NAVAL POSISRADUME SCHOOL Monterey, California
6)NAVAL POSISRADUME SCHOOLMonterey, CaliforniaAD-A283 704DTICI ELECTETHESIS CAUS 2 6IU.S. NAVY SHF SATCOM:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTUREbyIChristoper J. BushnellJune, 1994Principal Advisor:Associate Advisor:Dan C. BogerCarl R. JonesApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.94 8 25003
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGEForm AovedOMB No. 0704Public reportiangburden for this collectionof informationia estimated to average I hour per response, including the time for reviewing intructionsearchingexisting data sources, gathering sit mainzaiuing the data nee"d and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send commeas regarding thisburden estimate or any other apect of this collectionof information, including suggestiom for reducing this burden, to Washington HeadquartemScrvices,Directoratefor Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302,and to the Office of Managemcntand Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0198) WahingtonDC 20503.1.AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2.REPORT DATE3.15 June 1994REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVEREDMaster's ThesisU.S. Navy SHF SATCOM: Past, Presentand Future UNCLASSIFIED4.TITLE AND SUBTITLE6.AUTHOR(S) Christopher J. Bushnell7.PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)5.FUNDING NUMBERS8.PERFORMINGNaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey CA 93943-50009.ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBERSPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)10. SPONSORING/MONITORINGAGENCY REPORTNUMBER11.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do notreflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT12b.Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.13.1DISTRIBUTION CODE*AABSTRACT (maximum 200 words)This thesis discusses the Navy's Super High Frequency Satellite Communications (SHF SATCOM)capabilities prior to Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and the requirements for future systems that weregenerated due to Navy SATCOM shortcomings during the Gulf War. The four-phased evolutionaryapproach the Navy has designed (based on post-war requirements) to provide itself with a medium forSHF SATCOM into the 21st Century, as well as the Defense Satellite Communications Systems (DSCS),are examined in detail.Decreasing defense budgets have begun to have a significant impact on future military satellitecommunication (MILSATCOM) systems. A cost comparison between utilization of DSCS III satellitesand the INMARSAT commercial SATCOM system is presented.Recommended improvements to current MILSATCOM procedures and training practices areproposed that could improve operational C41 capabilities. Finally, this study determines that futureSATCOM architectures should include a mixture of commercial systems and MILSATCOM systems toprovide both cost savings and command and control protection.14.17.SUBJECT TERMS Super High Frequency Satellite Communications (SHF SATCOM),Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS), INMARSAT, Network Encryption System(NES)15.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT20.Unclassified18.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEUnclassified19.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OFABSTRACT16.NUMBER OFPAGES 15 7PRICE CODELIMITATION OFABSTRACTULUnclassifiedNSN 7540-01-280-5500Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)Prescribed by ANSI Sld. 239.18
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.U.S. Navy SI-IF SATCOM:Past, Present and FuturebyChristopher J. BushnellLieutenant, United States NavyB.S., United States Naval Academy, 1988Submitted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree ofMASTER OF SCIENCE IN SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY(COMMAND, CONTROL, AND COMMUNICATIONS)from theNAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOLJune 1994Author:ILLChristopaJ. BushnellApproved by:ZILC!LDa Bge/ .Jo,PrincipAdio, A/ ociate visorPaul H. Moose, ChairmanDepartment of Joint Command, Control, and Communicationsii
ABSTRACTThis thesis discusses the Navy's Super High Frequency SatelliteCommunications (SHF SATCOM) capabilities prior to Desert Shield/Desert Storm,and the requirements for future systems that were generated due to NavySATCOM shortcomings during the Gulf War. The four-phased evolutionaryapproach the Navy has desb iked --ised on post-war requirements) to provide itselfwith a medium for SHF SATCOM iizo the 21st Century, as well as the DefenseSatellite Communications Systems (DSCS), are examined in detail.Decreasing defense budgets have begun to have a signific ant impact on futuremilitary satellite communication (MILSATCOM) systems. A cost comparisonbetween utilization of DSCS HI satellites and theINMARSAT commercialSATCOM system is presented.Recommended improvements to current MILSATCOM procedures andtraining practices are proposed that could improve operational CI capabilities.Finally, this study determines that future SATCOM architectures should includea mixture of commercial systems and MILSATCOM systems to provide both costsavings and command and control protection.Accoseton ForIXTIS GRA&IDTIC TAB 0 Utlan ounoed0Jus t I.f I.catiOnBy,Availability Cod.ý-1ii,.,ý.
