One Small Step for Space Acquisition Doctrine
space systems have been large in scale, complex, and expensive to produce. Several DoD space programs, such as the Global Positioning System (GPS), Space-based Infrared System (SBIRS), and Wideband Global Satellite Communications (WGS), experienced significant cost growth and schedule delays (Kim et al., 2015). Both technical and programmatic cost growth contributed to these delays, highlighting the need for space professionals with a warfighting focus and programmatic and technical skills. The recent shift toward less expensive, proliferated systems reflects a movement toward more resilient and less exquisite capabilities (Calvelli, 2022). This transition is a key enabler for the Space Force, allowing it to adapt to rapid technological advancements and respond effectively to the evolving threat landscape. Although this shift in mindset—from viewing satellites as “big juicy targets” to a more diverse architecture— is appropriate, reducing the size of satellites cannot be the only consideration (Erwin, 2023).
The review of best practices and the history of acquisition reform reflects the ongoing desire to improve the acquisition process and the growing emphasis on a warfighting focus grounded in doctrine.
A 2021 RAND study introduced a “clean sheet” approach to space acquisition, offering several reform recommendations, many of which are driven by the complex technical nature of the space domain. The report emphasized the importance of space to Joint warfighting and highlighted the challenges and significance of horizontal and vertical integration (Shelton et al., 2021). Horizontal integration is mission- centric, enabling interaction between legacy and new systems, cross- Service space-centric cohesion, and multiagency collaboration. Vertical synchronization is space-segment-focused, facilitating interoperability between ground and space systems (Shelton et.al, 2021). The report recommended establishing a single acquisition decision-maker and fostering trusting relationships with industry, recommendations echoed by the Defense Business Board report years later. Conversely, Shelton et al. (2021) proposed two recommendations that align with this research. First, acquisition should be viewed as a warfighting capability
144
Defense ARJ, Summer 2025, Vol. 32 No. 2: 132—193
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker