NAFAG Way ahead on Space (version 6) - NATO ACT · NAFAG June 2011 Board Of Advisers 1 NAFAG Way Ahead on Space Document Version 5 – 10/06/2011

NAFAG June 2011 Board Of Advisers

1

NAFAG Way Ahead on Space

Document Version 5 – 10/06/2011


2

1 Introduction

1.1 Objective

During the 98th meeting in July 2010 [R1], NAFAG Board of Advisors (BoA) was tasked (Action 98/7) to write a coherent paper for NAFAG way ahead on Space.

This document presents the results of the BoA analysis. After background information about NAFAG and Space environment, potential involvement of Aerospace Capability Groups are presented and analysed. Then a way ahead for NAFAG is proposed.

1.2 Table of Contents

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Objective ...................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Documents of Interest .................................................................................................. 3

2 NAFAG vs. Space ................................................................................................................ 4

2.1 Background Information .............................................................................................. 4

2.2 Space Related Areas and Missions ............................................................................... 6

2.3 NATO and Space Missions .......................................................................................... 7

2.4 NAFAG Activities and Structures ................................................................................ 8

3 Aerospace Capability Groups and Space ........................................................................... 10

4 Proposed Way Ahead ......................................................................................................... 14

4.1 Activities Calendar ..................................................................................................... 14

4.2 Organisation and Structure ......................................................................................... 16

Annexe 1 - Acronyms ................................................................................................................ 17

Annexe 2 – ACG2 Potential Involvement in Space Domain ..................................................... 18


Annexe 4 – JCG ISR Potential Involvement in Space Domain ................................................. 21




3

1.3 Documents of Interest

The following documents, available on the NAFAG DI Portal, are considered of direct interest for this analysis:

[R1] Decision Sheet AC/224-DS(2010)0002 (5 August 2010)

[R2] JAPCC NATO Space Operations Assessment (Jan 2009)

[R3] JAPCC Briefing to NAFAG (Jan 2010)

[R4] Space Dimension of The Alliance - DIMS/BUS-0213-2009 (5 October 2009)

[R5] Stocktaking on NATO Space Activities NADC(PAD)N(2010)0012-REV1 (15 October 2010)

[R6] Military Use of Space - Preliminary inputs DI(ARM)(2010)0015(JAIS-AIR) (Feb 2010)

[R7] NADC-N(2010)0012-REV1 - NATO and Space, The Way Forward (17 December 2010)

[R8] NATO RTO Space Science and Technology Advisory Group (SSTAG) Recommendations for Space Research Topics - TM-SPD-002 (January 2006)

[R9] Status of NATO RTO SCI Panel Space Activities – JCGISR / RTA Meeting (17 November 2010)

[R10] SCI-229-RTG Space Environment Support to NATO Space Situational Awareness - TAP and TOR (Oct 2010)

[R11] NATO Strategic Concept “Strategic Concept For the Defence and Security of The Members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation” (November 2010)

[R12] A Proposed Framework for Addressing the NATO Long Term Capability Requirement for Space Mission Preservation (V3.4 February 2011)

[R13] Assured Access to the Global Commons – ACT (March 2011)

[R14] Multinational Experiment 7 - Space Domain Baseline Assessment Report DRAFT v 1.0 (1 April 2011)

[R15] AJP-3.3(A) Allied Joint Doctrine for Air & Space Operations (2009)

[R16] Revised NAFAG TOR AC/224-D(2011)0003 (01 March 2011)

Additional NATO documents connected to Space are listed below:

• Bi-SC Functional planning guide for Space operations (Apr. 2002);

• STANAG 4636 – Space and Nuclear Hardening Guidelines for military satellites (RD 2004);

• ACT DIR 75-2-N - Space operations joint functional area training guide (Jan 2006);

• ANP-3 Allied Navigation Publications;

• RD 2899 – Work package #25 on space capabilities carried out by NC3A – introduction to Space capabilities for insertion into CRR;

• Force Goals A0542 (JISTAR and Attack), A-0594 (Space based surface surveillance) and A-1591 (TBMD).


4

2 NAFAG vs. Space

2.1 Background Information

As a general statement, the issue of Space in NATO can be summarized:

• NATO does not own Space Systems or Assets, and there are no Space systems to manage or operational Space units in NATO. However, space-based services are widely used by NATO Forces and NATO Nations to support military capabilities;

• On bi-lateral or multi-national bases, Space Services are provided by nations or organisations. As needed, additional commercial Space Services can also be directly acquired by NATO.

