network can support their operations. Then the second component is to ensure the architecture is defendable and in compliance with Department of War policies for cybersecurity.” 

An aging digital infrastructure also increases the vulnerability of a “zero-day” attack that can be difficult to detect and often lead to data breaches and compromises, much like the recent disclosure by Ivanti that affected several government agencies and Allied partners.  

“Increasingly enabled by artificial intelligence, adversaries are going to be looking for vulnerabilities at every one of these networks and they will take advantage of them if they see them,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “Once inside a network, adversaries will look to compromise the identity of key system administrators that have privileged accounts to move laterally and ensure that they would retain deep access to our networks for future targeting. This is the reality of today’s operating environment, so it’s critical to upgrade our digital infrastructure and implement zero trust to defeat or complicate their ability to take on different identities within DOW networks.” 

A Foundation for Zero Trust and AI 

The modernization effort will also lay the foundation for implementing a new zero trust framework to enhance the resiliency and reliability of the Department of War’s network.  

“Zero trust is an approach that is founded on the assumption that your perimeter is going to be breached,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “Zero trust creates an operating environment with the least privileged access, which means only giving access to data, applications, tools and infrastructure to an authorized individual only during the period of time in which they’re authorized to operate.  

This approach makes sure that not only are you secure and resilient at the network edge, because you still won’t lose security of the entire network if one of your team members is compromised.” 

Toward this end, the National Security Agency (NSA) recently unveiled its Zero Trust Implementation Guidelines, beginning with its two initial phases: Primer and Discovery Phase. 

“NSA has coordinated all the necessary activities to implement a zero trust architecture into five parts,” Haugh said, who previously served as the Director of the National Security Agency. “The first phase, Primer, helps organizations understand which modules to begin with for laying out zero trust implementation to meet the Department’s expectations. The Discovery Phase is about creating visibility and understanding the data, applications and the assets that are within your architecture.” 

A fully implemented zero trust architecture can then create pathways for integrating emerging technologies like artificial intelligence in a way that will be reliable and secure. That’s in part why the DOW simultaneously released its Artificial Intelligence Acceleration Strategy that laid out seven “Pace-Setting Projects” across three mission areas: Warfighting, Intelligence, and Enterprise. 

“The Department’s strategy requires a secure and capable digital infrastructure to grow the compute capacity needed for greater implementation of artificial intelligence,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “Everything AI does – from running algorithms or using agents and autonomous capabilities – requires the power to compute. You can get that compute through on-base servers and data centers or cloud providers that are part of the overall architecture. This strategy intends to make that compute available to every Guardian and every Airman, regardless of the type of contested environment they’re in.”  

Digital Infrastructure and Golden Dome 

Artificial intelligence and the autonomous processing of trusted, effective and secure data will also be instrumental to future military operations, particularly for homeland defense initiatives like Golden Dome.   

“The biggest challenge for Golden Dome is the diversity of threats: the Department is prepared for specific scenarios of certain threats, but the nature and speed of those threats are diversifying,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “But Golden Dome demands a command and control structure that is always on, always available and integrated with the right data sources to have situational awareness that can provide the right data to the decision-maker, enabling the ability to execute command and control in real-time to mitigate and defeat those threats. The digital infrastructure is what will tie every sensor, base and shooter to deliver the command and control structure necessary for Golden Dome.” 

General Mike Guetlein, the Director of Golden Dome, has expressed that command and control is his first priority. Like all space and military operations, command and control requires a trusted and secure digital infrastructure at its foundation. That’s why Elara Nova has now established its Cyber, Data & Communications business sector to support industry in delivering the secure and trusted solutions that will empower the warfighter to deliver on mission requirements across domains.  

“Elara Nova offers a deep portfolio of cyber experts that have served across all elements of our intelligence community and military services,” Gen (Ret) Haugh said. “When combined with all of the air and space experts in our portfolio, Elara Nova brings a unique set of talents to bear on hard, cross-domain problems like Golden Dome. Our experts have served in both the Department and industry, which makes them an invaluable resource to accelerating integration of data and emerging technologies in a way that will produce a successful outcome for our nation.” 

Elara Nova is a trusted guiding partner that builds tailored teams to illuminate unseen opportunities and deliver impact across every domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/.    

Resourcing Strong and Capable Space Force Begins with Budget Reform

The United States Space Force requested $29.4 billion for Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25), a two percent drop from the previous year. The final budget, however, has yet to be passed as the federal government is operating under a continuing resolution that expires in mid-March. While the Space Force was founded in response to the actions of near-peer competitors in space that threatened the United States’ national and economic security, declines in funding for the Space Force, compounded by the inherent restrictions of continuing resolutions and the financial burdens of legacy defense programs, are compromising the Space Force’s ability to effectively resource against the space-based threat. 

“A continuing resolution means we don’t have a budget for this fiscal year, and so we have to comply with last year’s budget limits and existing programs,” said General (Ret) John E. Hyten, Senior Principal Advisor at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy. “This means no new start programs can begin and any other programs that require a budget increase to deliver a needed capability can’t be executed. Therefore, several space programs are consistently delayed and this inefficiency wastes billions of taxpayer dollars.” 

The Space Force has been in existence for a little over five years, or about 60 months. For roughly half that time, the Space Force has been operating under a continuing resolution. This can provide significant barriers for a new military service seeking to adopt rapidly evolving technologies. 

An Underfunded Space Force 

But even if a budget for FY25 was passed by now, the traditional approach to developing the Department of Defense (DOD) budget means the Space Force would still only receive a marginal amount of funding it needs. 

“Traditionally, the DOD budget is typically carved out in thirds,” said Lieutenant General (Ret) Nina Armagno, executive director of international partnerships at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy. “One third goes to the Department of the Army, another to the Department of the Navy and the Marine Corps, and a final third to the Department of the Air Force, which includes funding for the Space Force and the intelligence community. But this approach means the Space Force only garners about three percent of the overall DoD budget – that’s harmful to our national security.” 

Space capabilities underpin joint force and military operations in other domains, and recent adversarial actions demonstrate they are developing their own space capabilities to threaten the United States’ national and economic security. That’s why, in a recent Opinion Editorial co-written by Gen Hyten and Gen Armagno published by SpaceNews, they argued it’s time for the DOD budget to refocus away from outdated legacy programs to reflect the modern, space-based threat. 

“The defense budget should be all about responding to the threats right now, and the most significant threat is China building strategic air and space capabilities to challenge the United States in the Pacific,” Gen Hyten said. “The second is Russia, which is probably even more concerning in the near-term. Russia has realized the American way of war depends on space capabilities and that’s why President Vladimir Putin has threatened to deploy and perhaps employ a nuclear weapon in low-Earth orbit.” 

A Changing Threat Landscape in Space 

Russia’s threat to deploy a nuclear weapon in space comes in response to the United States’ shift toward proliferated architectures in the domain.  

“Russia spent an enormous amount of treasure and time building a direct ascent anti-satellite [ASAT] capability that would take out one satellite,” Gen Hyten said. “But then in the early stages of the Ukranian conflict, a commercial company with a proliferated satellite architecture essentially rendered the ASAT capability useless. Now, Putin has to threaten that capability with a nuclear weapon because he’s got nothing else in the inventory, so we need to pay attention to what our adversaries are doing to fill any voids.” 

Therefore, as the nature of warfare and the threat landscape has changed, so too should the budgeting process. 

“The first thing an adversary will do is take out the ‘eyes and ears’ of the United States in space,” Gen Hyten said. “This will be followed by cyber influence and chemical or biological warfare that will insert doubt into the American population about our military’s ability to achieve its objectives. Then an adversary will challenge the United States with military force because now the doubt is across the American people. That’s how conflict could start and defending ourselves against those threats should be the highest priorities reflected in the budget.” 

Defense Spending Declines Undercut Strategy 

Further exacerbating this shortfall in necessary funding, however, is the broader decline in recent defense spending by the United States Congress. In 2022, U.S. defense spending came in at just over 3.4% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the Congressional Budget Office forecasts this decrease will continue toward 2.5% GDP by 2034. For context, these percentages are lower than the running 4.2% average for total defense spending in the United States over the past half-century.  

“The FY25 budget request being essentially flat was a huge failure, and even Former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said the Space Force budget should probably double,” Gen Armagno said. “Every indication is that the Space Force budget needs to grow, because the Space Force is acquiring new capabilities and new technologies for new missions. Any delay to those Space Force programs is significant, particularly for its support to the entire joint force.” 