TABLE OF CONTENTSI.II.1.INTRODUCTION. . . . . . .A.GENERAL .B.SCOPE .C.ORGANIZATION . .B.C.2.Initial Systems .Phase 0 Requirements .2.Phase 0 Systems .AN/SSC-6 .c.AN/WSC-6 (V)2 .8.9.10.11.11.11.11Post Gulf War Requirements . .12.14.III. SHF SATCOM TERMINAL IMPROVEMENT .A.PHASE I:B.PHASE II:1.8.SHF SATCOM POST DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORM1.8.1.b.7.AN/WSC-6(V)1,2 AND AN/SSC-6 .AN/WSC-6(V)1 .7.Initial Requirements .a.5.1.15.INTRODUCTION .PHASE 0:. . .HISTORY OF NAVY SHF SATCOM .A. .QUICKSAT .iv14.AN/WSC-6(v)4 .DISA DAMA Standard .17.21
C.IV.a.Profile 1 .22b.Profile 2 .23.23PHASE III:.AN/WSC-6(V)XX .1.Standard Tactical Entry Point2.Global Grid .(STEP).DEFENSE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM BASICSA.DEFENSE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM I1.InitialCommunicationDefenseProgram (IDCSP) .2.B.C.27SatelliteDEFENSE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM IITechnology Advancements .2.Satellite Operations .3.Communication Subsystems .4.27.1.24.Satellite Operations .24.27.29.30.30.32.32a.Channel 1 .33b.Channel 2 .33c.Channel 3 .33d.Channel 4 .33.Constellation Life Cycle Management.34DEFENSE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM III .341.Program Inception .2.Satellite Components .3.35.35Primary Communication Subsystem .354.Secondary Communication Subsystem .375.Launch Vehicle Considerations .38v.
D.MODIFICATION OF CURRENT PLATFORM VERSUS DEFENSE39SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FOLLOW-ON1.Political Impact odification .b.3.Modification to Current Platforma.Additional Modifications . .b.c.Low-power DBS .(2)Medium-Power DBS .(3)High-Power DBS .(4)Military tellite.Multi-MissionBroadbandAntenna (MMBA) .V.4648.(1)(INTMILSAT) .44(DBS) SystemDirect Broadcast SatelliteInternational.Possible DSCS Follow-On Programsa.40(GAO)OfficeAccountingFindings .2.53NETWORK SECURITY .55A.INTRODUCTION .55B.APPLICATIONOFTHENETWORKSYSTEM COMPONENTS .1.SYSTEM.(NES) .C.ENCRYPTION.Keying Mechanism/External Componentsvi.57.58. .60
D.2.Internal Components .3.Datagram Flow .E.Latency Test Procedures .LIMITATIONS/SOLUTIONS .66.70.70.721.Increasing IBAC Table to 64 Hosts .732.IP Bridging .733.Address Masking .74.74.75.76.APPLICATIONS OF THE NES .H.CONCLUSIONS .CHAPTER VI.UTILIZATION OF COM4ERCIAL SATELLITESCOMMERCIALSATELLITECOMMUNICATIONS(CSCI) .INITIATIVE77.B.AEROSPACE/MSO STUDY .C.INTEGRATED SATCOM DATABASE (ISDB)D.COMMERCIAL SATELLITE USAGE DURING THE GULF WAR1.LegalIssuesF.PROBLEMSAssociatedINMARSAT .E.63. 65Throughput Test Procedures . .G.A.LATENCY ANALYSIS .1.F.THROUGHPUT ANALYSIS .1.63withUse.7780.81of.82INMARSAT OPERATIONS .841.INMARSAT A/B .852.INMARSAT M .863.INTELSAT .87INMARSAT COSTS .vii88
Additional Costs for INMARSAT A2.Additional Costs for INMARSAT B .903.Multi-Channel Terminal Costs . .904.COMSAT Proposals .91.91.DSCS COST COMPARISON .H.REPRESENTATIVE FLEET USAGE OF INMARSATCONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .APPENDIX A.ACRONYMS .APPENDIX B.HOST SYSTEM DESCRIPTION .PPENDIX C.APPENDIX D.A.BLOCK DIAGRAMS.G.VII.901.96.DSCS I/IDCSP .118.1.Design Life .2.Orbit .3.Shape/Dimensions .4.Weight .5.Power Source .6.Stabilization/RPMs7.Configuration .8.Capacity .9.Transmitter . .121. 121.121.121.viii.121121.106. 114. .DSCS DESIGN DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS98122.122. 122122122
10.Receiver .11. Antenna .B.C.DSCS II .122. 123.1.Design Life .2.Orbit .3.Shape/Dimensions .4.Weight .5.Power Source .6.Stabilization/RPMs .7.Configuration .8.Capacity .9.Transmitter . 123.123. 123123.123.123.124. 124.124.124a.ERP per Transmitter: Satellites 1 to 6124b.ERP per Transmitter: Satellites 7 to 12125c.ERPper Transmitter:Satellites13to16 .12510. Receiver .12511. Antenna .125DSCS III .1261.Design Life .2.Orbit .3.Shape/Dimensions .4.Weight .1265.Power Source .1266.Stabilization/RPMs .7.Configuration . .ix. 126. 126.126.127127
8.9.Transmitter .a.Channels 1 and 2 .127b.Channels 3 and 4 .128c.Channels 5 and 6 .128d.Single Channel Transponder(SCT)128.12810. Antenna .129a.Receive MBA .129b.Transmit MBAs .129c.Transmit GDA .129d.Horn Antennas .129e.UHF Antenna .130EXCERPTS FROM GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICE(GAO)APPENDIX F.REPORT GAO-NSTAD-93-216.THROUGHPUT CALCULATIONS .THROUGHPUTIN PACKETSSECOND .B.127Receaiver .APPENDIX E.A.THROUGHPUT ANALYSISPER.134SECOND AND BITS.(BITS PER SECOND)131PER134. 1351.64 Byte Packet .1352.128 Byte Packet .1353.256 Byte Packet .1364.384 Byte Packet .1365.512 Byte Packet .136x
6.1024 Byte Packet .1367.1400 Byte Packet .136LIST OF REFERENCES .INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST .xi.137142
LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.The Navy's Four Phase Evolutionary Approach toSHF (NCCOSC,Figure 2.1994,p.1-3) .2MILSATCOM Requirements Survivability Hierarchy(CJCS MOP 37,1992,p. A-4) .Figure 3.SatelliteFigure 4.Inter-Theater Global Grid (NCCOSC,.Dish Throughput Comparison4-3) .Figure 5.420.1994,pp.26Defense Satellite Communication System I (DSCSI) /Initial Defense Communication SatelliteProgram (IDCSP)Figure 6.1991,(Martin, 1991,p.100][Martin,1991,p.111]1994) .Figure 8.DSCS Usage (Williams,Figure 9.DoD Plans for DSCS Constellationp.31(GAO,.36.401993,.42Revisions to DoD Plans for DSCS Constellation1993,p.11) .43Tactical Entry Port Gateway vs. DirectConnectivityFigure 12.10) .(GAO,Figure 11.28Defense Satellite Communications System III(DSCS III)Figure 10.p. 95]Defense Satellite Communication System II(DSCS II)Figure 7.[Martin,(SPAWAR,1994).45DSCS Requirements Processing (DISA MSO ProgramPlan,1993,p.2-23) .xii.56
Figure 13.NES External Components .Figure 14.Datagram FlowFigure 15.Throughput Configuration .Figure 16.Throughput in Packets per Second (Wade,.p. 7) .Figure 17.Latency in MillisecondsFigure 20.Peacetime Requirement Assignment1993,10) .1993,(Wade,p.6)1993,11) .Figure 23.QUICKSAT BLOCK DIAGRAM (SPAWAR,BLOCK DIAGRAM (SPAWAR,PHASE III BLOCK DIAGRAM 'SPAWAR,.xiii7172(DISA MSO,791994,791994)1994,.85p.1181994,p.20) .15) .69.Navy.Use of INMARSAT (Hartung,14) .Figure 22.PHASE IIp.p. 8)CMRC Requirements Assignment (DISA MSO,p.Figure 25.1993,.Figure 19.p.6769Latency Configuration (Wade,Figure 24.Figure 18.1994,6264Throughput in Bits per Second (Wade,7) .Figure 21.1191994,p.120
hieldthe requirementintroductionofCommunications(SHF uperStorm(DS/DS)High FrequencySatellitecapability on aircraft carriersflagships.command,andDesertfor and greatly accelerated thethe Navy's(CV/CVNs)andIncontrol,intelligenceorderandto s would have to be undertaken with regard to SC,fourphase1994,SHFCommunicationsp. 1-2)SATCOM(MILSATCOM)Figure 1 represents theprogramevolutionthatisscheduled to occur between 1990 and 1996.While the Navy's MILSATCOM architecture was formed on thepremisethat no single ionsmedium could satisfy allSHF SATCOM was designated as themediumforjointand Allied/NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) oratedThe remaining three communicationsintheNavy'sExtremely High FrequencyMILSATCOM(EHF),and commercial satellite systems.1architectureUltra High Frequencyare(UHF),
1. TeFur Phse EolutinaryAppoc%Nay'sFigurp-1-3(CCOS,SHF194,2t.