From available documents and material (including NAFAG Topical Meeting on Space ISR in 2008 and JAPCC presentation during Jan 2010 NAFAG Meeting), previous activities related to Space in NATO include:

• A study, conducted by JAPCC in Jan 2009 [R2], outlined steps to better enable Transformation by addressing the need to develop NATO Space Power and better integrate Space capabilities. The results of this study were presented to NAFAG in January 2010 [R2];

• In an October 2009 document [R4], IMS developed a Food For Thought (FFT) paper, titled "The Space Dimension of the Alliance", announcing a future action to describe the Space dimension for the alliance: What do we have (as an Alliance); what do we foresee; what is missing;

• On behalf of Panel on Air Defense (PAD) of the Air Defense Committee (ADC), International Staff (IS) conducted in 2010 a stocktaking exercise on “NATO space activities”. Results [R5] are presented in the form of a generic summary of the current NATO space activities and their location . First inputs from NAFAG point of view where provided by IS/Air Unit in February 2010 [R6].

Following this exercise, ADC generated a notice [R7] highlighting this preliminary work and proposing a Way Forward to be forwarded to the NAC for endorsement;

• RTO Science and Technology activities on Space are numerous, from a previous study by Space Science and Technology Advisory Group [R8] to ongoing programmes [R9]: AVT-171-RWS Multifunctional Structures and System Technologies for small spacecraft, SET-147-RTG Micro satellites and Surveillance of Space, SCI-205-RTG Emerging Space System Concepts, SCI-214-RTG Satellite Constellations and Formation Flying, SCI-231-RLS Small Satellite Formations for Distributed Surveillance.

Future RTO activities include: SCI-229-RTG Space Environment Support to NATO Space Situational Awareness [R10] and SCI-238-ET Space Dependencies (discussed in following paragraph);

• During the Lisbon Summit, in November 2010, NATO nations approved a new Strategic Concept [R11] that identifies Space as an issue to be considered: “A number of significant technology-related trends – including the development of laser weapons, electronic warfare and technologies that impede access to space – appear poised to have major global effects that will impact on NATO military planning and operations”.


5

First meeting of Systems, Concepts and Integration Exploratory Team ET-SCI-238, held in ACT on 16th and 17th May 2011, was an opportunity to establish a situation of important ongoing activities related to Space in NATO:

• Space was considered by ACT in the 2008 Long Term Capability Requirements study. A specific LTCR, addressing “Space Capability Preservation”, is allocated to RTO/SCI (Systems Concepts & Integration) Panel as lead body, with potential support from NAFAG.

RTO SCI Panel has initiated a NATO Space Capability Preservation Framework [R12] for addressing this LTCR, redefined as “Preserve a space capability/situational awareness for assets used by NATO through a combination of defensive measure of space- and ground based assets.” This framework is based on a 3 pillars approach:

o Space Dependency for which audit, analysis and potential symposium/workshop could be organized,

o Risks and Threat covering both environmental and counter space-type activities, including the analysis of implications and consequences to NATO operations: near-term (hrs/days) and long-term (>months),

o Risk mitigating solutions that may be considered a priori (effects mitigation) and a posteriori (contingency measures);

First meeting of ET-SCI-238, dedicated to the preparation of Symposium/Workshop activities in support of the 1st pillar, created an opportunity to leverage ongoing ACT activities and to synchronize results and events. An initial specialist meeting is now planned fall 2012 to characterise NATO equities and dependencies. Further activities are also considered to provide answers to 2nd and 3rd pillars and generate a technology roadmap.

• ACT is mandated to collaborate in the Multinational Experiment MNE-7 [R13] & [R14]. Over a 2-year period, this project will address the “Assured Access to the Global Commons”: Maritime, Air, Space and Cyberspace domains. The Space domain (and its interface with Maritime and Cyberspace domains) is of specific interest for NAFAG, with several products expected:

o Product 1 - Handbook on Dependencies, Vulnerabilities and Threats in Space, expected in November 2011;

o Product 2 - Strategic Analysis of Influence & Deterrence in Space, in June 2012. This analysis will use tabletop experiments on some selected scenarios;

o Product 3 - Proposals for Collaborative Mitigation of Denial of Space Capabilities, by November 2012.

• With the overall concern of “Access to Global Commons” and considering ISAF feedback, ACT has been given a mandate to address several Space issues: Space Policy, Space Command and Control Structure, Space Situational Awareness, Training, Space ISR capabilities.

o ACT is lead of an Integrated Project Team (IPT) that has been tasked to address NATO space policy and to provide guidance to NATO. First inputs on Space dependencies and vulnerabilities are expected by mid-2012.

o In parallel, Space capabilities and requirements are been considered in the planning process (NDPP and CP): e.g. Communications, GNSS…


6

2.2 Space Related Areas and Missions

In the absence of a NATO Space Policy, a description of Space Domain can be taken from Allied Joint Publication 3.3 [R15]. This document highlights the Space Mission Areas, describes the attributes of Space useful to a Joint force and the role of military Space Command and Control, along with providing an overview of Space Capabilities.

Table 1 summarizes the four Space Mission Areas describing the capabilities Space brings to the fight and the associated main Missions/Functions considered.

Table 1 : AJP-3.3 (A) Space Domain

Mission Areas Functions and Operations

Space Force Enhancement Mission

ISR

Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment

Environmental monitoring

Communications

Position, Velocity, Time, and Navigation

Space Control Mission

Space Situational Awareness

Offensive space control operations

Defensive space control operations

Space Support Mission

Space lift

Satellite operations

Reconstitution of Space Forces

Space Force Application Mission

Attacks against terrestrial-based targets carried out by military weapons systems operating in or through space

Space Force Enhancement Mission Area

Force enhancement operations multiply effectiveness by enhancing battlespace awareness and providing needed warfighter support. There are 5 force enhancement functions:

• ISR;

• Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment;

• Environmental monitoring;

• Communications;

• Position, Velocity, Time and Navigation.

Space Control Mission Area

Space control involves operations conducted to attain and maintain a desired degree of space superiority by the destruction, degradation or disruption of adversary space capability. The main objectives of space control operations are to allow friendly forces to exploit space capabilities, while negating an adversary’s ability to do the same:


7

• Space Situational Awareness (SSA) is the result of sufficient knowledge about space-related conditions, constraints, capabilities and activities (both current and planned) in, from, toward or through space. Achieving SSA supports all levels of planners, decision makers and operators across the spectrum of terrestrial and space operations;

• Offensive space control operations deny, degrade, disrupt, destroy or deceive an adversary’s space capability or the service provided by a third-party’s space asset(s) to the adversary at a time and place of own choosing through attacks on the space and terrestrial nodes, or the links that comprise a space system;

• Defensive space control operations preserve space capabilities, withstand enemy attack, restore/recover space capabilities after an attack, and reconstitute space forces.

Space Support Mission Area

Space support operations consist of operations that launch, deploy, augment, maintain, sustain, replenish, de-orbit and recover space forces, including the C2 network configuration for space operations:

• Space lift delivers satellites, payloads and materiel to space. Space lift can be pursued from 2 approaches: launch-on-schedule, based on priority as well as launch vehicle and payload readiness, or launch-on-demand when required to accommodate user needs;

• Satellite operations are conducted to manoeuvre, configure and sustain on-orbit forces, and to activate on-orbit spares;

• Reconstitution of Space Forces refers to plans and operations for replenishing space forces in the event of loss of space assets. This could include repositioning and reconfiguring surviving assets, augmentation by civil and commercial capabilities and replacement of lost assets.

Space Force Application Mission Area

The application of force would consist of attacks against terrestrial-based targets carried out by military weapons systems operating in or through space. Currently, there are no force application assets operating in space.

In addition, Mission Support capabilities can also be considered as functional areas that cut across all mission areas and provide the infrastructure required to support all 4 space mission areas.

2.3 NATO and Space Missions

Looking more specifically at NATO:

• Force Enhancement Area is directly relevant as Space Services are provided to and can be used by NATO forces;

• NATO does not appear to be specifically involved in Space Support and Space Control as these areas are usually managed by Space nations or organisation. However, a NATO contribution to aspects of Space Control can be assured: e.g. SSA and Space preservation;

• Up to now, Space Force Application is an area not related to NATO mission;

• Space Mission Support capabilities are areas typically outside NATO missions.


8

Following the Lessons Learned on the use of Space-based capabilities in Afghanistan, NATO supports the need for a Space coordination cell that could optimise nationally-provided space capabilities. The studies are on going. In addition, the concept of permanent access to Global Commons leads to the need for NATO to have a Space policy. As previously mentioned, the associated studies have been developed in ACT.

Within NATO, Space Capable Nations (US, UK, GE, CAN, FR…) have already established policies and structures, and could be supporting future NATO analysis and activities.

2.4 NAFAG Activities and Structures

The NAFAG Term of Reference [R16] provides a definition of NAFAG responsibilities, mission and tasks:

The mission of the NAFAG is to enable, in the aerospace domain, multi-national co-operation on delivery of interoperable military capabilities to improve NATO forces' effectiveness over the whole spectrum of current and future operations.