The budget process begins with developing a strategy based on the threat, but when there is not enough funding to acquire the capabilities needed to fulfill the strategy’s broader goals, difficult decisions must be made on prioritizing certain programs or capabilities. This results in program cuts that can compromise the joint force. 

“We learned in the early days of standing up the Space Force that there were tough choices for funding the new service,” Gen Armagno said. “For example, we prioritized Space Domain Awareness under a strategy called ‘Pivot to SDA.’ But we soon realized that there were competing space priorities and requirements from the other military services and Congress, against limited available funding. Without the appropriate funding, our budgets for ground-based radars and optical telescopes necessary for SDA got cut.” 

DOD, Congress Can Overcome Budget Challenges 

However, solutions exist for Congress and the DOD to effectively adapt its budget and force structure so that the United States can secure its national and economic security interests in space. 

“Congress writes the law that the president signs into action, but any law can be changed,” Gen Hyten said. “People think the acquisition program is inflexible. But the Federal Acquisition Regulations are the compilation of all the laws that have passed over the decades, and Congress can change the law for the benefit of the country. If the DOD educates Congress on what they’re trying to accomplish, Congress will do their utmost best to include those imperatives in the budget.” 

Gen Armagno points to two recent examples that reflect how the DOD and Congress previously worked together to overcome budget challenges to acquire necessary space capabilities: the Space Force’s Silent Barker program and former Secretary Kendall’s request for “Quick Start” approval for Resilient-GPS under a continuing resolution.  

“When I worked space programs in the Air Force, we successfully communicated with Congress and their staffers regarding a space-based situational awareness program called ‘Silent Barker,’ so Congress understood its priority and the acquisition strategy before the program was even announced,” Gen Armagno said. “Then another example is former Secretary Kendall working with Congress to get an exception to the ‘no new start’ rule under a continuing resolution for Resilient-GPS in the FY24 budget. It was a great idea, and more of that work needs to happen in working with the Hill, because laws can be changed.” 

Iron Dome Highlights Need to Fund Space Imperatives 

Now, a recently issued executive order from the Trump administration, “The Iron Dome for America,” will also require significant investment in space-based capabilities that must be incorporated into the Space Force budget. This new effort only strengthens the imperative for adapting the DOD’s budget and force structure according to the modern threat environment.  

“You can’t shoot anything you can’t see, so the first priority will be to build an integrated terrestrial and space-based surveillance system to see and characterize all the ballistic and hypersonic cruise missiles that threaten America,” Gen Hyten said. “Then you have to build a capability to attack multiple targets with ground-based, naval-based and air-based systems to neutralize those incoming threats, so you don’t have to respond in kind with nuclear weapons.”  

General Hyten points to further solutions already proposed in the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States in 2023. 

“The Missile Defense Agency needs to divest itself of all production and sustainment programs to the appropriate Military Departments. This means the Missile Defense Agency can just focus on the research and development for the long-term missile defense capabilities of the future. This can be done in the FY26 budget, but not if a majority of the MDA is focused on production sustainment and not on innovative moves toward the future.” 

Balancing the national security needs against the threat, so that they’re reflected in the budget, represents the complex problems Elara Nova and its partners are prepared to provide solutions for.  

“The budget must reflect the threat that’s out there today, and we need Space Force Guardians that understand the entire space enterprise,” Gen Hyten said.  “Elara Nova partners fill a critical void in providing that experience, expertise and analytic capability to developing the enterprise approach necessary for establishing the United States’ national and economic security in space.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Maneuver Without Regret, In-Space Assembly and Manufacturing Among Potential Use Cases 

In late 2024, the United States Space Force established the Space Power & Propulsion for Agility, Responsiveness & Resilience (SPAR) Institute with $35 million to develop nuclear-powered systems for spacecraft propulsion. The initiative demonstrates the latest effort by the Space Force, in partnership with the Air Force Reserarch Laboratory (AFRL), eight universities and 14 industry partners, to explore nuclear fission as an energy source in space. If successfully developed and deployed, nuclear-powered systems can unlock a broad range of capabilities: from ”maneuvering without regret” and in-space assembly and manufacturing (ISAM), to orbital clean-up and natural resource extraction. 

“Retired Lieutenant General John Shaw’s catchphrase ‘maneuver without regret,’ means we need to operate and maneuver satellites without compromising the satellite’s lifetime energy supply,” said Tom Cooley, PhD, partner at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy and former Chief Scientist at AFRL. “The current energy consumption costs of maneuvering space assets adversely affect the Space Force’s long-term capabilities. Nuclear energy has long been considered a potential solution, and the SPAR Institute will explore its viability.” 

Traditionally, maneuvering in space has been generated through electric or chemical propulsion. But both approaches have their respective limitations. 

“While electric propulsion is extremely efficient, it can’t generate enough power to change an orbit quickly, so it tends to be used for lower impulse per unit time activities like station-keeping,” said Brad Tousley, PhD, partner at Elara Nova and former director for the Tactical Technology Office at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). “Meanwhile, chemical propulsion rockets have greater impulse per unit time, but fuel is volume and weight-constrained by the spacecraft. So chemical propulsion requires the Space Force to address on-orbit refueling and logistical challenges.” 

Alternatively, nuclear fission carries both high-impulse thrust and low-consumption rate qualities. Nuclear fission works by splitting an atom’s nucleus within a controlled reactor to generate energy in a way that could revolutionize dynamic space operations.   

“Nuclear fission’s latent energy is simply far more per unit volume compared to electric or chemical power sources,” Dr. Tousley said. “Regulatory and safety issues still exist that can inhibit nuclear development and deployment. But from a physics and energy density perspective, nuclear power can change how we approach building resilient architectures and systems in space.” 

Therefore, nuclear-powered spacecraft are an attractive endeavor for both national security and civil space applications. 

“The Space Force is interested in nuclear energy because maneuvering to change orbits requires a lot of energy,” Dr. Cooley said. “Maneuverability can also enable in-space logistics, like on-orbit refueling or conducting maintenance repairs on a spacecraft. Then for NASA, human habitation on the moon requires a reliable source of energy, especially during the two-week lunar ‘night.’” 

Nuclear-Powered Systems vs. Nuclear Weapons 

Nuclear-powered systems are not nuclear weapons. Whereas a nuclear weapon splits an uranium or plutonium atom in an uncontrolled manner to maximize energy consumption, a nuclear reactor can house this same atom-splitting process in a way that generates a low-carbon, long-term energy source.  

It’s the same technological process leveraged by nuclear power plants and even the United States Navy. 

“There’s no better analogy for using nuclear power in space than how it changed the U.S. Navy’s global operations,” Dr. Tousley said. “The Navy went to nuclear-powered aircraft carriers because the infrastructure to supply carriers with conventional fossil fuels was burdened by long-distance deployments. So today’s Navy depends on nuclear energy for their global power projection.” 

To this end, developing and deploying similar nuclear reactor technology for space is legally within the bounds of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.  

“The 1967 Outer Space Treaty is clear that we must not put nuclear weapons in space,” Dr. Cooley said. “But a nuclear reactor simply uses nuclear technology to generate electricity. Some of the most successful NASA programs used radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs), which similarly leveraged nuclear technology for deep space or interplanetary exploration.” 

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Programs 

Historically, the United States has embarked on a series of research and development programs for nuclear energy in space. Nuclear-powered systems can be delineated in two ways, the first of which is nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP). In an NTP system, hydrogen fuel is used to split a uranium atom within a nuclear reactor to generate heat, which can create thrust. 

One of the earliest NTP efforts was the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application (NERVA) program, overseen by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). 

“NERVA aimed to develop an upper-stage rocket engine using nuclear thermal propulsion, because the heat generated by a nuclear reactor is much greater than the heat you get from a chemical reaction,” Donna Dickey, Elara Nova partner and aerospace engineer, formerly of AFRL and now supporting DARPA. “The NTP process generates twice the efficiency, while maintaining the thrust levels of a traditional chemical rocket – so it’s the best of both worlds. The NERVA program developed several nuclear reactors to be integrated into a rocket engine, and even started testing before the program ended in 1973.” 

While the nuclear-powered rocket engine NERVA developed was never launched into space, the program has been considered a successful proof of concept for nuclear thermal propulsion.  

Today, similarly-inspired DARPA programs have emerged, like the Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) and LunA-10 programs.  

