• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

	Director, Operational Test & Evaluation
FY97 Annual Report

MILSTAR SATELLITE SYSTEM

	Air Force ACAT ID Program 6 Satellites Total program cost (TY$) $11820M Average unit cost (TY$) $990M Full-rate production 4QFY99 Prime Contractor Lockheed Martin

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION 2010

The Milstar satellite system supports strategic and tactical missions through global communications that are secure, jam resistant, survivable, and have a low probability of intercept. Milstar's unique capabilities will enable our forces to maintain information superiority throughout all levels of conflict, enhancing full-dimensional protection and ensuring that warfighters retain freedom of action through continuous, secure communication.

Through the combined capabilities of a six satellite constellation, Milstar provides support for worldwide coverage; multi-Service ground, airborne, and shipborne terminals for connectivity; and a mission control segment with constellation control stations proliferated worldwide for survivability. The following paragraphs describe the three Milstar segments-space, terminal, and mission control:

• Space Segment: The full operational capability of Milstar will be provided by four low-inclined geosynchronous satellites. The first two satellites possess the original strategic low data rate (LDR) payload, while the third and subsequent satellites will also possess a tactical medium-data rate (MDR) payload. The MDR payload was added in the Milstar program in 1992 in response to a congressional request to restructure the program to accommodate tactical users. Each MDR-capable satellite will have a variety of antennas to support the requirements of both tactical and strategic users. Additionally, cross links between the satellites will provide worldwide connectivity without using vulnerable ground relays. A polar adjunct, currently under study, will be added to the Milstar constellation to meet the requirements of coverage at latitudes above 65 degrees North.

• Terminal Segment: The Milstar terminal segment will consist of a family of multi-Service ground, shipborne, submarine, and airborne terminals functionally interoperable and tailored to meet the individual Service requirements. These terminals consist of the Air Force terminal, the Navy Extremely High Frequency Satellite Program (NESP) terminal, and both the Army's Single-Channel Antijam Man-Portable (SCAMP) terminal and the Secure, Mobile, Antijam, Reliable, Tactical, Terminal (SMART-T). The SMART-T is the first MDR-capable terminal. The Navy's NESP terminals will be upgraded to be MDR capable.

• Mission Control Segment: The Milstar mission control segment provides communications resource management and satellite operations support. The primary responsibility of the mission control segment is to maintain the satellite constellation in a state of readiness to support user communication requirements during all levels of conflict.

The first Milstar satellite was launched in 1994 on-board a Titan IV rocket. The second satellite was launched in 1996. The third satellite, scheduled for launch in 1998, will be the first of four low- and medium-data rate capable satellites.

LDR IOT&E was conducted in two phases. Phase I LDR IOT&E addressed system connectivity and interoperability, while Phase II LDR IOT&E addressed system control, cross-link communications, and incomplete test events from Phase I testing. AFOTEC completed Phase I LDR IOT&E in September 1995. Phase I LDR IOT&E consisted of seven test events: (1) Dedicated Asset Test, (2) Pacific Fleet Operational Network Test, (3) UHF Backward Compatibility Test, (4) Demand Assigned Multiple Access Test, (5) Navy terminal FOT&E, (6) Fixed and Transportable Terminal Electromagnetic Pulse Test, and (7) Coverage Test.

Phase II LDR System IOT&E: Phase II test activity included (1) Air Force Operational Network Test, (2) Time Standard Module Data Integrity Test, (3) Over-the-Air-Rekey Test, (4) Mission Control Tests, and (5) Autonomy and Endurance Tests. AFOTEC concluded Phase II LDR IOT&E with the second Dedicated Asset Test (DAT II) in March 1997. DAT II addressed communications connectivity over networks using cross links between Flight 1 and Flight 2 Milstar satellites, as well as issues not resolved in Phase I LDR IOT&E.

Milstar Jamming Vulnerability Analysis: At the request of AFOTEC, the Air Force Information Warfare Center (AFIWC) completed an analysis of Milstar uplink and downlink jamming vulnerability in June 1997. AFOTEC based their evaluation of Milstar's uplink anti-jam performance on the AFIWIC vulnerability analysis. AFOTEC conducted a follow-on analysis to complement the AFIWIC analysis. The downlink anti-jam evaluation also utilized results of a Navy field test conducted in June 1996.

Milstar Intersegment Test: Army, Navy, and Air Force terminals participated in the Milstar Flight 3 Intersegment Test conducted in July 1997. In this developmental test, the Service terminals were connected to the Milstar Flight 3 satellite payloads at the contractor's facility. These tests examined the compatibility and interoperability of the terminals with the Milstar LDR and MDR payloads.

Four COIs provide the basis for the operational evaluation of the Milstar LDR system.

• System Connectivity, which addresses the ability of the Milstar system to provide secure, worldwide, interoperable communications at all levels of conflict, was unsatisfactory due to several limitations. One key parameter (Milstar Demand Assigned Multiple Access) is unresolved pending the receipt of a command-approved concept of operations from USSTRATCOM and fielding of an Air Force terminal software upgrade by the program office. AFOTEC is planning to retest this parameter. A number of threshold parameters, including Voice Quality, Teletype Quality, and JCS Emergency Action Message (EAM) percentage of correct message receipt did not meet their respective requirements. None of these limitations is related to satellite performance.

• System Control, which addresses the ability of Milstar ground segment to provide adequate constellation planning, management, and control, was satisfactory with limitations. The limitations reflect the fact that two of the four System Control Elements, Mission Planning Element and Mission Development Element, were not ready for IOT&E evaluation during the LDR test program. The two elements tested, Mission Control Element and Mission Support Element, were evaluated as effective in providing essential constellation control.

• System Survivability, which addresses the ability of Milstar to provide the minimum essential wartime communications through all levels of conflict and the postattack period, was satisfactory.

• System Suitability, which addresses the ability of Milstar to support system dependability and logistics, was satisfactory with limitations. The Air Force airborne and transportable terminals demonstrated lower than expected reliability, and the Air Force terminal software is immature. Failure to meet reliability and maintenance requirements for the Air Force terminal primarily stems from software problems, insufficient manpower, and inadequate unit proficiency training.

DOT&E will submit the final Milstar 1 Report to Congress in April 1998. The preliminary evaluation of the system is that, although the satellite portion of the Milstar system is performing very well, the non-space portions of the system will probably not be rated as fully effective and suitable until such time as the most serious shortcomings relating to connectivity, control, and the Air Force terminal are corrected.

Air Force Space Command declared Milstar's IOC-1 on July 21, 1997.

Although the Milstar submarine terminal met low-probability of intercept requirements, operational tests of the terminal under realistic conditions indicated an increased vulnerability to detection than had been found in developmental testing. This experience will be applied to future Milstar operational testing.