As such, Space areas and missions constitute Issues of Interest for NAFAG from different points of view:

• ACGs are natural “Space Service Users” to provide effective Airspace Capabilities. Capabilities addressed by ACGs are for a large part dependent on Space Services (Space Force Enhancement Operations Area): Position, Timing and Timing applications, ISR and ISTAR functions, Communication…. For each airspace capability, functions and user’s requirements can be specified, unacceptable space dependence can be reported, deficiencies/gaps specifically linked to Space can be identified…

• ACGs can also be considered as potential “Space Service Providers”. Apart from having the possibility to provide additional Space Systems (Space Support Mission Area) by e.g. air launch of satellites, or complement Space services (Space Force Enhancement Operations Area) by e.g. providing BLOS Communication relay or GNSS pseudolite platforms, the capability to preserve or contribute to preserve Space systems and services (Space Control Area) can be considered and assessed.

These two items perfectly fit under the RTO SCI Space Capability Preservation Framework: “Space Service User” leading to a Space Dependency and “Space Service Provider” contributing to the Risk Mitigating pillar. As such, NAFAG CGs and BOA analysis could contribute to the work envisioned under this RTO-led LTCR.

For each item, specific subjects could be identified that will support dedicated activities amongst one of NAFAG Business Areas:

• Requirements Harmonization and Translation Mechanism;

• Interoperability through Standardization;

• Interoperability through Armaments Procurements;

• Information Exchange;

• Leverage Defence Technology & Industry;

• Demonstrations.


9

However, the present NAFAG structure does not specifically allow considering the Space Domain: no dedicated Air Capability Group is addressing the subject and for the moment no national Space Subject Matter Expert (SME) are allocated to NAFAG activities.

In its present structure (Figure 1), Space Preservation (LTCR) is the only domain that could be considered under ACG 3 to support RTO SCI lead activity. But there again, no SME are provided.

Effective

Engagement

Survivability

Force Protection

Deployability

Mobility

Effective

IntelligenceEffective

C3

CNAD Domain NC3B Domain

Te

ch

nic

al D

om

ain

Level-2

NAFAG

ACG3Survivability

ACG2Effective Engagement

ACG5Global Mobility

JCGISRInt, Surv Rece

JCGC2C&C

NAFAG

ACG3Survivability

ACG2Effective Engagement

ACG5Global Mobility

JCGISRInt, Surv Rece

JCGC2C&C

Technical Domain

EA (ESDWG)

Technical Domain

NUAIWG

Technical Domain

NADWG

Technical Domain

ED (SG2)

Technical Domain

ALSJWG

Technical Domain

JPACWGTechnical Domain

HUMINT WG

Technical Domain

MASINT WG

Technical Domain

ES (SEWWG)

Technical Domain

MTDS WG

Technical Domain

ASIISG

Technical Domain

IMINT WG

Technical Domain

AASG

Level-3

Technical Domain

AVS

Technical Domain

AAI

Technical Domain

AEE

Technical Domain

EA (ESDWG)

Technical Domain

NUAIWG

Technical Domain

NADWG

Technical Domain

ED (SG2)

Technical Domain

ED (SG2)

Technical Domain

ALSJWG

Technical Domain

JPACWGTechnical Domain

HUMINT WG

Technical Domain

MASINT WG

Technical Domain

ES (SEWWG)

Technical Domain

MTDS WG

Technical Domain

ASIISG

Technical Domain

IMINT WG

Technical Domain

AASG

Level-3

Technical Domain

AVS

Technical Domain

AAI

Technical Domain

AEE

Space

Preservation

Space

Preservation

Figure 1 : NAFAG Present Structure

In fact, Space appears more as a “holistic” issue that could better fit under the future CNAD “Capability” structure as a transverse technical domain, covering and interfering with all NATO Capabilities in a way similar to e.g. the UAS domain (Figure 2).

CNAD ACT NC3O MC SNLC

Effective

Engagement

Survivability

Force Protection

Deployability

Mobility

Effective

Intelligence

Effective

C3

Timely

Force

Availability

Logistics

SustainabilityTechnical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

Technical

Domain

College

CC&MG CC&MG CC&MG CC&MG

UASUAS

SpaceSpace

Figure 2: Future CNAD Capability Structure


10

3 Aerospace Capability Groups and Space

During 1st BOA meeting (October 2010), the following tasking was defined for ACGs:

• Identify Space Services used for Aerospace Capabilities:

o Functions, Users, Performances, Requirements…

o Solutions, Gaps, Interoperability issues…

• Identify Capabilities to Counter Threats against (all?) Space Services and Space Systems:

o Detect, Predict, Plan or Counter, Neutralize, Destroy…

o Requirements, Solutions, Gaps, Issues….

• Identify On-going - Planned - Potential Activities:

o NAFAG / NATO;

o Aerospace / Global…

Note: it was agreed that this analysis had to be performed in the present ACGs structure and at the level of details compatible with existing allocated resources.