“DRACO is focused on demonstrating nuclear thermal propulsion technology on-orbit,” Dr. Tousley said. “Effectively managing the excess heat a nuclear reaction generates continues to be a technical challenge that DARPA and NASA are working through, but the program is an effective example of how we can develop nuclear technology in a way that adheres to the Outer Space Treaty. Meanwhile, LunA-10 was a capability study of the lunar economy and how shared systems could benefit everyone, including nuclear power and propulsion.” 

Nuclear Electric Propulsion 

The second way to leverage nuclear energy is known as nuclear electric propulsion (NEP), which uses nuclear fission to create electricity that generates the magnetic fields used to accelerate and expel gas propellants like xenon and krypton. The NEP process provides a lower amount of thrust compared to its NTP counterpart, but it can still efficiently propel a spacecraft for extended periods of time.  

That’s been the focus of the Joint Emergent Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear High Power (JETSON) program, overseen by AFRL. JETSON emerged after the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling Technology (KRUSTY) experiment, led by NASA and the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, safely demonstrated NEP capability. 

“KRUSTY created a relatively small nuclear reactor and used that to generate electricity,” Dr. Cooley said. “Now, JETSON gets back to powering an ion thruster with that electric energy, but the hard part is getting the nuclear reactor into space safely.” 

Remaining Challenges and Terrestrial-Driven Solutions 

Launch presents one of many remaining challenges needed to be overcome before the government, with its industry and academic partners, can successfully adopt nuclear-powered systems for spacecraft propulsion. 

“The biggest concern is not launching the reactor structure, but rather the nuclear material itself,” Dr. Tousley said. “But launching the reactor structure on one rocket and the nuclear material on a smaller, more reliable rocket before assembling it in space is one example of how we can creatively reduce the risk of an accident or reentry. Although we would still need mission assurance during the system’s lifetime, and a means for appropriately disposing it at end of life.” 

But similar, land-based nuclear energy efforts may in turn facilitate solutions for getting a nuclear reactor to space. For example, the Strategic Capabilities Office’s Project Pele aims to develop a mobile nuclear reactor to power remote military bases.  

“It’s difficult to get fossil fuel sources to places like Eilson Air Force Base in Alaska, where winter limits opportunities to resupply,” Dr. Tousley said. So Project Pele’s investment in  nuclear research and development for terrestrial power purposes can advance similar technologies for space.” 

Land-based applications for nuclear power systems are also drawing the attention, and investment, of technology companies and their private equity partners.  

“Companies are developing small nuclear reactor concepts to meet the growing nationwide energy demands of data centers,” Dr. Tousley said. “So nuclear developments may not start with space, but the government is still going to benefit from private capital investments in developing advanced reactors and power systems for terrestrial purposes.” 

Enabling the Future of Nuclear in Space 

If successful, these programs could enable the development of other space-based capabilities, like in-space assembly and manufacturing (ISAM), orbital clean-up, recycling and even natural resource extraction in space.  

“Nuclear energy can solve two problems at once: building the future infrastructure in space, while cleaning up the old one,” Dr. Cooley said. “Nuclear power systems can maneuver space debris into remote orbits, or recylce and manufacture debris into new material. But all of these capabilities would require tremendous amounts of energy that nuclear-powered systems can uniquely provide, and the United States needs to take that risk and invest in these capabilities now if we are going to lead that change.” 

However, the government must also make the appropriate regulatory and policy changes if it’s to overcome the risk-averse mindset triggered by nuclear accidents like Three Mile Island. 

“Japan, France and the United States led the free world in nuclear power development for electric generation purposes before the 1979 partial nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island,” Dr. Tousley said. “That accident impacted U.S. public policy and set us back in nuclear development for decades, while Japan and France continued forward. Likewise, we need to be more risk-tolerant in order to make progress because the physics don’t lie – nuclear energy is incredibly efficient.  

The complex challenges facing the SPAR Institute and other nuclear energy programs require the type of intersecting technology, human capital, regulatory and policy-driven solutions Elara Nova partners are prepared to provide. 

“The SPAR Institute is funding graduate students to work in nuclear development, an area that is critical to the United States,” Dr. Tousley said. “These students will likely go on to work in industry or start their own companies in support of the U.S. government’s nuclear development efforts. That’s where Elara Nova can support them, by bridging the gap between policy and technical challenges to enable their company’s success.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Washington Post Reporter to Release New Book, “Rocket Dreams,” in 2025 

Christian Davenport, a space industry and NASA reporter for The Washington Post, has announced a forthcoming book: “Rocket Dreams: Musk, Bezos, and the Inside Story of the New, Trillion-Dollar Space Race.” The new book, set to be released in the fall of 2025, picks up where his previous book “The Space Barons: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and the Quest to Colonize the Cosmos,” concluded seven years ago. While his journalism career began as a metropolitan reporter and editor covering local politics in Washington, D.C., it was Davenport’s experience as an embedded reporter in Iraq and Kuwait that enabled him to recognize a unique story idea that led to writing “The Space Barons,” during a 2014 press conference. 

“I was assigned to cover the military-industrial complex when, in 2014, Elon Musk held a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., to announce he was filing a lawsuit against the Pentagon, specifically the Air Force, for the right to compete for national security launch contracts,” Christian Davenport said. “But Musk started the press conference by talking about building a re-usable launch vehicle that would bring the booster back by catching it. I wrote the story about the lawsuit, but during my research into SpaceX’s efforts to develop reusable rockets I found that Jeff Bezos and Blue Origin were trying to do that, too.” 

At the time, the idea of a re-usable launch vehicle that would return to Earth was unproven. But Davenport took to heart an old journalism mantra that harkens back to Watergate: “Follow the money.” 

“If the richest people in the world are investing their money in space exploration and advancing state of the art launch technology, then we should be paying more attention to that,” Davenport said. “So I interviewed Elon, Jeff, as well as Richard Branson and Paul Allen, for ‘The Space Barons.’ But while each of them approached their space companies with very different mindsets, there is a common thread through all of them: to lower the cost of access to space.” 

A Starting Point for Commercial Space 

The billionaires’ ambitions were diverse: Musk wanted to colonize Mars, Bezos wanted to reduce human impact on the Earth and Branson licensed technology from Allen’s StarShipOne to establish suborbital tourism. Each of them self-funded their space company’s efforts to varying degrees, but it was Allen’s original aspirations to win the Ansari X prize that today is viewed as a catalyzing moment for commercial space. 

“The Ansari X Prize was a contest to see if a commercial venture can send a vehicle to the edge of space and back – twice – without government money,” Davenport said. “When Paul Allen and Burt Rutan, the famous inventor and aerospace engineer, came up with SpaceShipOne and won the Ansari X Prize, it was heralded at the time as a breakthrough moment for commercial space. But while it showed it could be done, we don’t have regular people going to the edge of space like originally envisioned.” 

Davenport’s “The Space Barons” also takes readers inside a 2006 Valentine’s Day conference where the billionaires gathered together to brainstorm how to move the commercial space industry forward.  

“Back then, it would have been fair to look at these space barons and say, ‘Commercial space is never going to happen,’” Davenport said. “Space is such an expensive and difficult proposition that requires immense expertise. So there were a lot of skeptics who thought space was always going to be an exclusively government enterprise. Yet, over time, the space barons persisted.” 

The motives behind the Valentine’s Day conference meeting have clear repercussions that still resonate today. 

“In a sense, they posed a question: ‘Is there a commercial space industry?’” Davenport said. “Well, the next book, Rocket Dreams, answers that question with a resounding ‘Yes,’ because anytime you put human beings in a commercially owned and operated rocket is a big deal. Today, we’re seeing a proliferation of a space market and a space economy beyond just the billionaires.”  

The Government’s Role in Commercial Space Growth 

A key shift in making today’s space market possible, however, was the actions government agencies made to facilitate the commercial space industry’s growth.  

“There was a willingness from the government, from NASA and the Pentagon, to outsource some tasks and space missions to the private sector,” Davenport said. “Today, that outsourcing seems routine, but that was a revolutionary change to trust the private sector with vital space missions that had always been part of the national enterprise. That was a significant paradigm shift that enabled the space industry to take off.”  

It took key government figures like NASA’s Mike Griffin or DARPA’s Tony Tether and Steve Walker to advocate for the government to embrace what was – at the time – a budding space industry.  

“In the context of the time, there were two space shuttle disasters and the end of the space shuttle program, which meant the United States government would rely solely on Russia to get our astronauts to the International Space Station,” Davenport said. “So government officials began thinking about doing something radically different to access space. It started with industry partners flying cargo and supplies to the International Space Station before flying astronauts – but it was an incremental approach that developed over time.” 

