05_CHIRPs

Report
CHIRP’s Potential to Introduce
a New USAF Space
Acquisition Paradigm
16 October 2012
Joe Simonds
Deputy Director of Contracts, SMC/SYK
George Sullivan
Contract Specialist SMC/SYK
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Background
• The Alternative Infrared Satellite System (AIRSS) project
began in 2006 at the Developmental Plans Directorate (XR)
of the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC).
• In 2008, Americom Government Services (AGS) submitted
an unsolicited proposal that led to CHIRP program stand-up.
• Hosted Payload Office (HPO) formed in July 2011 to
coordinate USAF Space Command hosted payload efforts.
• CHIRP launches flawlessly in September 2011 and begins
on-orbit ops.
• Oct 2011 – CHIRP+ Acquisition planning begins
• 28 Jan 2012 – PMD formalizing HPO approved by Lt. Gen.
Ellen Pawlikowski.
• March 2012 - HPO IDIQ Acq planning begins
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
2
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Policies Supporting the Use of Hosted Payloads
• The FY09 Defense Authorization Bill instructed the Secretary
of Defense to assess “the manner in which commercial satellite
capabilities are used by the Department of Defense and options
for expanding such use or identifying new means to leverage
commercial satellite capabilities, such as hosting payloads”
• Report on Technology Horizons – A Vision for Air Force
Science & Technology During 2010-2030: “Fractionated or
distributed space systems can potentially provide greater onorbit capability at lower cost than is achievable with traditional
approaches, while allowing rapid reconstitution in the event that
elements in the constellation are lost.”
• National Security Space Strategy – Unclassified Summary,
Dept. of Defense and Director of National Intelligence, January
2011: “As we invest in next generation space capabilities and fill
gaps in current capabilities, we will include resilience as a key
criterion in evaluating alternative architectures. Resilience can
be achieved in a variety of ways, to include… hosting payloads
on a mix of platforms in various orbits.”
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
3
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
USAF Evolving Approach to handle the 3 Cs
• The Three Cs:
• Congested – physical and radiofrequency spectrum
• Contested – advances in adversarial counterspace
capabilities
• Competitive – lower barriers to entry and increasing access
to advanced technologies at lower cost
• New architecture terminology: Resilient and robust.
Architectures must be able to withstand steadily growing threat
of accidental and intentional interference (resilience) while
maintaining or enhancing capabilities provided to the warfighter
(robust)
• Exploring disaggregated architectures – USAF moving away
from “Battlestar Gallactica” approach to examine possibilities for
disaggregated architectures involving, inter alia, hosted
payloads.
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
4
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
CHIRP Project
Date
Event
Dec 05
USecD Krieg calls for new competitor for SBIRS
Apr 06-Apr 08
XR develops requirements and hardware for this competitor, renamed 3rd
Generation Infrared Surveillance (3GIRS)
Jan 08
AGS submits an unsolicited proposal to SMC for CHIRP rideshare using
upgraded one-eye sensor from SAIC-RR payload
Jun 08
SMC contracts with AGS for CHIRP, with a payload delivery in Jul 09 and
an expected launch in May 10
Jul 09-Dec 09
Due to delays in the payload development, the payload delivery is pushed
back – first to Oct 09, then Dec 09, and finally May 10
Feb 10
Launch is delayed until 3rd quarter 2011 - $18.5M ECP required
Sep 2011
CHIRP launches and is operating on-orbit as expected
CHIRP was committed to an aggressive schedule but suffered delays resulting mainly
from the sensor upgrade and, to a lesser extent, integration and launch issues.
Nevertheless, the sensor has been operating on-orbit as expected and was launched
far more quickly than traditional military free-fliers.
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
5
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
CHIRP Mission Objectives
1. Collect real-world IR data commensurate with 3GIRS performance
• Collect against cooperative targets and targets of opportunity
• Assess performance of WFOV sensor against a wide variety of weather
and seasonal conditions
2. Investigate spacecraft-sensor interactions and sensor behavior in
space environment
• Jitter, line-of-sight motion, thruster firings, out-gassing,
EMI, contamination, thermal interactions, etc.