Annexes 2 to 6 provide detailed data about ACGs potential subjects of interests in relation to the different Space Missions and Functions. From these elements, an analysis and a synthesis were performed at the BOA level:

• First table present a synthetic view of the potential implication of ACGs activities with the Space Areas and Missions;

• Second table presents potential activities to be considered by ACGs.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

11

Table 2 : NAFAG ACGs and Space Areas

Space Capabilities - Areas and Missions ACG

2 ACG

3 JCG ISR

ACG 5

ACG 6

Space force enhancement capabilities contribute to maximizing the effectiveness of military air, land, sea, and space operations

ISR X X X

Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment X X X

Environmental Monitoring X X X

Communications X X X X X

Positioning, Velocity, Time and Navigation X X X X X

Space control capabilities attain and maintain a desired degree of space superiority by allowing friendly forces to exploit space capabilities while negating an adversary’s ability to do the same

Offensive Space Control X X

Defensive Space Control X

Space Situational Awareness X X

Space support capabilities provide critical launch and satellite control infrastructure, capabilities and technologies that enable the other mission areas to effectively perform their missions

Spacelift

Satellite Operations

Reconstitution of Space Forces X X X

Space Force Application considers combat operations to influence the course and outcome of conflict by holding terrestrial targets at risk

In Space

Through Space

NAFAG BOA June 2011

12

Table 3 : NAFAG ACGs and Potential “Space Related” Activities

Potential “ Space related” Activity ACG 2

ACG 3

JCG ISR

ACG 5

ACG 6

Gro

up

1

Evaluation of dependence on GNSS

Evaluation of dependence on BLOS Satellite Communication

Evaluation of dependence on Space ISR information and products

Evaluation of dependence on Space Environmental information and products (e.g. weather satellite data)

Evaluation of dependence on Space SSA information and products

Feasibility, availability and constraints of satellite communications for all NAFAG Capabilities

Gro

up

2

Interoperability of satellite communications for all NAFAG Capabilities

Interoperability for exchange of Space ISR information between NATO nations: e.g. extension of NIIA to the Space products

Interoperability for exchange of “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” information between NATO nations

Interoperability for exchange of Environmental information between NATO nations

Interoperability for exchange of SSA information between NATO nations

Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with Space ISR information

Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with SSA Space information

Potential “ Space related” Activity ACG 2

ACG 3

JCG ISR

ACG 5

ACG 6

NAFAG BOA June 2011

13

Gro

up

3

Technical analysis of potential alternative means to BLOS space communication

Technical analysis on effective engagement against Space Systems, after definition of Operational Requirements

Technical analysis on supporting the “Defensive Space Control“ function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements

Technical analysis on supporting the “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements

Technical analysis on supporting the “PVTN” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements

Technical analysis on supporting the “Reconstitution of Space Forces” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements

NAFAG BOA June 2011

14

4 Proposed Way Ahead

The analysis performed in the previous chapter identified different activities that could be performed by one or more ACGs. Depending on the associated effort required, a classification of those activities regarding timeline is proposed.

The realisation of these activities may also require additional expertise, not available in the present NAFAG, ACGs or even CNAD structure. Different solutions are proposed as far as organisation of NAFAG.

Considering already ongoing activities, under ACT or RTO lead, it appears necessary to coordinate future NAFAG work in the Space domain. Such coordination is needed to avoid duplication and to guarantee that validated concepts of employment, requirements and technical solutions are considered.

An initial coordination task will also be needed, as some of these technical issues may already be covered by other NATO forum (e.g. C3O for Satellite Communications or GNSS).

4.1 Activities Calendar

• Short term activities

Short term studies are directly linked to the issue of dependency of Airspace Capabilities to Space Service.

A first step in this dependency issue could be performed at NAFAG level, almost immediately, without too large involvement of the present committees; e.g.:

• Participation in a Specialist Workshop or Space Symposium: e.g. RTO SCI Workshop in 2012, in support of ET-238 activities;

• Topical meetings with participation of a limited number of SMEs, from nations or international organisations (e.g. ESA). Note that a topical meeting on “Space ISR” has already been organised in May 2008. Potential topics to be considered may include: capabilities, dependencies and vulnerabilities for GNSS, BLOS…

Corresponding activities [Group 1] are:

• Evaluation of dependence on GNSS;

• Evaluation of dependence on BLOS Satellite Communication;

• Evaluation of dependence on Space ISR information and products;

• Evaluation of dependence on Space Environmental information and products (e.g. weather satellite data);

• Evaluation of dependence on Space SSA information and products;

• Feasibility, availability and constraints of satellite communications for all NAFAG Capabilities.

These activities will come directly in support of RTO efforts for LTCR “Space Capability Preservation” and will leverage the 1st pillar “Space Dependency” of the proposed framework under SCI-ET-238.

The following aspect of dependency, more related to risks and vulnerabilities, will require validated inputs from appropriate organisations; coordination of work with RTO SCI-ET-238 will need to be established.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

15

• Future activities

Long term activities are related to the risk mitigation issue and will analyse potential solution that may be considered to complement Space Service or support Space Capability with Air capabilities.

Such work may also require additional expertise, expended participation, dedicated resources…. There is a need to involve more technical expertise in the Space domain and the proposed activities will require specific and dedicated organisations: e.g. specialist team with a 3 year mandate…

Corresponding activities [Group 2] are:

• Interoperability of satellite communications for all NAFAG Capabilities;

• Interoperability for exchange of Space ISR information between NATO nations: e.g. extension of NIIA to the Space products;

• Interoperability for exchange of “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” information between NATO nations;

• Interoperability for exchange of Environmental information between NATO nations;

• Interoperability for exchange of SSA information between NATO nations;

• Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with Space ISR information;

• Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with SSA Space information.

Also classified as “future activities”, the following activities [Group3] appear to be more demanding and, for most of them, NATO military requirements will be needed to initiate and support the task:

• Technical analysis of potential alternative means to BLOS space communication;

• Technical analysis on effective engagement against Space Systems, after definition of Operational Requirements;

• Technical analysis on supporting the “Defensive Space Control“ function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements;

• Technical analysis on supporting the “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements;

• Technical analysis on supporting the “PVTN” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements;

• Technical analysis on supporting the “Reconstitution of Space Forces” function, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.

All these activities will support RTO efforts for LTCR “Space Capability Preservation”, as contributions to the 2nd and 3rd pillars of the proposed framework: “Risks and Threats” and “Risk Mitigating Solutions”.

They could also support activities performed at ACT level, either for a NATO Space policy or for Capability Planning. Such activities could include: e.g. analysis of new concepts (Operationally Responsive Space, use of mini/micro satellites, distributed sensors…) or definition of interoperability requirements.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

16

4.2 Organisation and Structure

Based on previous section, it appears that 3 options may be considered to allow NAFAG to take into consideration the Space Domain in its mandate:

• For short term analysis [Group 1], the present NAFAG structure can be maintained, with some additional expertise provided as required in the existing ACGs or sub-structures. Additional Specialist Teams or Tiger Teams may however be considered;

• For longer term activities [Group 2], the present NAFAG structure can still be used, but creation of untitled or non-untitled Working Groups on the dedicated subjects (to be decided) will be required. Note that such activities will require participation of many national or multi-national Space experts, not available now in NAFAG. Existing NAFAG structures (ACGs) could then contribute to activities of these groups. Additional information may also be required for other MAGs;

• For longer term activities [Group 3], a real Joint vision will be necessary to perform the proposed tasks, as no single solution can be found in the Air Domain only. This Joint analysis could be performed in 3 coordinated CGs, each under a specific MAG, but a JCG on Space seems a better option. As these activities will require an initial set of operational requirement, and potential iteration between requirement and solutions, coordination with the Integrated Project Team under ACT will be strongly recommended.

In all cases, support from NIAG and RTO will be required:

• Coordination with RTO SCI-238 will be an absolute necessity, as SCI-238 is the lead body on the Space Capability Preservation LTCR;

• Additional NIAG studies will be needed to support future ACGs activities: standardisation, programme, demonstration…

• Additional RTO studies may be required to support analysis of future capabilities.

As already mentioned, coordination with other NATO agencies, especially C3A on Communications, Navigation, Command & Control, need to be established to avoid duplication of work.

…

NAFAG BOA June 2011

17

Annexe 1 - Acronyms

ACG Aerospace Capability Group ACT Allied Command Transformation ADC Air Defense Committee AJP Allied Joint Publication AVT Applied Vehicle Technology BLOS Beyond Line Of Sight BOA Board Of Advisors C2 Command and Control C3O Consultation, Command and Control Organisation CG Capability Group CNAD Conference of National Armament Directors EA Electronic Attack ED Electronic Defense ES Electronic Surveillance ET Exploratory Team FFT Food For Thought GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System IMS International Military Staff IPT Integrated Project Team IS International Staff ISAF International Security Assistance Force ISR Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance ISTAR ISR Target Acquisition JAPCC Joint Air Power Competence Center JCG Joint Capability Group LOS Line Of Sight LTCR Long Term Capability Requirements MAG Main Armament Group NAAG NATO Army Armament Group NAFAG NATO Air Force Armament Group NNEC NATO Network Enabled Capability MD Missile Defense NIIA NATO ISR Interoperability Architecture NNAG NATO Navy Armament Group PAD Panel on Air Defense PALS Precision Approach and Landing System PVTN Position Velocity Timing and Navigation RLS RTO Lecture Series RTG RTO Task Group RTO Research and Technology Organisation RWS RTO Workshop SCI Systems and Concepts Integration SET Sensors & Electronics Technology SME Subject Matter Expert SSA Space Situational Awareness UAS Unmanned Aerial System UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

NAFAG BOA June 2011

18

Annexe 2 – ACG2 Potential Involvement in Space Domain

The mission of the ACG2 is to enable multi-national co-operation on delivery of interoperable military capabilities to improve NATO forces’ effectiveness in the area of Effective Engagement from the aerospace domain in support of current and future operations.

As such, ACG 2 is dependent on, or can be involved to support, the following Space missions and functions:


• ISR

ISR information is of primary importance for Air-to-Ground effective engagement; specifically the availability of high resolution, high precision and up-to-date mapping and geographic data is crucial. As such, ACG2 capabilities are heavily dependent on the availability of such data.

The dependence on Space ISR information and products (map and satellite imagery) is a concern that needs consideration.

• Environmental Monitoring

Weather information is of critical importance for accurate and timely application of effects with Air-to-Ground armament.

The dependence on Space Environmental information and products (e.g. weather satellite data) is a concern that needs consideration.

• Communication

Effective Engagement functions are dependent on Communications, both Line Of Sight (LOS) and Beyond Line Of Sight (BLOS), as rapid and effective links are required to either control weapon during the engagement phase (re-target, update, cancel ...) or to obtain Battle Damage Information (BDI) during or just after the engagement. Satellite communication is one of the primary means for BLOS between C2 centres, aircraft and effectors in a NNEC concept.

The feasibility, availability, constraints and interoperability of satellite communications needs to be considered. Alternative means need to be considered.

• PVTN

To optimise the effects and to limit collateral damage, almost all weapon systems and weapons need an accurate target location indication and require generating/using an optimised navigation from the launch point to the Desired Mean Point of Impact (DMPI). This is mainly obtained through the use of Global Navigation Satellite System ((GNSS) - GPS and Differential GPS for the moment, other potential systems like Galileo in the future.

The dependence on GNSS is a concern for ACG2 Capability.


• Offensive Space Control

NAFAG BOA June 2011

19

The application of effective engagement can be considered everywhere in the aerospace domain and this capability can be extended to support the Offensive space control operations and contribute to functions such as “deny, degrade, disrupt, destroy an adversary’s space capability … through attacks on the space and terrestrial nodes, or the links that comprise a space system”. Space ACG2 capabilities can be obtained through classical (kinetic) weapons or directed energy weapon, with lethal or non lethal effects.

Technical analysis on effective engagement against Space Systems needs to be considered, after definition of Operational Requirements.


• Reconstitution of Space Forces

In support of ACG5, ACG2 may be contributing to this function through its expertise in the field of Air-to-Air operation when considering satellite launch techniques more “tactical” than the classical Spacelift from a fixed site: e.g. release from transport aircraft or fighter.

Technical analysis on supporting the “Reconstitution of Space Forces” function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

20


The mission of the ACG3 is to enable multi-national co-operation on delivery of interoperable military capabilities to improve NATO forces’ effectiveness in the area of survivability of NATO Nations aerospace assets in support of current and future operations.

As such, ACG 3 is dependent on, or can be involved to support, the following Space missions and functions:


• Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment

Technical means of action used and considered by ACG3 in the area of survivability of NATO Nations aerospace assets can be used to contribute to this function. Electronic Surveillance (ES), e.g. Signal intelligence, can provide valuable information about incoming space threat (e.g. Strategic or tactical ballistic missiles, satellite control or payload communication…) that could be fused with other source of information (radar or electro-optical surveillance).

Technical analysis on supporting the “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.

• Communication

Same as ACG2 as far as exchange of information between different actors, sensors…

• PVTN

Same as ACG2 as far as positioning of actors or threats…


• Offensive Space Control

Same as ACG 2 with the application of Electronic Attack (EA) measures

• Defensive Space Control

As for Offensive Control, the use of ES and Electronic Defence (ED) can be considered against enemy space activities: e.g. interception or jamming of satellite control communication…

Technical analysis on supporting the “Defensive Space Control“ function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

21

Annexe 4 – JCG ISR Potential Involvement in Space Domain

The mission of JCG ISR is to support achievement of Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) within NATO and between NATO and national forces by developing and providing technical interoperability through standardization, technical capabilities demonstrations that support ISR in operationally-relevant situations, and multinational programmes and cooperation. Achieving Information Superiority requires integration and interoperability for collection, exploitation, analysis, correlation, fusion and dissemination of data and information.

