Should the DOD move to Commercial Satcom Use for their Communications?

[fredinno]

For people who are unaware, the Pentagon currently uses its own satellite communications system, the WGS (Wideband Global Satcom) for remote communications. However, the DOD is considering ending that program, instead using commercial satellite communications systems to do so- their budget is limited, and bandwidth demand is increasing. 

Though commercial comsats seem like a good way to do extend capabilities for lower cost, (not to mention increase redundancy) and studies to do so have been made, but the process has been going very slowly so far. Obviously, there are people against this, but some believe that commercial comsats cannot deliver for specialized DOD needs. There is also the possibility that such a system would undermine the security of a currently very secretive system (something the DOD wants, for the obvious reasons that they are a military service, and communications are essential).

Edited January 23, 2016 by fredinno

[Spaceception]

41 minutes ago, fredinno said:

For people who are unaware, the Pentagon currently uses its own satellite communications system, the WGS (Wideband Global Satcom) for remote communications. However, the DOD is considering ending that program, instead using commercial satellite communications systems to do so- their budget is limited, and bandwidth demand is increasing. 

Though commercial comsats seem like a good way to do extend capabilities for lower cost, (not to mention increase redundancy) and studies to do so have been made, but the process has been going very slowly so far. Obviously, there are people against this, but some believe that commercial comsats cannot deliver for specialized DOD needs. There is also the possibility that such a system would undermine the security of a currently very secretive system (something the DOD wants, for the obvious reasons that they are a military service, and communications are essential).

Good idea, but the DOD will probably have to do a decent bit of retrofitting to make it work right, but I do agree it could lower costs, and that's always a good thing.

[Mazon Del]

They could theoretically maintain security, in an operational sense, by only sending encrypted data. The real question I might have is what similarities might exist between the two sides frequencies. If they are roughly the same, there might not be a whole lot of problems getting things to work. If they are rather far off, then there could be issues making things work nicely in a near term sense. In either case, the DoD maintaining a separate communications network for themselves in SOME capacity is required to ensure some level of continuous operations against an under teched but highly cyber opponent.

[fredinno]

11 hours ago, Mazon Del said:

They could theoretically maintain security, in an operational sense, by only sending encrypted data. The real question I might have is what similarities might exist between the two sides frequencies. If they are roughly the same, there might not be a whole lot of problems getting things to work. If they are rather far off, then there could be issues making things work nicely in a near term sense. In either case, the DoD maintaining a separate communications network for themselves in SOME capacity is required to ensure some level of continuous operations against an under teched but highly cyber opponent.

Maybe just make sure you have 3 as a backup, then use the rest from commercial sats?

[Mazon Del]

You need to have more than 3 satellites to ensure global coverage at 90% of all latitudes 24/7. Especially if you want any redundancy in what you are doing as systems will fail, and if you ever go up against a teched opponent, you should expect to lose a few. A "good" guide to look at is the GPS system.