Memorandum of Policy Number 37 (MOP 37) is the Chairman ofthe Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS)document which tingrequirements for MILSATCOM connectivity as either hard core,core or general purpose.An illustration of the applicabilityof these terms to DoD missions is depicted in Figure 2.MOP37 defines these terms in the following ication and intelligence (C3 1) needs of the si4eintegrated operational plan (SIOP), integrated tacticalwarning and attack assessment (ITW/AA), and nonstrategicnuclear forces (NSNF) iissions. Characteristics includesurvivability against the maximum threat for ack,scintillation, and includes low probability of intercept(LPI),low probability of essandnetworkreconfiguration.Core - Provides communications connectivity to supporttheater/contingency operations, force projection, tacticalintelligence support, and counternarcotics requirements.Characteristics include survivability against a mediumthreat for jamming (tactical janmer) and limited LPI/LPD.General Purpose - Provides communications connectivity ative, intelligence, and common-user networks,and counternarcotics requirements, as well as non-DoDorganizations. (CJCS MOP 37, 1992, pp. GL-5 - GL-6)The MILSTAR Satellite encompasses the EHF communicationsin the Navy's MILSATCOM architecture.MILSTAR can currentlyprovide low data rate (LDR) transmissions in the EHF frequencyband which serve to provide the primary protected,core communicationsservice.or hardImprovements are planned forfuture MILSTAR satellites to support medium data rate (MDR)3
transmissions which will provide high capacity "in-theater"protected communications.MILSATCOM Recuirements Survivability Hierarchy"Hard' Core'Soft* T,ACTI CAL FORCEJTF C2ANTI-9E9t2 iNNET SINmTIL LONip.A4N3NF1uTRIADTheNavysmostost se(Commorciall/Military Mix)LowSurvivabilityFigure 2.MILSATCOM Requirements Survivability Hierarchy(CJCS MOP 37, 1992, p. A-4)The Navy's most cost effective satellite coulmmicationsystems are those which provide communicationsfrequency range.inthe UHFThese systems make up the worldwide backbonefor unprotected and general purpose military communications.4
ide a "surge" capacity for the military when MILSATCOMassets are either overburdened or not available due to rotected general purpose communications.The Defense Satellite Communications Systems (DSCS) servesas the MILSATCOM system that provides high capacity,general purpose communicationsfrequency band.core andto tactical users inThe Navy's SHF SATCOM program isthe SHFthe focus ofthis pthexamination of the Navy's SHF SATCOM program before,and histhesis provides insight into the political discussions ommunicationscommercial satellite systems inC.futureandthedevelopmentsinapplicationofthe MILSATCOM architecture.ORGANIZATIONThis document is organized into seven chapters.chapter describesgeneralprogram.backgroundTheThe firstthe purpose of this thesis and 'stheSHFreaderSATCOMwith a
completeoverview ofthe Navy'sDesert Shield/Desert Storm,SHFprior tocapabilitiesand the requirementsthat weregenerated for future systems due to Navy SATCOM shortcomingsduring the Gulf War.The third chapter discusses the four-phased evolutionary approach the Navy has designed to provideitself with a medium for SHF SATCOM into the 21st Century.InChapter IV the Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS)isdescribedindetailoperating status.possibleDSCSfrom itsinitialdesign to currentChapter IV closes with a description ofTheprograms.follow-onintroduce3 the network encryption system (NES)fifthchapteras a means tomigrate fixed-site-to-fixed-site DSCS SATCOM transmissions studies and applications of commercial satellite systems inthe MILSATCOM architecture.acostAdditionally, Chapter VI providescomparison between the annualsingle DSCSIII randoperating costs of aand the feesoneyear.recommendationsthe Navy pays forThefinalto problemssurfaced during the examination of this program.6chapterthat