The Modern Commercial Space Industry 

Today, that once-emerging commercial space market has established itself as a projected $1.8 trillion space industry by 2035. As such, government agencies will be looking more and more to their commercial partners for a variety of space missions. 

“We’re seeing the space enterprise understand that if the commercial sector can fly astronauts to the space station, then maybe they should be the ones who land astronauts on the moon and build uncrewed spacecraft for scouting missions,” Davenport said. “The government can also get investors involved to help subsidize the cost of these missions. However, the commercial sector works by experimenting to move faster, which means at times they’re going to fail. So it will be interesting to see what the government tolerance level is for that.” 

The balance of success and failure can perhaps be described by two recent commercial space endeavors funded by NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. In early March, Firefly Aerospace landed their Blue Ghost spacecraft for a successful two-week mission, but Intuitive Machines’ Athena spacecraft had an imperfect landing that left much of its mission goals unfulfilled. 

“It’s a balance of how much risk are we willing to take, because whether it’s astronauts on-board or even the cargo and supplies needed to service those astronauts – the government requires success,” Davenport said. “Even SpaceX has recently had problems with its Falcon-9, Dragon and Starship spacecraft. So while we often celebrate the success of American innovation, some of these setbacks call into question how much government oversight there should be.”  

A New Space Race 

The government has a vested interest in the success of commercial space companies, primarily because the United States has once again found itself in a modern-day space race. 

“China has shown amazing progress for moon landings, as they are the first country to go to and bring samples back from the far side of the moon,” Davenport said. “They have a space station in low-Earth orbit and have operated a rover on Mars. But what many people don’t realize is there are no longer American flags on the moon. The flags from the Apollo era have been bleached white by the radiation and vacuum environment, meanwhile China has planted two flags: one made out of composite material specifically designed for space and another made with in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) technology so it can withstand the harsh space environment.” 

In “The Space Barons,” Davenport catalogued how the commercial space industry rose up to meet today’s space race needs by delineating the book in three sections: Impossible, Improbable, Inevitable. But now that the commercial space industry is well on its way, “Rocket Dreams” will showcase how these companies will reach their destinations and achieve their goals in the modern space race. 

“‘Impossible, Improbable, and Inevitable,’ encompass the narrative of ‘The Space Barons,’ but also the journey of space exploration in the commercial space sector,” Davenport said. “This next book, ‘Rocket Dreams,’ takes a more symbolic approach to its three sections: on the ground, on-orbit, and to the moon and beyond. The book ends more on ideas, because there’s a lot of questions being asked and certainly progress that is being made, but these unpredictable variables are what makes it an exciting time to be a part of the space industry.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

New Space Traffic Management Program Lays Foundation for Future Space Capabilities

In 2009, an on-orbit collision between a defunct Russian satellite and an Iridium communications satellite created more than 1,800 pieces of debris and signaled an emerging need for a space traffic system. Since then, space has only become more congested with the rise of a commercial launch market that has enabled affordable access to space for commercial, civil and military space programs alike. The resulting influx of satellites on-orbit inspired the signing of Space Policy Directive-3 (SPD-3) during the first Trump administration, which declared the need for U.S. leadership in establishing a space traffic system to mitigate the risk of on-orbit collisions through a coordinated data-sharing effort between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Commerce. This joint effort produced a new program, the Traffic Coordination System for Space (TraCSS), which late last year achieved initial operating capability in cataloging assets on-orbit and delivering space situational awareness (SSA) to spacecraft operators. 

“TraCSS leverages government and commercial capabilities to provide actionable space situational awareness as a free basic service,” said Col (Ret) Charlie McGillis, Elara Nova partner and a currently-serving member of the TraCSS Independent Review Board. “Safety is paramount in space, especially considering there are tens of thousands of satellites on-orbit today. SPD-3 responded to the growing challenges posed by that increasing volume of space traffic and the greater risk it creates for more on-orbit collisions that can create orbital debris.” 

An increasingly populated and congested space domain not only increases the likelihood of collisions like the 2009 incident, but the orbital dynamics of space makes those collisions exponentially more damaging than collisions in other domains like land, sea or air. 

“Objects in space are traveling over 17,500 miles per hour, so any collision will create a huge debris field that could stay on-orbit for decades or even centuries,” McGillis said, who previously served as the former Director of Intelligence at 14^th Air Force (Space) and a former Senior Vice President at Slingshot Aerospace. “Even a small speck of debris can cause significant damage to other spacecraft and render it unusable. This creates a need for satellite operators to be able to maneuver their assets to avoid other spacecraft, as well as debris, to avoid similar collisions in the future.” 

Augmenting Government Data with Commercial Capability 

The new TraCSS program aims to replace the legacy government-run space traffic system: space-track.org.  

“The Department of Defense stood up space-track.org in response to that 2009 collision, because somebody needed to provide that data from a global perspective,” said McGillis, who currently serves as the Public Sector Vice President at The Provenance Chain Network. “But at the time, it wasn’t a huge drain on DOD resources because there weren’t as many satellites on-orbit as there are today. Now, as the number of satellites on-orbit has increased, so has the difficulty and drain on those DOD resources to serve this effort. The Space Force was founded to defend and protect our space assets, not provide a global space traffic system. That’s why the Office of Space Commerce was created to begin transitioning these capabilities from the Department of Defense to the Department of Commerce.” 

Today, TraCSS is building off the progress made by space-track.org by delivering basic space situational awareness data directly to civil and commercial spacecraft operators. 

“TraCSS has taken a methodical, iterative approach where commercial owner-operators provide their data directly, which was also done on the DOD system,” McGillis said. “A commercial vendor also built TraCSS’ cloud-based infrastructure, which takes DOD data and augments it with commercially provided data. But if you want access to that information as a commercial space owner-operator, you have to provide the ephemeris – or location – of your own assets in space.” 

Commercial Opportunities and Remaining Space Traffic Challenges 

TraCSS delivers its space tracking data through what are called conjunction data messages (CDMs), or standardized notifications about potential close approaches between space objects. Receiving a CDM is seen as a first step toward enabling a satellite operator to maneuver their spacecraft out of the way to avoid a collision. But other challenges remain in creating a safe and sustainable space environment through spacecraft maneuverability. 

“In today’s space environment, you need to be able to maneuver if there’s going to be a close approach,” McGillis said. “The CDMs can come in at a three-day or even seven-day notice, which would give you time to maneuver. But a risk still remains because some satellites on-orbit today don’t have the capability to maneuver, which begs the question about whether policy or regulations need to change to require spacecraft maneuverability.”  

In the meantime, TraCSS is seeking industry input to further augment its effort with other commercial capabilities that can help identify and catalog spacecraft on-orbit through a Collision Avoidance (COLA) Gap Pathfinder program. The COLA Gap Pathfinder program is intended to help tracking efforts adjust to the increased prevalence of “ride-sharing,” or using a single rocket launch to deliver several different types of satellites on-orbit. 

“The hardest part is tracking and cataloging those objects after they’ve been released from the rocket,” McGillis said. “When several objects are released on the same launch, it’s hard to discern which object is which – whether that’s satellite number 1001 or satellite number 1002. Bringing in a commercial capability to fill that need is huge because from a safety perspective, you want to detect, identify and catalog spacecraft as quickly as possible. So this is a great mission for the commercial sector to provide capabilities for.” 

Space Situational Awareness vs. Space Domain Awareness 

Offloading some of the basic space situational awareness capabilities to the commercial sector will also enable the DOD and the Space Force to focus on a similar, but distinct mission area: space domain awareness.  

“Space situational awareness is about knowing where a spacecraft is and the path of its trajectory,” McGillis said. “Space domain awareness adds intelligence information from a military perspective. What is the intent of that object? What are its capabilities? Is it hostile or not? What are its behaviors? Is that a bad actor? So you get into more of what is the intent and the capability of that specific object or satellite.” 

That’s why the TraCSS program’s design is one of the latest examples of how commercial space capabilities can be leveraged by the government to support national security objectives. 

“The government doesn’t want to build something that’s going to be costly, when they can just buy the same product or service directly from the commercial market,” McGillis said. “The way TraCSS is currently organized is in line with serving both national security and economic purposes. It uses commercial innovation to supplement government data and provide warning to those commercial space operators. It’s not unlike how the government manages air traffic control by first providing that data infrastructure and then supplementing that with commercial resources.” 

Opportunities for International Collaboration 

In serving both space situational awareness and space domain awareness missions, however, the need for a space traffic system also requires collaboration with international partners. 

“Space is global – it’s got civil, commercial and a variety of international government assets,” McGillis said. “It’s important that we engage our international partners, so that they understand the capability TraCSS brings to the domain. Likewise, we can coordinate our data with other space traffic systems like the European Union’s Space Surveillance and Tracking program that takes both national military data, but also commercial data. That coordination between the EUSST and TraCSS is a great example of opportunities for international collaboration.” 

Similarly, the need to establish data-sharing standards and other norms of behavior through international collaboration further reinforces the strategic imperative that the United States be the leader in space traffic management. As it stands today, there is no single, standardized global space traffic system.  

“The inherently dual-nature of space between civil and national security means some countries are not going to want to share their space tracking data to protect a national prerogative,” McGillis said. “China doesn’t share their information with us today, so the only way to track their satellites is through the capabilities that we have today – like TraCSS. So, the United States must take the lead on setting data-sharing standards and establishing norms of behavior, because even when an owner-operator shares their asset’s location, their data format may not be the same.” 

TraCSS as a Foundation for Future Space Capabilities 

In turn, the emergence of a leading space traffic system like TraCSS will enable a foundation for future space capabilities and mission areas that serve both economic and national security purposes. 

“TraCSS is the first step toward a future where spacecraft have the capability to do an ‘RPO,’ or rendezvous in proximity,” McGillis said. “Having a satellite come up to another satellite is an inherently complex mission that requires very exquisite data. But if you can accomplish an RPO effectively, that unlocks opportunities for capabilities like in-space assembly and manufacturing, orbital maneuverability and re-fueling, as well as cleaning up debris on-orbit. TraCSS can provide a foundation for those innovative space capabilities to emerge.” 

In support of the increasingly vital, but inherently complex challenge of space traffic serves as the latest mission area where Elara Nova’s team of experts are uniquely positioned to strengthen government and commercial efforts. 

“Elara Nova brings that voice to all the space conversations that we have, whether it’s in the commercial or government sector,” McGillis said. “Elara Nova can help commercial businesses understand what TraCSS is about and the capabilities that it provides. Whether you’re building a propulsion system or whether you’re launching satellites, you need to understand where you are in space. Everybody has a role in keeping space safe, and we need U.S. leadership in creating this foundational tracking system not only for our economy, but also for our national security.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Chinese Advancements Raise Stakes for Faster Adoption of Quantum Sensors 

China’s advancements in quantum technology have triggered a call-to-action for the United States to accelerate their own investments in quantum research and development. According to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s Critical Technology Tracker, China surpassed the United States in published quantum research in 2021. China’s lead in published research can be interpreted as a faster pace toward adopting and deploying quantum technologies in space for military purposes, which China already demonstrated in 2016, with plans for launching more quantum-equipped satellites in 2025. In response, the Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C) is similarly advocating for more research and development to support quantum technologies in space, specifically to reinforce the Position, Navigation and Timing (PNT) mission.  

“PNT is a combination of technologies that determine location, orientation and time associated with a particular asset,” said Major General (Ret) Kim Crider, Founding Partner at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy. “Currently, the United States Space Force delivers PNT capability through the Global Positioning System (GPS) of space-based satellites. By broadcasting signals between satellites in space and receivers on Earth, GPS systems can calculate an asset’s position, while tracking and predicting its movements according to a given time standard.” 

The Military and Commercial Value of PNT 

While GPS is owned and operated by the United States government, it is just one satellite system providing PNT capability under the broader Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). Allies and adversaries alike have fielded similar PNT capabilities under GNSS and through satellite systems of their own: Russia’s GLONASS, the European Union’s Galileo constellation, China’s BeiDou, Japan’s QZSS and India’s IRNSS/NavIC.  

But the PNT capability provided through each of these systems are widely seen as ‘dual-use,’ serving both commercial and military purposes.  

Consequently, these systems are subject to near-constant attack.  

“There are jamming, spoofing and cyber attacks against our GPS signals every single day, in addition to the changing space weather conditions that can also compromise these systems,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “Each of these threats create denial-of-service challenges for the Space Force, particularly because PNT is critical in warfighting operations to accurately understand where troops are on the ground or where ships are at sea, while enabling effective communication between forces in a time-synchronized environment.” 

Quantum Creates Resiliency for PNT 

That’s why the QED-C, a consortium of quantum industry stakeholders established under the National Quantum Initiative Act of 2018, published a recent report that underscored the immediate implications quantum sensors can serve in reinforcing compromised PNT capabilities or support forces in GPS-denied areas.  

“GPS signals may not be able to reach assets that are underground, under water, in valleys or canyons and sometimes even indoors, where a roof provides a cover that the satellite signals can’t penetrate,” said Lietuenant General (Ret) Harry Raduege, partner at Elara Nova.  “The polar regions can also be a GPS-denied area because of their extreme and remote location, while also becoming more globally contentious as potential areas of future conflict.” 

Quantum sensors, however, are inherently more resistant to jamming or spoofing than legacy GPS systems. 

“While GPS actively transmits and receives signals, these quantum technologies passively sense changes in the Earth’s environment,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “Quantum technology collects data and makes measurements at the atomic level, which means they can track precise changes in the way atoms interact in electric or magnetic fields. Therefore, these sensors can create a more precise and accurate understanding of what’s going on in the environment around an asset in a way that GPS currently can’t.” 

Quantum Sensors and How They Work 

The QED-C report describes two types of quantum sensors that support mapping and navigational efforts: quantum magnetometers and quantum gravimeters.  

“Quantum magnetometers and quantum gravimeters can detect and measure minute changes in magnetic fields and gravitational fields, respectively,” Lt Gen (Ret) Raduege said. “So these technologies offer new ways to map the planet, particularly for remote and featureless environments like oceans and the polar regions.”   

With these sensors, operators can identify and orient military assets through what the QED-C report calls “magnetic anomaly-aided navigation (MagNav),” and “gravitational anomaly-aided navigation (GravNav)”. 

“These sensors look for anomalies in the magnetic or gravitational environments, and can match these anomalies to known magnetic or gravitational maps,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “For example, a U.S. naval vessel operating in the polar region with limited GPS availability can rely on gravimeters to detect anomalies in the gravitational field around the ship and verify any changes with previously known maps of Earth’s gravitational field.” 

Quantum technologies can also go beyond mapping capabilities for PNT verification, to also include quantum accelerometers and quantum gyroscopes that measure an asset’s changes in motion and angle of rotation, respectively.  

“Quantum accelerometers and quantum gyroscopes can be networked together to dramatically improve the accuracy and reliability of our sensing capabilities for measuring an asset’s movement,” Lt Gen (Ret) Raduege said. “These tools can also be directly applied to the space domain to provide highly accurate measurements of a satellite’s position and orientation, as well as objects in its surrounding environment to support the space domain awareness mission.”  

According to the QED-C report, quantum sensors are particularly valuable in how they can be integrated with legacy GPS systems to enhance their accuracy and reliability. 

“It’s important that we network these emerging technologies into our traditional GPS systems to get that added resiliency in providing PNT capabilities to joint military operations,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “When GPS signals are disrupted or compromised, these quantum sensors can verify the accuracy of those GPS signals while also providing an alternative PNT capability for joint forces operating in those GPS-denied areas.” 

Quantum sensors are relevant to various commercial industries as well, such as agriculture, transportation, communications, financial management and even mining for critical resources. As a result, the QED-C proposed several recommendations for the federal government and its industry partners to invest in greater research and development of quantum technologies in a way that facilitates the broader industry’s growth. 

Investing in Quantum R&D 

One priority is investing in the research and development of photonic integrated circuits (PICs), or microchips that transmit, process and sense information through light-based particles called ‘photons.’ PICs are viewed as faster and more efficient than traditional electronic microchips, which primarily transfers information through electrons. 

“The government can invest in the development of PICs similar to how they have taken steps to establish a foundry for electronic microchips in the U.S.,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “We have to ensure there is a supply chain for developing these photonic components, such that we can create the PICs necessary for quantum sensors.” 

The QED-C report also emphasizes the role of partnerships between the government and the quantum community to identify opportunities for standardizing the size, weight, power and cost (SWaP-C) criteria of PICs used in quantum technology.  

“Reducing the SWaP-C elements of PICs would enhance their reliability and facilitate the economies of scale needed to broaden the application and commercialization of quantum sensors across industries,” Lt Gen (Ret) Raduege said. “The government must work with organizations like QED-C, academic institutions, think tanks and other industry stakeholders to encourage market studies, pilot programs and test-beds for developing quantum technology.” 

