tv Hearing Examines National Security Space Assets CSPAN May 20, 2017 4:11am-5:27am EDT
of expert witnesses joining us here today and want to take a moment to a knowledge that while i cannot imagine to be a better place to work and the subcommittee apparently somebody thinks there is a better job in washington d.c. so this is the last hearing steve bin his current position to go to the secretary of defense for space policy. and our loss is his game he does a great job i know he will do a great job there as well. [applause] so today we have witnesses general raymond commander
air force commander joint command for space in director of national reconnaissance office and the director of national guyots spatial intelligence agency in the system for spays paula c. and after we finish this unclassified testimony we will adjourn to a closed session in a secure fashion. so with the confirmation hearing earlier this year stated what the military has capable airplane and anc forces to demand an increasing sheriff investment and i fully agree with the secretary's statement the leaders have been nuclear going back many
years that the use of space could be taken away in the next military conflict the we have not move for that conviction or urgency with these warnings leaving us with a growing crisis with the threat of bader of full faith and confidence of beach expert witnesses i do not have faith in the bureaucratic structure although china is rapidly advancing with a new military organization to focus cyberand electronic warfare capabilities misstated earlier we're not broke organized to deal with those new challenges the old structure may have been sufficient with areas of operations but that time has passed and i cannot agree more. ladies and gentlemen, now
was the time for reform so without afford to hearing your priorities on this topic i now recognize my friend from tennessee. >> bob like to add my note of congratulations and thank you for this hearing especially the focus to strengthen the space capabilities there is no more important goal there are many issues before us but i am glad we are addressing them in a bipartisan fashion of afford to the testimony. >> can now recognize our witnesses statements will be submitted for the record if you to leave it to five minutes or less to get to questions that would be awesome. >> i will also pylon to say
congratulations to look forward to have you sitting here next u.s. next year. [laughter] has distinguished members of the subcommittee it is my distinct privilege to represent in the 36,000 airmen providing cyberspace capabilities and is also a distinct privilege to be with my friends and panel of experts this is an exciting year for the air force and air force space command in september 2017 we will celebrate our 70th birthday and commanding will be with there 35th birthday we have been involved since the beginning of 1954 we have come a long way.
today there is nothing read do of a joint force but is that enabled and immigration has been restrained ahead the intersection of i reliance and folder ability but today in no uncertain terms just like air land and sea potential adversaries develop capabilities to deny access with the benefit of the main and i will be clear we do not want a conflict but one way to keep that from happening is to avoid that conflict if it should occur and should not be lost or space program is the envy of the world but first to be in partnership of the national space defense to provide command-and-control capability and second must
have state situational awareness to a full fighting focus that is required and to transition this based architects to provide resilient capabilities for the strategic environment that we face thank you for your support and active leadership and we will work closely with you and i look forward to your questions. >> chairman rogers and ranking member thank you for your steadfast support for men and women in uniform with the state's enterprise. as this committee is well aware to turn in educational corner that is not widely
acknowledgement but is critical for our way of life coupled with the understanding of the compound being threats is the burning platform to the national security space enterprise certainly an overhaul is necessary to guarantee your freedoms to and from space this is a challenge because national security process was is largely conceding to provide services or commodities during an era when the most significant threat was debris giving that emerging threat we no longer approach space as a service provider mentality but the foremost responsibility is to gain and maintain space superiority this is a prerequisite with this
payees joint operating area to provide space for an engagement with the joint forces across the globe. over the past year we have made substantial progress especially with respect to all the main operations to defend the national security space enterprise there are areas that have continued focus in vigilance must continue to normalize operations to include situational awareness as well as improving foundational intelligence to have robust indications continuing the full court press for awareness of command and control capability to review and update those authorities of rules of engagement. and we must continue to push
down those capabilities on an operational the relevant time line here focused on maintaining freedom of action it is imperative of the joint force as a learning organization we will review our approach is an organizational structure because the speed and complexity demands operational agile organization. every challenges an opportunity. freedom of action is not a birthright and must be security and preserved this requires constant vigilance and active participation thanks for your leadership and advocacy. >> chairman rogers and distinguished members things for the opportunity to be
here to be responsible for operating the nation's overhead surveillance and reconnaissance architecture the foundation of the global situational awareness and contribute to military analysts security operations while assisting with the formation of national policy to achieve diplomatic goals we provide direct support and help protect the borders and contribute significantly to the fight against isis and counterterrorism operations worldwide and our people are behind every mission success and without direct support of combat and command to serve as a functional component in the task force unit not just dedicated to the mission that we in still a culture of innovation in everything
we do it comes in many forms to develop new apps for the ground system and those other critical to a closing the intelligence gap so to be sure we have fully leverage capabilities as a small slat organization fully successful and affordable architecture we have control of every thing that enables us to stay ahead of targets to the acquisition space and ground capability and then to upgrade those capabilities. . .