I1.A.HISTORY OF NAVY SHKSATCCO(INTRODUCTIONPrior to the development of satellites, the Javy relied onsemaphore,flashing light,flag-hoistsignals,Ultra HighFrequency (UHF) line of sight, and High Frequency (HF) firstsatellitesplaced in orbit over the Atlantic,in the mid 1970s.adventofsatellitecamethatthroughhad beenPacific and Indian OceansThese satellites covered the UHF spectrum,and the program these satellites were leased under was calledthe Maritime Satellite (MARISAT)Program.The leased MARISATassets were later given the name GAPFILLER.93)(NOSC,1991,p.Additional UHF satellite capabilities were later providedby the Fleet Satellite Communicationthe late 1970s,(FLTSATCOM)program inthe Leased Satellite (LEASAT) program in theearly 1980s and the UHF Follow-On (UFO) program in the early1990s.(NOSC,1991,pp.93-101)Dueto supportstrategicconsiderationsandpurpose,and hard core" requirements,core,the needHigh Frequency Satellite Communicationswas initiated in1971.Ittobandwidthwgeneralthe Navy Super(SHF SATCOM)programwas determined that the DefenseSatellite Communications System7(DSCS)would be utilized as
the space segment,since the Department of Defense (DoD) hadbeen experimenting with this orbiting constellation since 1968to satisfy DoD al RequirementsThe initialstartedinprotected,requirements for the SHF SATCOM capability1971wereto providearobust,Anti-Jamship/shore/ship conmnunications service.(AJ)Specificdata rates were not mandated, the driving force was simply tohave to capability to communicate through SHF communicationsvia satellite.2.Initial SystemsThe firstand ce beenAJ-protectedtheOM-55(V)/USCwas madeinteroperablewith the Armyspread spectrum modulation subsystem within theSatellitePHASE er Measure (ECCM)B.terminals(PN) spread spectrum modulation subsystem which,late 1970's,AN/USC-28(V)DefenseSHF shipboard terminals were the AN/SSC-6Systemnetwork.(DSCS)(ACS,Electronic1994,p. 2-8)AN/WSC-6(V)I,2 AND cations was identified for the Surveillance Towed ArraySensor System(SURTASS)operational mission.8SURTASS ships
are basically"submarinearray sonar systems.of the "Cold War,"hunters"that use advancedtowedThis period of time marked the mid-pointthus the current application of SHF SATCOMwas primarily "strategic" in nature only.Phase 0 ions(CNO)requirementto onalcapabilityfortheSURTASS T-AGOS ships and Navy combatant and Fleet Flagships.(CNO Letter, 14 June 1976; ACS,p.3)1994,pp.2-8; SPAWAR,1994,The operational requirements for the Navy SHF SATCOMsystems inprovide1976 were:foraFailures (MTBF)the system had to be jam resistant,singlecarrier,haveaMeanTimeBetweenfor the antenna greater than or equal to 1300hours, MTBF for the radio greater than or equal to 900 hours,MTBF for the modem greater than or equal to 1200 hours, havea Mean Time To Repair(MTTR)for the antenna less than orequal to eight hours, MTTR for the radio less than or equal tofive hours,hours,MTTR for the modem less than or equal to fourhave an operational availability of 0.94, and be ableto initially support data rates of 32 kbps with expansion to64kbps.(SPAWAR,1994,p.9)This trend towards"high-capacity" SHF SATCOM communication would continue on into thenext century.TypicalcircuitloadingutilizedbytheSURTASS platforms was a 64 kbps ship-shore SURTASS data link9