Further, by providing third-party validation and verification requirements, like those coming out of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative and National Institutes of Standards and Technology, the government can ensure that the quantum technologies it adopts has been proven to be accurate and reliable.  

“The federal government can fund organizations supporting standardization and validation measures of emerging technologies, and also support the research labs and academic institutions that provide test-beds for establishing these performance standards,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “Then the DOD can work with the military services to facilitate the integration of quantum capabilities into warfighting operations.” 

Quantum, PNT, and the Joint Fight 

With the effective development and deployment of quantum sensors, particularly with legacy PNT systems, the implications for supporting joint force operations across domains can be significant. 

“Quantum sensing technologies can support the military across all the different elevation levels that joint forces operate in: from the subsurface to the surface level, which includes both maritime and land domains, as well as the air and space domains,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “We need that resiliency to create competitive advantage, particularly as China is investing and developing quantum technologies for the same reasons.” 

Enabled by the expertise in emerging technologies from the likes of Maj Gen (Ret) Crider and Lt Gen (Ret) Raduege, Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy is particularly equipped to support partnerships that facilitate the development and adoption of quantum sensors across space mission areas. 

“Elara Nova can identify the best applications for these emerging technologies and how to engage the entire community of industry, government, academia partners to work through these issues from a quantum perspective,” Maj Gen (Ret) Crider said. “Together, we can bring these capabilities forward into the innovation systems and processes by establishing standards, developing early prototypes, and integrating these technologies into new and legacy systems to create effects that assure space superiority and preserve our national security interests.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Incoming Administration Must Implement Commission’s Recommendations, or Risk Losing Great Power Competition 

China’s rapid rise in adopting and deploying innovative technologies has sparked a new “Great Power Competition,” particularly in the space domain. Meanwhile, the budgetary process the Department of Defense (DOD) uses to acquire military capabilities – Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) – is increasingly unable to keep up with the rapid innovations of modern technology. But now, after a Commission on Planning, Programming, Budget and Execution (PPBE) Reform delivered guidance for modernizing the budgetary process, the 2024 election presents both promise and peril for PPBE reform in acquiring the military capabilities necessary to deliver space superiority for the warfighter. 

“The doctrinal definition of space superiority is mission-oriented: to provide space capability at a time and place of your choosing,” said Shawn Barnes, partner at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy. “But in the context of budgeting and strategy, space superiority is about having the space capabilities that provide superior capability to support the warfighter across domains to deter or defeat an adversary.” 

According to DOD officials, China is having a “strategic breakout” in space that directly coincides with their adoption of innovative space technologies. Major General Gregory J. Gagnon, the United States Space Force’s chief intelligence officer, recently acknowledged China has over 1,000 satellites on-orbit and has demonstrated a capacity for launching 200 satellites a year.  

For added context, Maj Gen Gagnon noted that just 10 years ago China was capable of putting only 24 satellites on-orbit in a single year. 

“China has gone from being a potential near-peer competitor to an out-pacing challenge in areas like quantum computing, air and missile systems and space capabilities,” Barnes said. “Meanwhile, one of our nation’s greatest attributes is innovation in the private sector, but the PPBE process no longer serves us as well as it should.” 

PPBE From the Cold War to Today 

The PPBE process evolved from the Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS) originally introduced by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in the 1960s. By developing the DOD budget sequentially through four phases, PPBE brought discipline to the DOD’s budgetary process and enabled the United States to acquire the military capabilites it needed to project deterrence through the Cold War and maintain decades of military hegemony after the Soviet Union’s collapse.  

But in today’s Information Age, the PPBE process that once enabled military success is increasingly constricting the DOD’s capacity for keeping pace with technological innovation, most notably in space. 

“The cost of launch has been reduced dramatically, which enables cheaper and more frequent access to space,” Barnes said. “More capability can also be put into smaller satellites, which can be effectively networked to outperform larger satellites. These changes are accelerating innovation across the space ecosystem.” 

In response to this emerging Great Power Competition and the exponential rate of technological innovation, the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) mandated a Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) Reform to evaluate PPBE and recommend policy changes to modernize the process. 

Then last spring, the Commission published its Final Report with 28 recommendations across five critical areas to overhaul the budgeting process across the DOD’s military services. But given the inherent interconnection of space and technology, along with the growing reliance on space for Joint Force operations, the Commission’s recommendations can have an outsized influence in delivering space superiority. 

The Imperative for Strategy-Driven Budgets 

The first critical area the Commission provided recommendations for is to: “Improve the Alignment of Budgets to Strategy.” To do this, the Commission recommends creating a Defense Resourcing System (DRS) to replace the PPBE process and consolidate the PPBE’s four phases into three: strategy development, resource allocation and execution. 

“It is absolutely critical that we have strategy-driven budgets, and not budget-driven strategies,” Barnes said. “The Commission proposed an ongoing discussion within the DOD to provide timely updates to strategy that would come before each service’s budget submission to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD).” 

Key documents such as the National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and National Military Strategy will continue to drive the strategy development phase. But significant changes exist in the resource allocation phase, where senior leadership forums informed by strategic wargaming and analytics would produce a Defense Resourcing Guidance (DRG) that would replace the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) document used today. 

“The Defense Planning Guidance is used as a grading mechanism after the services provide their budget recommendations to OSD, but the DPG doesn’t present difficult decisions for the OSD budget,” Barnes said. “So the new DRG would facilitate a more rigorous discussion upfront, where senior leaders across the DOD can evaluate budgetary risk in a more substantive manner.” 

The Commission also recommends replacing the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) and Budget Estimate Submission (BES) documents with a single, Resource Allocation Submission (RAS) proposal. This step would streamline what OSD submits as the DOD portion of the President’s Budget that will ultimately go to Congress.  

Balancing Discipline with Flexibility 

The second critical area identified by the Commission is to: “Foster Innovation and Adaptability.” To this end, the Commission aims to increase the availability of Operating and Maintenance (O&M) funds, which expire at the end of the fiscal year regardless of when those dollars are appropriated. 

In other words, if Congress does not pass a budget on October 1st – the first day of the fiscal year – but rather passes a Continuing Resolution (CR) until a budget is passed at a later date, the O&M funds still expire on September 30th of that fiscal year. 

“The DOD only has so much time to expend O&M funds,” Barnes said. “Sometimes at the end of the fiscal year, there is a mad rush to spend money as quickly as possible. So the Commission proposes that about five percent of O&M funding be eligible to roll-over as two-year or three-year money to make better use of taxpayer dollars.” 

The Commission also recommends the DOD be able to fund new programs and capabilities, known as “new-starts,” which is currently prohibited under a CR. The Final Report also suggests eliminating Below Threshold Reprogramming, or the amount of funds the DOD can transfer between programs without Congressional approval, to facilitate flexibility in responding to evolving military requirements. 

A Collaborative Relationship to Streamline Budget Development 

Each of these efforts, however, will still require a level of transparency with the Hill. That’s why the Commission emphasizes a need for transparency in its third critical area: “Strengthen Relationships Between DOD and Congress.” 

It’s for this purpose that the Commission recommends establishing enclaves for both classified and unclassified information exchanges between the DOD and Congress, which in turn may also promote greater cohesion between the authorizers and appropriators in Congress.  

“The Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee are the ‘Authorizers’ that write the NDAA, a policy bill that describes what money is available for certain requirements,” Barnes said. “But the four Appropriations Committees are more data-driven and focused on their oversight role. Sometimes, different views between the Authorizers and the Appropriators can create tension in the DOD when they receive authorization for a program, but aren’t appropriated the money to implement it.” 

The Commission concludes its report by recommending a single, common data system from which each service can build its budget under the fourth critical area: “Modernize Business Systems and Data Analytics,” and providing more education and training related to the budgeting process in its fifth critical area: “Strengthen the Capability of the Resourcing Workforce.”  

2024 Election Implications for PPBE Reform 

Since its release, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hick pledged to evaluate the Commission’s Final Report in collaboration with executive and legislative partners. At the same time, the DOD also published an Implementation Plan for the Commission on PPBE Reform’s Interim Report, which was previously released in August 2023. 

But the 2024 election creates both promise and peril for the Commission’s recommendations to reform the PPBE process. While a change in executive and legislative branches can facilitate an opportunity to implement these necessary changes, the Commission’s Final Report is also at risk of being neglected during the transition – thus, perpetuating the status quo.  

