The military says it wants space capability, not defenses against defense breaking

Washington: According to Rick de Vata, director of the Space and Missile Defense Center of Excellence, the Army plans to continue testing small satellites as a way to report future long-range capability requirements.

However, in yesterday’s remarks at the Huntsville, Ala. State, Aviation and Missile Defense Symposium, he made every effort to stress the Army’s current mantra that it did not want to build and operate its own satellites.

“We are not going to send satellites to the military,” de Fetta said. “Because we’re going to be doing experiments and doing a small group trial… Once we’ve demonstrated this technology, we’re going to put it back into these emerging architectures” put together by Space Forces and Space Command explained.

One of 12 Military Centers of Excellence, the FTAA is part of the Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) that currently serves as the military headquarters for both Space Command and Strategic Command, as well as providing support to Northern Command’s missiles. defense mission.

He explained that his center is responsible for developing space and missile needs based on the needs identified by multi-role military teams (CFTs). These requirements, in turn, drive development efforts. In addition, de Fetta noted that the center is responsible for scientific and technological research related to space and rockets.

He explained that space capabilities will be critical to the Army’s priority efforts to implement what he calls long-range precision fire – a requirement the service deems essential in any future conflict with China and/or Russia.

In fact, the long-range joint strike is one of the guiding principles of the Department of Defense’s new concept of joint warfare, which in turn lays the foundation for the new American method of warfare, and all field operations. (The Army’s plans for joint fire, including the development of long-range hypersonic missiles, are a point of contention with the Air Force.)

“If you are going to hit long-range fire with precision, you need accurate long-range targeting. De Vita said:”

De Vita emphasized that the Army considers space operations an integral part of its tactical mission groups.

“Let me tell you that the Army is at an important inflection point in space as I focus on space innovation formations and capabilities that are shifting from the center of SMDC… a tactical army and integrating it into our tactical formations. These are exciting times for us,” he said. Senior Army leaders now understand outer space and require these skill.

The military’s insistence that it retain control of space operations put it on a collision course with the space forces as well as with the intelligence community. (In addition, the Space Force is in conflict with the National Reconnaissance Bureau and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency over where responsibility for battlefield intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance lies in space.)

The question for the military is who can decide on a “mission” – that is, where and when to assign satellites, based on whom’s priorities. This question is actually about the mission a key The reason for the Army’s long campaign was to find a way to use small ISR satellites, either their own satellites, or, as planned, to place ISR payloads on commercial or other national security satellites.

Essentially, experts believe the military simply doesn’t trust anyone else to provide them with the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) their leaders need when they need it.