staying ahead of the adversaries and threaten our space capabilities are a challenge. the invest heavily in except heavily that nasa is the rapid progress. the us is not keeping pace. i believe we have not made the investment that would indicate space is a priority or fundamental to the us. our retirement and budget acquisition project are disconnected and none of them. failure is not well tolerated, even in the research and developing activities required to keep our base capabilities relevant and vital. or to improve their real resiliency. national security space is a
team sport and everyone on the team those in the executive branch and the congress must do all they can to advance its capabilities and improve its resilience to threats. we must have processes that are integrated, then move faster and demonstrate greater risk tolerance. we must recommit to space as a national priority and imperative committee has been out in front trying to drive the changes required. the inroads to address barriers to change in the pace of change required to advance national security space. the broader national space community have people with the talent committee and passion necessary to take us forward. we only need to empower and enable them to succeed. mr. chairman and members of the subsidy, thank you for your continued support for the recon against this information. thank you. i recognize for five minutes
back members of the committee, i too am pleased to testify before you here today with my distinct alex. as a member of the national security presence. and ga is the primary provider of geospatial intelligence or for the department of defense and the intelligence community. our support to military services and commands and providers includes safety of navigation, precise targeting, disaster recovery and tailored intelligence support, just to name a few. i also have the job of being the functional manager the national system of geospatial intelligence. i strengthen the overall enterprise by ensuring that those combat and coming needs are met through future overhead architectures. more specifically, the d document serves as a framework to titillate those needs into the key enterprise functions and capabilities that are analysts
required to resolve our most vexing intelligence challenges. global persistent provides an architecture to monitor these intelligent challenges and an nda to provide national tactical leaders the intelligence and early warning needed to precision advantage. it leverages the exquisite capabilities of the reconnaissance office to allow the combat and command hold specific targets at that risk. it integrates our international partners to fill gaps in our enterprise. the explosion of data has driven the geo beyond the limits of human interpretation and explanation. by combining the data now available to us with the use of algorithms, automated processing , machine to machine learning and artificial intelligence, we believe we can automate as much as 75% or more of the road tests we performed today. this free are analysts to spend more time and focus on those
hard intelligence problems. adding to that point will prior significant investments in our it architecture as well as our research and development. not only is the data exploding, conservative estimates over the next ten years. over 9000 commercial satellites will be launched compared to fewer than 1500 in the last ten years. accordingly, in our and our oval partner, nta will partner with nro to engage and access the most mature of these space via the geo activity. through it will identify and evaluate emerging commercial sealant data and services against those needs that we capture and maintain. in closing, the national security space enterprise is vital nta ability to provide war fighters, commanders and policymakers, to give them the decision space and the operational time they need to do their job, timely relevant, accurate is only possible through the combined efforts of
the ic, chairman of the fence emerging industry and allied partners. i'm happy to address any questions you might have and i'm pleased to be here. thank you your guys for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman routers, with members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. in the months ahead understanding and addressing the impatience of the growing threat in space is critical as this administration prepares the president new national security strategy and the national defense strategy and is congress carried out responsibly for oversight and funding of the programs and activities necessary to live the strategies no less important, strategic success requires increased resources, and the defense budget caps, an end to the year-long pattern of continuing resolutions and return to strategy focused resourcing. today we consider space security
in an area where russia and china present anti- access area denial strategies intended to prevent or counter intervention and conflict and to undercut our ability to secure our interest. diplomatic solutions remain our preferred option of settling the differences that divide nations but american diplomatic influences rests on the credibility and capability of our military power which is fundamental to determine into the confidence of our allies in knowing that they do not have to submit to the course of pressures of large and powerful neighbors. america's space posture underwrite deterrence by enabling the us military to project power globally, responded to crises rapidly, strikes fully and precisely into command forces in multiple theaters simultaneously. potential adversaries know well our reliance on spatial systems that many perceive as vulnerable this leads to an unstable situation which some have