• Natural space environment effects over mission life
3. Explore operational issues relevant to 3GIRS
• Algorithm performance on real-world data
• Effect of the communication link on overall performance
4. Evaluate long-term suitability of a commercial host
• Mass, power, thermal, schedule, command and data link constraints
unique to the “ride” opportunity
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
6
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Commercially Hosted IR Payload (CHIRP)
On-Orbit Testing of WFOV Data & CONOPs
Payload
• SAIC sensor from payload contract
• ¼ earth, 1-eye field of view
• No on-board processing
• Tactical cryocoolers
• SWIR, MWIR, SWIR/MWIR STG
• Min. 1 year design life
• NSA hardware encryption
• Class D mission
• MW/MD/BA/TI/C&E Mission areas
SES World Skies USG
Solutions Commercial
Launch
• Ariane V
• GEO at 87º W
Longitude
• 21 Sep 2011
• Dual spacecraft launch
Cost $82.5M* / FFP
(Awarded 27 Jun 08)
*Includes launch and operations
Spacecraft Bus
• Enhanced STAR 2.4 Bus
• Standardized secondary
payload interface
• Dedicated payload
thermal radiator
• Commercial C2 ground
• Mission data downlink
via dedicated
transponders
On-Orbit/Ground Processing
• 1+ month initialization & checkout
• View over CONUS test ranges
• Transmit at 70Mbps to ground
• Mission Analysis Center for
end-to-end processing
• DoD data archive and exploitation
Teleport
Control Center
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
7
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
CHIRP Lessons Learned - Contracting
1. Finish up-front systems
engineering and development
before contracting for launch
2. Keep it simple and avoid multi-tier
subcontracts and overlapping
contracts
a) Reduces pass-through costs
b) Reduces potential for
communication problems
3. Have one Govt team responsible
for payload development and
hosting
4. Despite problems and ECP – total
costs and schedule ended up
being a small fraction of those for
a typical free-flier
Pre-integration and test CHIRP
Contractual Structure
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
8
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
CHIRP Lessons Learned - Technical
Problem
Potential Fix
Getting attitude, time, or other information between the
unsecured system of the vehicle and the secured
system of the payload requires a manual step and thus
impacts payload mission data utility
1)
Hard to calibrate the sensor and monitor FPA
degradation while the payload is in orbit because it
affixed to the vehicle. Problem more a challenge to
OPIR sensors and remote sensing platforms
1)
Needed to make undesirable modifications to payload
so that it will not interfere with vehicle
E.g., payload baffle shortened to make room for
the vehicle’s antennae; cryocooler was designed
with insufficient knowledge of the heat
dissipation plan for the space vehicle
Insist on receiving vehicle’s specs early on in the
process to address interference between the payload
and vehicle in the design phase
Generic “do no harm” principle insists that the needs of
the vehicle always trump the requirements of the
payload – even at the cost of the mission
E.g., the commercial host may need to
move the satellite so that the satellite
cannot view friendly targets
Possible contractual clauses to protect Government
interests and provide liquidated damages for certain
eventualities; but otherwise, this may be an unavoidable
risk of commercial rideshares
2)
2)
Add on-board infrastructure so the vehicle can
securely transfer information to payload
Add components to payload so that it can be selfsufficient (star trackers, GPS, etc.)
Add on-board calibration equipment,
albeit at a cost of additional weight
Have the ability to nod into deep space (and store
data during the process)
Problems currently being addressed real-time and novel solutions being employed.
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
9
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Challenges with Commercially Hosted Payloads
Government vs. Commercial schedules
• A contractor cannot delay the launch without risking a
loss of satellite coverage.
• The Air Force does not want to deliver the payload for
integration until it has been fully tested.
• Loss of launch opportunity could kill a program – very
high schedule risk
• CHIRP benefited from confluence of fortunate
circumstances regarding delays in both Govt and
commercial schedules
• Contractors’ launch schedules, orbits and payload
activation plans not always best for Government’s
purposes, but variances can be negotiated
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
10
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
R&D Advantages of Hosted Payloads
TECHNOLOGY READINESS LEVELS
TRL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Basic principles observed and reported.
Technology concept and/or application formulated.
Analytical and experimental critical function and/or
characteristic proof of concept.
Component and/or breadboard validation in
laboratory environment.
Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant
environment.
System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration
in a relevant environment.
System prototype demonstration in an operational
environment.
Actual system completed and qualified through test
and demonstration.
Actual system proven through successful mission
operations.
Source: DOD Deskbook 5000.2-R AP1.1
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
- Air Force will not fully rely
on technology until it
passes through all TRLs.
- New space tech often
stalls at level 6, since the
next step requires a
demonstration in the
operational environment.
- The high failure rate
between TRL 6 and 7,
earned that step the
moniker of the “valley of
death.”
- Hosted payloads provide
a cheap and efficient way
for an R&D prototype to
traverse the “valley of
death.”
