Posted on Oct 20, 2015
What do you think of the imminent commercialization of Wideband Global SATCOM?
Suspended Profile
5.51K
6
4
As 3SOPS accepts SCA of WGS 7: (http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/3_SOPS_accepts_SCA_of_WGS_7_999.html)
FBO.GOV has an RFP for "The Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS), MILSATCOM Directorate is contemplating a contract for commercial operations of the USAF WGS satellite constellation. The intent of this Request for Information (RFI) is to identify potential sources to perform 24/7 on-orbit operations and maintenance of the constellation of WGS satellite platforms and to gather industry's estimates of start-up and operation cost, timeline for going operational, and ability to provide the necessary capabilities." (Solicitation Number: 15-129)
FBO.GOV has an RFP for "The Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS), MILSATCOM Directorate is contemplating a contract for commercial operations of the USAF WGS satellite constellation. The intent of this Request for Information (RFI) is to identify potential sources to perform 24/7 on-orbit operations and maintenance of the constellation of WGS satellite platforms and to gather industry's estimates of start-up and operation cost, timeline for going operational, and ability to provide the necessary capabilities." (Solicitation Number: 15-129)
Posted in these groups: 
Satellite Controller
13S: Space Operations
40A: Space OperationsAFSPCUSASMDC/ARSTRAT
Satellite Controller 13S: Space Operations 40A: Space OperationsAFSPCUSASMDC/ARSTRAT
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 4
It is an interesting article and viewpoint, however this has been a consistent trend over the past 10 years. If you look at the Army WIN-T tactical networks, the majority of work is already commercialized, managed, and developed by industry (e.g. contract organizations) even while the networks and sites are operated and maintained b military personnel. Upgrades, modifications, and changes are still conducted primarily by industry personnel.
Taking this concept to a larger focus, the current trends of DoD, as a proposed cost savings measure on the basis of 'continuity' and 'technical expertise', have been to outsource support and development of capabilities. While this does provide cost savings measures by using larger, specialized organizations to provide support it also introduces a significant level or risk and near-certainty of cost overruns as demonstrated by the new naval ship platforms and the Air Force oint Strike Fighter.
In the end we have already given control over to industry and become as reliant on contractors and the commercial world even more so than the reliance of our forces to win our nation's wars. It is an inevitability due to budgetary constraints imposed by budgets and 'dream' programs while allowing the force to compromise its' individuality and abilities for self-sustainment. I believe that DoD no longer possesses the ability to operate independently without significant commercial support across the board, only further supporting your statement about the inevitability of this being applied to Wideband Global SATCOM as has already been done with C and Ku frequency bands.
Taking this concept to a larger focus, the current trends of DoD, as a proposed cost savings measure on the basis of 'continuity' and 'technical expertise', have been to outsource support and development of capabilities. While this does provide cost savings measures by using larger, specialized organizations to provide support it also introduces a significant level or risk and near-certainty of cost overruns as demonstrated by the new naval ship platforms and the Air Force oint Strike Fighter.
In the end we have already given control over to industry and become as reliant on contractors and the commercial world even more so than the reliance of our forces to win our nation's wars. It is an inevitability due to budgetary constraints imposed by budgets and 'dream' programs while allowing the force to compromise its' individuality and abilities for self-sustainment. I believe that DoD no longer possesses the ability to operate independently without significant commercial support across the board, only further supporting your statement about the inevitability of this being applied to Wideband Global SATCOM as has already been done with C and Ku frequency bands.
Suspended Profile
I have seen it first hand from both sides. Here's my thoughts:
The military or government should always remain in control; this includes keeping the smartest subject matter experts in uniform.
The military should allow its skilled technicians to have longer tours of duty if the required on the job training takes nearly a year to complete. The military could make a reserve unit for 3 SOPS much like how 19 SOPS is the backup for 1 SOPS.
The military or government should always remain in control; this includes keeping the smartest subject matter experts in uniform.
The military should allow its skilled technicians to have longer tours of duty if the required on the job training takes nearly a year to complete. The military could make a reserve unit for 3 SOPS much like how 19 SOPS is the backup for 1 SOPS.
As with many of the commercialization efforts by the military, this is not a smart move. I have no problem bringing contractor in for additional technical support/man power, but we should also be able to do the job independently if necessary.
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google