As such, JCG ISR is dependent on, or can be involved to support, the following Space missions and functions:


• ISR

ISR is the typical field of action for JCG ISR and it seems logical to expend its activity beyond the classical “air” domain to the “space” domain.

Interoperability for exchange of Space ISR information between NATO nations needs consideration: e.g. extension of NIIA to the Space products

The dependence on Space ISR information and products is also a concern that needs consideration.

Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with Space ISR information need to be studied


As for ACG3, the use of ISR techniques to provide valuable information about space threat (e.g. Strategic or tactical ballistic missiles sites) or to complement (fuse?) information from other source must be considered


Classical or more specific ISR products being also used for that mission, JCG ISR should be involved in a similar way as for ISR Space mission

Interoperability for exchange of Environmental information between NATO nations needs consideration.

The dependence on Space Environmental information and products (e.g. weather satellite data) is also a concern that needs consideration.

• Communications


• PVTN



• Space Situational Awareness

Space Situational Awareness is defined as “the knowledge and the understanding of military and non-military events, activities, circumstances and conditions within and associated with the space environment or space related systems that are relevant for current and future NATO interest, operations and exercises.” ISR techniques need to be considered to support that function and JCG ISR need to be involved in a similar way as for ISR Space mission.

NAFAG BOA June 2011

22

Interoperability for exchange of SSA information between NATO nations needs consideration: e.g. extension of NIIA to the SSA products

The dependence on Space SSA information and products is also a concern that needs consideration.

Complementarities of classical ISR Airborne techniques (UAV, aircraft) with SSA Space information need to be studied

NAFAG BOA June 2011

23


The mission of the ACG5 is to enable multi-national co-operation on delivery of interoperable military capabilities to improve NATO forces’ effectiveness in the area of Global Mobility in support of current and future operations.

As such, ACG5 is dependent on, or can be involved to support, the following Space missions and functions:


• ISR

ISR information is of primary importance for mobility either at a tactical or a strategic level; specifically the availability of high resolution, high precision and up-to-date mapping and geographic data is crucial. As for ACG2, ACG5 capabilities are heavily dependent on the availability of such data.

The dependence on Space ISR information and products (map and satellite imagery) is a concern that needs consideration.


As part of its mandate, ACG5 may be directly assessing the capability to provide such information in all conditions of deployment: availability of data everywhere in the world, interoperability with local products, use of alternative means (other than space assets)…

Interoperability for exchange of Environmental information between NATO nations needs consideration.

The dependence on Space Environmental information and products (e.g. weather satellite data) is also a concern that needs consideration.

• Communications


• PVTN

Same as ACG2 as far as positioning of actors or threats; this being of special interest for the future NATO Precision Approach and Landing Systems (PALS).

Alternative to Space assets to provide such a capability could also be assessed by ACG5: e.g; the use of UAS as airborne “pseudolites” able to broadcast a GNSS like Signal-in-Space. Pseudolites can be used either as an augmentation to GNSS or stand-alone, i.e. without any additional GNSS signal (e.g. in case of GNSS jamming).provide additional GNSS local or wide area communication relay

Technical analysis on supporting the “PVTN” function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.



As part of its mandate, ACG5 may be directly assessing the capability to contribute to this function through the use of techniques more “tactical” than the classical Spacelift from a fixed site: e.g. use of transport aircraft or fighter to provide an additional tactical satellite launch capability.


NAFAG BOA June 2011

24


The primary mission of ACG6 is to further the ability of NATO Nations to meet national and NATO requirements on Aerospace Command & Control (C2) and to achieve an improved interoperability between NATO and national air C2 (either airborne or fixed) in application of the NNEC concept. The aim is to provide the commander a global, clear, coherent and real-time picture of the air battle space.

As such, ACG6 is dependent on, or can be involved to support, the following Space missions and functions:



As a central point for aerospace C2, the capability to address such information is a concern for ACG6, with a specific focus on interoperability and exchange of information between nations.

Interoperability for exchange of “Integrated tactical warning and attack assessment” information between NATO nations needs consideration.

Note that this issue may already be covered by another NATO forum (C3O, MD IPT?)

• Communications


Alternative to Space assets to provide such a capability could also be assessed by ACG6: e.g; use of UAS as local or wide area communication relay

Technical analysis on supporting the “PVTN” function to be considered, for feasibility and interoperability, based on Operational Requirements.

• PVTN



• Space Situational Awareness

As for JCG ISR, ACG6 may be involved in the Air C2 aspects of the SSA function.



ACG6 may be involved in the C2 aspects of plans and operations for replenishing space forces in the event of loss of space assets. Complementarities and Interoperability with existing concepts, structures and technical solutions may be of concerned