and a 1.35 kbps full duplex OrderwireThe Fleetcircuit.Flagship's data rates vary from platform to platform rangingfrom 16 kbps to 52 T)Teletype at 75 bps.2.kbps,at 2400 kbps,Edition (STU-III)VoiceMilitaryCommandandSystemControlat 2400 kbps, Contingency Theater Automated Planning(CTAPS)SystemCircuits employed by these vesselsat(SPAWAR,Unit-ThirdTelephoneSecureAdvanced Narrowband Digital2400kbps,1993,p.andOrderwireand6)Phase 0 Systemsshipboard SHF installation was in 1974 on aThe firstSURTASS T-AGOS platform, but this conducted as a result of theeffort started in 1971.The direct result of the CNO's letterstating the operational requirement was the installation of 256(V)lterminals18 AN/WSC-Specifically these 25 were:SHF SATCOM systems.onSURTASS(forerunner of AN/WSC-6(V)2)T-AGOS1ships,AN/SSC-6on the flagship USS LASALLE,5AN/WSC-6(V)2 terminals on Navy fleet flagships (USS CORONADO,USS BLUE RIDGE, USS MT. WHITNEY, USS BELKNAP, and USS NASSAU),and one ;p. 5)The technical characteristics of the three differentvariants of Phase 0 included different combinations of antennagroups,radio groups and modems.10
a.ANIWSC- 6 (V)1This variant utilizes the OE-279 Antenna Group, asdo theothertwo.Itusesthe OZ-43Radio Group,includes an 8 KW High Power Amplifier (HPA),whichand the MD-1030AModem.AN/SSC- 6b.Variant two shares the same OE-279 Antenna GroupThe Radio Group isas the C-6(V)2Variant three of Phase 0 shares the common OE-279Antenna Group and OZ-43 Radio Group,Since AN/SSC-6 inHPA.the forerunner of the AN/WSC-(V)2,they share the same OM-55(V) modem.C.which includes an 8 KW(SPAWAR,1993,p. 5)SHF SATCOM POST DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORMThe Phase 0 SHF SATCOM variants remained the status quofor the Navyuntil 02 August 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait.Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm (DS/DS) demonstrated theneed for the Navy to have more communications "pipes" for alltypes ofinformation,operational forces.ofitswidetransmission,as well as connectivityThe other services were using SHF becausebandwidth,andbetween allwhichalso becauseititinherently moreisresistant than Ultra High Frequency (UHF)11idealformakestransmissions.datajamThe
Navydeemed thatitSATCOM F"to satisfy minimum tactical command ements, and improve Joint and Allied/NATO pp.1-2)One glaringexample of how an improved SHF SATCOM capability would havehelped the Navy duringthe Gulf Warishow itcould havehelped eliminate the problems associated with dissemination ofthe Air Tasking Order (ATO).1.Post Gulf War Navy'susage of SHF SATCOM from a "strategic" to a "tactical" natureand provided the impetus for a rapid increase in the numbersof SHF SATCOM terminals inthe fleet.Recognizing the needfor an improved SHF SATCOM capability, the Office of the CNOmandated the accelerated fielding of SHF shipboard terminalsin August 1990.(CNO Letter, 28 August 1990)As a result ofthis order, the Navy's use of DSCS expanded significantly overthe next few TCOM system tie Navy was seeking were vastly different fromthose SATCOM systems that the Navy had1974.been operating sinceOperational requirements as of 1992 were:the systemmust be able to support multiple carriers; MTBF for the system300-1200 hours; MTTR for the system 2.5-7 hours; operational12
availability of 0.85-0.98; be able to support data rates of upto 640 kbps; have a modular design to permit future componentlevel upgrades as component technology improves; and be f T1 (1.544 Mbps) and El (2.048 Mbps) .10)13(P 31)for data(SPAWAR,1994,
III.TheSEF SATCOM TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTSHF SATCOM terminalimprovementsthat weredeemednecessary as a result of the shortcomings of the Navy's SHFSATCOM capabilitiesduring Desert Shield/DesertStorm wereprogrammed to be completed in an incremental evolution processtotaling three phases.The AN/WSC-6(V)terminals that wereinstalled on the SURTASS platforms and Fleet Flagships are notoneofthephasedimprovements,butrecognized as Phase 0 installations.the three phase process,thosevariantsUpon the completion ofa significantly improved SHF SATCOMcapability will be installed on most naval combatants.1994,A.p.were(ACS,2-8)PHASE I:QUICKSATTo meet the urgent joint interoperabliity requirement tosatisfy minimum tactical command, control,intelligence (C 3 I),war-fighting communications, and high datarate communications,Force (USAF),Force (GMF)Army,communications andthe Navy obtained and modified U.S. Airand Marine Corps AN/TSC-93B Ground MobileSHF SATCOMequipment.Modifications to the vanswere limited to use of the standard Navy SHF antenna ied SATCOM vansmodem,andtwolowadditionaland ere designated
