Developing Responsive and Agile Space Systems - Space-Library

needs with their ability to more rapidly incorporate
the latest technological advances
while reducing development and operational
costs.
Achieving open architectures and standards
for space is not without challenges.
The low market volume that characterizes
the existing environment for space systems
makes it unpalatable for the space industry
to invest in significant, nonrecurring
expenses and adopt modular and open
architectures without expecting a sufficient
return on investment. Getting the space
industry on board with these standards
requires commitment from the broader
government community. On the other
hand, government commitment requires
adequate demonstration of these new
architectures and standards to instill confidence,
establish flight heritage, and address
mission assurance. Rapidly demonstrating
new architectures and standards for exquisite
systems that require higher mission
assurance is just not possible within current
acquisition budgets and timelines. The ORS
Office may be able to provide a solution to
this “chicken and egg” problem. It offers the
broader space community an economical
and low-risk proving ground to quickly gain
flight heritage for new open architectures
Widely
used
Market acceptance
2. Popular proprietary
standards
Widely used but not open
3. Government
standards
Not very widely used, more
open than proprietary
4. Proprietary standards with
little market support
Narrowly
used Proprietary Standard type
Open
1. Popular open
standards
Both nonproprietary and
widely used
The ORS Office strategy for selection of standards is to “adopt, adapt, and as a last resort develop.” This diagram
illustrates the priority by which the ORS Office adopts or adapts standards.
and standards that can equally enable the
objectives of “good enough” or “exquisite”
space capabilities.
Although driven to deliver assured space
power that is focused on timely satisfaction
of JFC needs, the ORS Office also offers
an opportunity for collaboration across the
greater space community that is focused on
mutually beneficial architectures and standards
that support overall rapid response,
innovation, and reduced costs.
Further Reading
“A Modular Open Systems Approach to Acquisition,
Open Systems Joint Task Force,” Program
Managers Guide, Sept. 2004, http://www.acq.osd.
mil/osjtf/pmguide.html (as of July 23, 2009).
“Concept Study: PnP on Large Satellites,”
Aaron Jacobovits, The Aerospace Corporation,
March 2008.
Michael George, James Works, Kimberly
Watson-Hemphill, and Clayton Christensen,
Fast Innovation: Achieving Superior Differentiation,
Speed to Market, and Increased Profitability
(McGraw-Hill, 2005).
Open Handset Alliance, http://www.openhandsetalliance.com
(as of May 14, 2009).
Peter Wegner, “Operationally Responsive Space,”
Presentation to Rapid Response Space Center
Industry Day, Feb. 11, 2009, https://www.fbo.
gov (as of July 23, 2009).
“Plan for Operationally Responsive Space, A
Report to Congressional Defense Committees,”
National Security Space Office, Washington,
DC, April 17, 2007.
“Report of the Defense Science Board Task
Force on Open Systems,” Department of Defense,
October 1998. http://www.acq.osd.mil/
dsb/reports/opensystems.pdf (as of May 14,
2009).
Robert Allen and Ram Sriram, “The Role of
Standards in Innovation,” Technological Forecasting
and Social Change, Vol. 64, pp. 171–181 (Jan.
2000).
World Wide Web Consortium, http://www.
w3.org (as of May 14, 2009).
The ORS Office conducted several demonstrations using the Space Plug-and-Play Avionics (SPA) standardenabled
spacecraft developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.
These demonstrations helped define an early baseline of processes, metrics, and lessons learned for defining
the prototype Rapid Response Space Works called “Chile Works.” Technicians were able to assemble a fully
functional plug-and-play bus (shown) from its component piece parts in less than four hours.
Crosslink Summer 2009 • 17