Note: Colors are not DOD standard
11
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Life After CHIRP
• CHIRP a great success despite speed bumps and technical limitations
• Projected benefits of hosted payloads validated
• Cost savings apparent:
• CHIRP R&D costs (including development, program office costs,
calibration, testing, integration, launch, and ground infrastructure
for C2 and MDP) = $216M
• Operational legacy free-flier costs (build and launch) = ~$1B
• Technological advantages:
• OPIR payload development to launch: 3-5 years
• Legacy free-flier development to launch: 10-15 years
• Legacy system is already a proven technology, is operational, certified
and providing a critical national capability, but TRLs for HP
technologies are rising and potential for operational use being proven
• Cost-cutting and rising threats driving increased focus of DoD and
Congress on disaggregation, possibly signaling a paradigm shift to
prioritizing acquisition of small, less-expensive assets over large,
complex assets
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
12
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Establishment of Hosted Payload Office (HPO)
• The HPO PMD signed by Lt. Gen Pawlikowski on 28 Jan 2012
tasks the HPO with:
• Coordinating with SMC directorates for detailed
implementation of hosted payload options
• Performing concept and architecture development and risk
reduction
• Coordinate the design, development, procurement, test,
launch, and operations of government payloads within
operational architectures on commercial and/or government
hosts.
• Hosted payload = an instrument or package of equipment affixed
to a host spacecraft, which operates in orbit making use of
available capabilities of the host spacecraft, including mass,
power, and/or communications. (Futron Guidebook definition)
• Industry engaged via SMC/HPA forum in September 2011,
Satellite 2012 Conference in March 2012 and HPA summits in DC
in October 2011 and September 2012
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
13
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
HPO – Longer-term Big Picture
• Standing up an IDIQ (HoPS – Hosted Payload Services) for
procuring launch, integration and ops for developed
payloads:
• Need money and Congressionally-approved
requirements from SMC directorates
• Other SMC directorates expressing interest:
• Already engaged with Infrared Systems, MilSatCom,
Space Weather and Space Superiority Directorates
• GPS has indicated some interest
• NASA is very interested and an IPT participant
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
14
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
HoPS Status and Current Contract Structure
• Market research underway:
•
•
•
Contracting/business workshop with HPA members held in July 2012
Sources sought synopsis issued September 17, 2012; responses
received October 1, 2012
Industry One-on-Ones held October 2 and 3, 2012
• Draft RFP planned for November and Industry Day for December
• ASP currently being drafted
• Contract Structure
•
•
•
Multiple-award IDIQ
Ceiling estimated at value of 5-6 delivery orders
Planning to request approval to consider this as supplies, not services
•
•
•
•
Supplies being delivery on-orbit and useable data delivered
Will have to rename contract (originally thought of as services)
5-year PoP as a “trial run”
FAR 12/FFP delivery orders preferred
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
15
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
CHIRP+
• Key part of Infrared Systems Directorate’s Overhead
Persistent Infrared (OPIR) Space Modernization Initiative
investment effort
• Purchase of 9 degree OPIR staring sensor to be launched
as a hosted payload
• Class C sensor with 3-5 year design life optimized for
battlespace awareness mission
• High TRL heritage hardware to be used
• 36 month development schedule after ATP
• Intended to advance TRL of OPIR Wide Field of View
(WFOV) technology
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
16
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
OPIR Mission Areas
•
Missile Warning
•
•
Missile Defense
•
•
Provide reliable, accurate, and timely IR target signature and threat performance data
to warfighters, the intelligence community, weapon system developers, and other
users
Battlespace Characterization/Awareness
•
•
Provide reliable, accurate, and timely information to defensive systems
Technical Intelligence
•
•
Reliable, unambiguous, timely, and accurate missile warning information to the
President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, Unified Commanders, and
other users
Provide reliable, accurate, and timely data to enhance situational awareness, nonballistic missile threat warning, decision support, battle damage assessment and
intelligence information (for land, sea, air, and space) for unified commanders, Joint
Task Force (JTF) Commanders, and other users
Civil/Environmental Uses
•
Provide support to national, state, local, foreign, and civil and environment agencies
for natural and man-made disasters and events (e.g., cloud cover, ash clouds, snow
and ice accumulation, electrical grid blackouts, forest fires, floods)
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
17
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Challenges to DoD Use of Hosted Payloads
• Money and Politics
• Lack of funds committed to stand up new HP projects
• Funds still tied up in legacy programs
• Substantial effort by SMC and AFSPC required to
refocus funding priorities despite already having HQ,
AFSPC and SMC leadership support
• Culture
• Acquisition process requires streamlining to capitalize on
commercial opportunities
• Inversion of requirements definition approach: Focus first
on how to field something inexpensive with a few key
capabilities versus something large with myriad
capabilities
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
18
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
Conclusion
• CHIRP is only the beginning, and a successful one at that
• Many invaluable lessons learned from CHIRP can be
applied on CHIRP+
• HPO stand-up and PMD approval a clear sign of
leadership support and commitment to pursuing HP
opportunities
• CHIRP success and increasing DoD and NASA support
signal potential for acquisition paradigm shift
• Challenges remain, many of which can be surmounted by
a groundswell of support from industry, Congress and DoD
for the use of hosted payloads in disaggregated
architectures and for rapid TRL advancement
UNCLASSIFIED -- FOUO
19

similar documents