"QUICKSAT."The introductionoftheseterminalsinto thefleet marked the beginning of Phase I of the Navy's SHF SATCOMfielding plan.Theobjectivewas to quicklyprovidethemaximum capability with the highest probability of off-the-shelf(C4 I)relied(COTS)1-2)QUICKSAT was to provide a diverse range of host systems.These host systems services include voice,database transactions,graphics,and combinations of those listed
6) NAVAL POSISRADUME SCHOOL Monterey, California AD-A283 704 DTIC I ELECTE THESIS CAUS_2 6 I U.S. NAVY SHF SATCOM:
Fig. 1. Monterey Bay, California, with depth contours in fathoms. The 100-fathom contour divides Monterey Bay into 3 areas of almost equal size: (1) north slope; (2) Monterey Submarine Canyon, and (3) south slope. The dashed line indicates the course of transect. species are transients whose stay on Monterey Bay varies from a few weeks to 10 .
The Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail is a collaborative effort between public agencies, non-profit organizations and the public to construct a trail that would span Monterey Bay from Lovers Point in Pacific Grove to Wilder Ranch in Santa Cruz. The primary purpose of the Trail is to enhance appreciation and protection of the Monterey Bay National
the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Bay and South Monterey Bay (see Figure 1-1: Map of Monterey Peninsula Integrated Regional Water Management Planning Region). In January 2006, DWR awarded a grant of approximately 497,000 to MPWMD to develop and complete a plan. MPWMD
naval base coronado north island naval base coronado/ nosc north island; . naval postgraduate school nps monterey/nsa monterey; ca 6/15/15; x x; point mugu naval aws nb ventura county/ nosc ventura county ca; . u.s. coast guard academy ct; 6/15/15 1/1/19; x x; x guantanamo bay ns cub;
California State University Monterey Bay Marine Sciences Program Guide for Prospective Students MSCI Courses Science Diving Research Opportunity . Contents . Proximity map showing the highly accessible location of CSU Monterey Bay to the phenomenal Monterey Bay Canyon and other world-class marine research institutions and coastal management .
Monterey became isolated socially and economically. The Old Monterey Whaling Company began shore whaling operations in 1855, using the Old Whaling Station as headquarters and whalers' residence. Made of whale vertebrae, the front walkway reminds visitors of this unique economic activity in California's history. In the early 1900s, Monterey
North Monterey County Mid-Cycle Progress Report 7 NORTH MONTEREY COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL MID-CYCLE PROGRESS REPORT Student Enrollment and Demographic Data In the 2015-2016 school year, North Monterey County High School had a student body of 1,111 with an almost even split amongst males and females. The male student population was 52%
counseling and consultation for little or no cost to the employee. VA offers up to 15 days a year of military leave support for reservists and National Guard, and supports our nurses’ ability to serve both their country and Veterans. VA employees have the benefit of the Federal Employee Retirement System and Thrift Savings Plan. VA also offers continuation of federal service from .