“The Implementation Plan signals that DOD is taking the Commission’s recommendations seriously, and they are willing to work with the Hill to implement it,” Barnes said. “A new Congress also creates an opportunity to adjust the budgetary process and the Commission’s recommendations add flexibility without removing the discipline. We live in perilous times, and space is not unique in suffering the budgeting challenges that the PPBE process has today, so it’s especially important to apply these changes to acquire the innovative commercial space technologies of the future.” 

Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy recognizes the significant role government policy serves in the acquisition process, and its’ experts are prepared to support not only the commercial space companies developing innovative technologies, but also the government partners seeking to leverage policy to exploit these technologies to deliver space superiority to the warfighter. 

“The breadth and depth of experience at Elara Nova is unparalleled,” Barnes said. “There are Elara Nova experts who understand the resource allocation process, and its relationship between the executive and legislative branches. But there’s also experts who have been program managers and program executive officers leading large acquisition organizations within the DOD. So when a company wants to work with Elara Nova, they get the benefit of all of that experience across the space security spectrum.” 

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Study Recognizes the Value of Commercial Space Systems in Military Requirements 

In November of 2022, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering commissioned the Defense Science Board (DSB) to study commercial space systems and how they can be leveraged in support of Department of Defense (DOD) objectives. As the Federal Advisory Committee to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the DSB engaged government and space industry stakeholders to assess the opportunities and challenges to integrating commercial space systems into military requirements. The study’s resulting document, “Final Report on Commercial Space System Access and Integrity,” was published nearly two years later with five recommendations toward what the DSB called its bottom line objective: “Integrated Deterrence Requires Integrated Operations.” 

“The bottom line of ‘Integrated Deterrence Requires Integrated Operations,’ means we must budget and plan in advance to provide maximum capability to the warfighter,” said Dr. Brad Tousley, partner at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy and a member of the Defense Science Board. “Economic power is a critical element to our military power. If commercial space capabilities exist that can support DOD objectives, they should be integrated into warfighter training now.” 

Dual-Use Technologies in Space 

The Defense Science Board’s findings come as an emerging commercial space market is increasingly developing “dual-use technologies,” or commercial space capabilities that can also be applied toward DOD objectives.  

“Commercial space systems bring the collection and distribution of information to the fight,” said Mike Dickey, Founding Partner at Elara Nova. “For example, the military needs satellite communications to transmit orders from commanders to troops in the field, ships at sea and airplanes in the air, which is the same technology that puts the World Series in every home. Further, commercial satellite images that support economic monitoring of crude oil movement through ports around the world can also find Russian convoys in Ukraine.” 

Commercial space systems have demonstrated their military value since the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022. However, the Ukrainian military’s reliance on commercial space systems was not planned in advance, but rather came as a result of the inherent responsiveness of commercial space technologies.  

Understanding Commercial Space 

Now, the DOD is looking to understand how the commercial space industry – and the institutional investors financially backing it – can similarly be factored into their own warfighting plans today.  

“Prior to the pandemic, commercial investment in space technologies peaked at about $15 billion a year, which was essentially the same as the Space Force’s budget in Fiscal Year 2021,” Dickey said. “Leveraging that commercial investment becomes a huge opportunity for the Department to double its financial resources toward space capabilities for military operations.” 

The Defense Science Board defined “commercial space,” across four elements: innovation, development, products and services. But the report prioritized the two elements that can provide immediate value to a modern or future conflict: commercial products and commercial services.  

“From a near-term standpoint, the Defense Science Board’s goal was to offer a set of recommendations for applying commercial solutions to immediate DOD needs,” Dr. Tousley said. “There are a variety of commercial space products or services the DOD can buy now, as demonstrated by the use of commercial space systems in Ukraine.” 

Planning for Commercial Integration 

To this end, the Defense Science Board offered five recommendations toward facilitating the growth of commercial space markets in ways that also align to fulfilling DOD objectives.  

The first recommendation calls on the government to “implement an end-to-end framework to better integrate existing and planned commercial capabilities into national security architectures.”  

This recommendation stems from opportunities to utilize commercial space technologies that have already matured, much like the commercial satellite communication (SATCOM) networks that exist today.  

“United States Space Command has a Commercial Integration Cell that sits at Vandenberg Space Force Base primarily supporting satellite communications,” Dickey said. “By sitting with Space Command, those satellite communication providers are aware of ongoing operations and threats to their commercial systems, so they can translate those potential issues into enhancements, upgrades or defensive cyber operations to guarantee resiliency against the threat before a crisis emerges.” 

While the Commercial Integration Cell at Vandenberg is an example of integrating a mature commercial space capability at the operational level, not all commercial space markets have reached the same level of maturity that makes this collaboration possible. However, the DOD can apply the same financial strategies it uses to buy services from the SATCOM market to support the growth of other emerging capabilities, too. 

Budgeting and PPBE Flexibility 

One of the significant advantages of a mature commercial space services market is the ability to respond to the ebbs and flows of supply and demand. Long-term budgeting for these variations, however, is difficult to predict. In the SATCOM market, the government has solved this by making use of a Defense Working Capital Fund as a funding tool. 

“The working capital fund basically creates a checkbook that the government can use each year in the commercial market to support a certain requirement,” Dickey said. “DOD users can transfer money into that checkbook and have the purchases made on their behalf. With a multi-year funding process and the working capital fund, the DOD can get better market pricing that will drive the cost down for a service, while providing transparency to companies and their investors about the government’s buying habits.” 

The Defense Science Board further addressed challenges in the DOD’s budgeting process directly in its second recommendation: “integrate evaluation of and provision for commercial space services into institutional processes.” 

The DOD currently develops its budget through an institutional process known as Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Evaluation (PPBE). But the long-established PPBE process lacks the flexibility needed to keep pace with the rapid developments of commercial space technologies. 

As such, the Defense Science Board advocates for more flexible funding measures within the PPBE process. In addition to the working capital fund model found in their first recommendation, the DSB also supports the flexible reallocation of operations and management (O&M) funds that were similarly recommended by a Congressionally mandated Commission on PPBE Reform earlier this year.  

“Program executive officers need flexibility to move funds between program elements year-to-year, because sometimes one program might under-spend on a service or product, while another might have a greater need,” Dr. Tousley said. “So if the government can adopt a multi-year acquisition reform and leverage working capital fund-like models, the commercial market will have clarity on market demand. Then as long as Congress can review a multi-year appropriation in the appropriations process, their equities are served.”  

Guaranteeing Resilience of Commercial Space Systems 

A greater reliance on commercial space systems, however, presents its own set of risks for the DOD’s military requirements. These risks influenced the Defense Science Board’s third recommendation: “incentivize trust and build resilience in commercial providers.” 

“The government can include resilience of a commercial space capability as a quality-of-service requirement, while acknowledging that quality assurance is going to cost more,” Dr. Tousley said. “But as long as the additional price is factored in as part of the economic model, then the vendors know what they have to do to ensure resiliency, and the government can rely on the enhanced capability as a function of the increased pricing.”  

Commercially available space technologies also present the risk of adversaries leveraging them against the United States and its Allies. The Defense Science Board acknowledges this likelihood in its fourth recommendation: “develop suite of capabilities to monitor, assess and respond to adversary use of commercial space capabilities.” 

“Commercial partners and the government have to acknowledge that adversaries will want to use the same commercial capabilities that we would want to use,” Dr. Tousley said. “So commercial vendors must ensure the U.S. government’s interest is best protected in a way that does not damage the commercial industry’s international growth.” 

Government as Regulator, Investor and Customer 

Navigating the complexities of the commercial space market may be a challenging endeavor, but the state of each market can inform how the DOD develops its policy. This dynamic created the Defense Science Board’s fifth recommendation: “account for maturity of the commercial market when making decisions on how it regulates, invests and buys commercial space services.”  

The Defense Science Board proposes the DOD do this by avoiding over-regulation, while investing for “market creation, not market monopolization.” As an example, Dr. Tousley points to how the DOD actively relies on the GEO commercial satellite communications market today, while understanding the more nascent proliferated Low-Earth Orbit (pLEO) and cislunar markets will require a more calculated investment to facilitate their growth. 

“Over-regulation can restrict a robust domestic market, while inhibiting commercial competition internationally,” Dr. Tousley said. “Competition in the commercial space market serves the DOD’s best interest in the long term with more competitive pricing, so the government must account for market maturity when it evaluates how it’s going to regulate, invest and buy these commercial space services.” 

This final recommendation highlights the key challenge for the DOD as it looks to engage the more nascent industries within the commercial space market.  

As an “anchor tenant,” the DOD can provide critical, early-stage funding for emerging space companies to grow their capability into a total addressable market. But the government’s influence can also inadvertently prevent other competitors from entering the market by creating “vendor lock” with a single provider, thereby also reducing the resiliency for a given military requirement. 

“There are ways to navigate the government’s role as an anchor tenant while avoiding vendor lock,” Dickey said. “The government can put down the first investment in an emerging space technology as its first and majority customer, but the government also needs to mitigate the risk of vendor lock by creating on-ramps for other providers into the market and off-ramps for those who fall short of mutually agreed expectations.” 

Achieving Integrated Deterrence 

With each of these recommendations realized, the DOD can apply the lessons learned in Ukraine to achieve “integrated deterrence.”  

“‘Integrated deterrence’ means the United States must integrate commercial capabilities into its military operations upfront,” Dr. Tousley said. “What happened in Ukraine demonstrates the agility and responsiveness of the commercial space market, but we must remember that wasn’t planned in advance. The government needs to plan for integrated operations now by developing contracts with the commercial space sector, because the DOD can’t just hope that a commercial space company is going to be there in an emergency.”  

Now, partners at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy, are positioned to provide their expertise to stakeholders similarly exploring solutions at the cross-section of military requirements and commercial space capabilities. 

“Elara Nova lives at the intersection of the government, industry and the investment market,” Dickey said. “Elara Nova partners have direct experience in each of these sectors of the space economy, so we offer a unique opportunity to support the implementation of the Defense Science Board’s recommendations.”  

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/. 

Academic Institutions Prepare to Meet Space Force’s Accelerating Human Capital Needs

Ms. Katharine Kelley, the Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Human Capital with the United States Space Force, recently announced the military’s newest service was engaged in a pilot program called the Defense Civilian Training Corps (DCTC). While similar to the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC), the DCTC is a congressionally mandated initiative to streamline university graduates into civilian careers at the Department of Defense (DOD). While the DCTC exemplifies how the government is initiating partnerships with academia from the top down, grassroots efforts like certificate programs at engineering schools are preparing to engage the Space Force from the bottom up. All together, these initiatives demonstrate how the Space Force can engage academic institutions to foster the workforce it needs among its civilian employees, active-duty Guardians and industry partners. 

“The Defense Civilian Training Corps program looks to increase the available pool of applicants for defense acquisition programs by partnering with civilian universities,” said B.T. Cesul, Ph.D., partner at Elara Nova: The Space Consultancy. “DCTC students receive a curriculum on defense acquisition that’s developed by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense, while also facilitating an accelerated security clearance process and preferred access to civilian DOD positions upon graduation.”

According to the Government Accountability Office, nearly 770,000 civilians work in the DOD. But while these civilians make up around one-third of the DOD’s total workforce, they provide an outsized role in enabling military effectiveness. 

“Active-duty leaders inherently serve rotating positions to broaden their skills and facilitate career advancement, which makes them more effective leaders in higher positions of authority,” Dr. Cesul said. “The civilian workforce serves in roles like program managers and chief engineers to backstop the rotational leadership process with the continuity of processes, philosophy, strategy and technical competency that makes the DOD the premier warfighting force of the world that it is today.”

On-Boarding Challenges for Civilian Employees

Students interested in pursuing a national security career, however, often face challenges understanding the vernacular and technical jargon of the DOD and its bureaucratic processes.  This challenge extends to the DOD’s industry partners as well, as the on-boarding process can be a burdensome and time-consuming endeavor for students entering the workforce. 

But now, the DCTC program is streamlining the learning process for students at four universities: North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, Purdue University, The University of Arizona and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 

“The DCTC program integrates the defense acquisition process into the curriculum,” Dr. Cesul said. “This gives students the equivalent experience of the full-time training typically found when on-boarding to a job with the DOD. Students also get first-hand experience working in DOD offices through a summer internship opportunity, all while receiving scholarships and a stipend that offset the cost of tuition.”

Further, the DCTC program enables students to get a head start on receiving the clearance credentials relevant to their career. For the Space Force, which has inherited classification policies that the service is looking to modernize, the opportunity to jump-start the clearance process is also an advantage.

“There is a heavy demand signal for a cleared workforce to support the Space Force, because most of their activities are inherently classified based on legacy classification rules,” Dr. Cesul said. “Students entering the workforce want to be productive right away, and a security clearance process that takes months to years to complete may motivate highly qualified candidates to look for other career opportunities outside of the Space Force or in other industries. So the DCTC program presents a contractual relationship between students and the government to initiate the security clearance process without a defined billet or a designated employer.” 

Accelerating Space Workforce Demands

The streamlined clearance process for students will inevitably support the DOD’s industry partners, as well. Typically, commercial companies in the defense industrial base often favor hiring retired or former active-duty service members for their workforce to better position themselves for government contracts. 

“Commercial companies responding to proposals require a cleared, experienced and trusted workforce to win that government contract,” Dr. Cesul said. “But that also means there is a smaller pool of available candidates that meet this requirement for a clearance-credentialed workforce that is also familiar with the DOD’s acquisition process.”

Meanwhile, the demand signal for a space workforce continues to accelerate.

“We are going to have a shortfall in the space professional workforce, probably between 50,000 to 75,000 people per year starting in around 2030, based on the current graduation numbers and the current estimated job requisitions from both government and industry,” Dr. Cesul said. “This is going to create a cycle of competition over smaller human capital resources against an increasing number of problems – which will inherently raise costs for space programs.”

Certificate Programs for Space Operations

But efforts to develop the space workforce of the future go beyond the DCTC and other government initiatives, as grassroots efforts like space-relevant certificate programs are emerging at small universities.  

Before on-boarding as a partner at Elara Nova, Dr. Cesul helped initiate one such pilot program at Lake Superior State University in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. 

“The Space Mission and Operations Certificate program aims to develop pragmatic skills for space operations requirements,” Dr. Cesul said. “The program introduces students with a technical engineering background to a fundamental understanding of space operations through labs on orbital mechanics, satellite orbit determination and digital twinning.”

To facilitate an experiential learning environment for its students in the certificate program, Lake Superior State University engaged the Homestead Mission Operations Center – a satellite ground station developed to support commercial and government research activities for space communications. 

“We used state of the art digital simulators to give students the opportunity to experience satellite communications with Homestead’s live satellite antennas,” Dr. Cesul said. “This lab experience parallels what a government employee experiences in places like the Air Force Lifecycle Management Center or Space Systems Command. Furthermore, a student can point to this certificate as a complement to their engineering degree, which will be an attractive narrative for potential employers in the commercial space industry.”

These pilot programs can also provide a valuable workforce counterpoint to the engineers and designers that traditionally come out of aerospace engineering programs at legacy four-year institutions. 

“These students without a traditional space background want more hands-on work at a terminal or ground station, operating a satellite or conducting field maintenance on a remote system,” Dr. Cesul said. “This certificate program provides a bridge between the system designer to the field technician necessary to actually operate these systems for defense programs, which is also a huge need in the Space Force right now.” 

The Need for Alternative Space Education and Training Programs

Now, the Space Mission and Operations Certificate Program is seeking to engage with the Space Force’s Space Training and Readiness Command (STARCOM) to evaluate opportunities for integrating their program into existing Basic Military Training programs. 

“We designed the curriculum to replicate other training environments, and the ultimate goal for the certificate program is to get recognition from STARCOM that this program could be equivalent to one of their other introductory training programs,” Dr. Cesul said. “Then by replicating programs like this at other universities, we can increase the volume of students receiving relevant basic training. This opportunity demonstrates how the Space Force can address workforce needs through a variety of partnerships with civilian institutions, while not overwhelming the traditional training programs at Vandenberg or Colorado Springs.”

While Elara Nova is already embarking on support at the various elements of space: government, industry, financial and international partnerships, the space consultancy can also provide expertise to academic institutions developing the space workforce of the future.

“Elara Nova brings experience and expertise to the fight,” Dr. Cesul said. “The value proposition for these education programs is the ability to link real-life experience and expertise to program and curriculum development. Elara Nova can provide those pragmatic links from academia to training, so the government recognizes that there’s a trusted path to on-boarding a productive employee in a government office from day one.”

Elara Nova is a global consultancy and professional services firm focused on helping businesses and government agencies maximize the strategic advantages of the space domain. Learn more at https://elaranova.com/.