concluded that in times of conflict attacking us military space systems may make an irresistible and most tempting. this is using them of such misguided notions is a strategic priority. that is why in the department of defense we are making such a concerted effort to strengthen the mission assurance of our space capabilities and to deny aggressors the benefits of the tax base. we are changing our investment in operations and increasing our partnering with commercial entities and allies. more importantly, we are changing attitudes by recognizing the space is a war fighting domain and preparing ourselves to deter competencies and fail if deterrence fails. finally, i want to recognize this committee's priorities on strengthening national security space organization management and leadership. this question has the intention of the secretary of jeopardy of
defense, they expect that it sound analysis and a full range of options and they mean for us to meet the deadline of reporting to congress this june. in conclusion, i want to think this committee for keeping the challenges of securing space before the public. i look forward to working together to ensure that we had the right strategy and resources and the necessary programs, posture and organizational structures to sustain deterrence , to fail deterrence fail and to increase the incentive nations have settled their differences by peaceful means. thank you. >> i would add, as a person acting in the job of that he will be doing, nobody is happier to have him that i am left back. [laughter] >> i recognize myself first for questions. this would be a question for anybody who is willing to get it
we passed a law about ten years ago directed how the operation for space office would be one. i've heard that instead of being streamlined, or if options are still forced to the traditional pentagon processes, including the defense space council. that's a small number of decision-makers focused on moving fast with the respect to operational response of apartment acquisitions in the recent decision meeting the program included over 60 attendees with 54 more than we had envisioned. to me this is an example that indicative of extremely bureaucratic zoo, my word, you have to be this out to know what to do is, it comes in and struggles out the life of the dod space programs. this is a situation where everyone can say no but no one can say yes. how do you set? well first?
german, thank you for the present. sixty people were not involved in that position. as you stated, common law is clear. [inaudible] the psa has the ability to designate others that are critical to that decision and in this case, i wasn't in the room, but my understanding was those six for the voting members plus two or three others. that's it. it's under the framework of a larger doc for the larger decision-makers were eight or nine for the voting members. >> i understand there were six voting members but were there 60 people in the room? yes, there were 60 people in the room but there's also some transparency of having others there. they didn't influence the decision, they were there and i'll tell you after those folks make the decision a lot of those folks then have to be the ones that have to go execute the decision and make sure they have a common understanding.
it was a very small number of folks that was consistent with the legislative that was passed for a small, tight decision-making process for and i'm comfortable that it was -- >> six people were the decision-makers. >> as i mentioned, there were six that were by law and a couple others that were added -- >> eight or nine people. >> do you have to have six to eight people on an acquisition process program for the organization? i have at least two people to make decisions. when on the icy side and one of the dod site. there's a lot of people, as you mentioned, review the package of documentation for sufficiency before it gets to those decision-makers. again, there's a whole lot of staff and i see said and the other sites. >> a lot of people look at it
for a gift on the calendar for the decision-makers. >> the people that look at it, do they have the authority to stop it or say no? >> the have the authority to stall it. back is that the case with the rs, general raymond. can they slow it down or stop it >> my understanding is that they do not have a vote in the process. by law, the six that our bylaws --, the process before it gets in that room for decision-making? back it's done relatively routinely. it was done early in this process and i didn't sense a slowdown back anyone else want to see added? all right. >> chairman, i'll give you a comment as one of those nonvoting people within the room it will dod space advisor did was tea up the decision that was also necessary which is the long-term solution for ors is an
important gap that was for us is important gap for the general heightened that was put forward and brought in the air force. it went pretty quickly in the discussion also said to everybody are we moving on the requirements process but a longer term and she is that effectively in the respect. >> great. and the testimony to this earlier this week, general goldstein talks about the need to integrate space. the joint staff is responsible for overall space integration forces on the joint staff there are 11 air force general officers. of those 11 general officers, how many space professionals are included #-number-sign does anyone want to guess zero. to know how many pilots nine. if you look at the specific combatant commanders according to you, there's over 28000 personnel supporting yukon. that would be too.
we do need to integrate space. i agree with general goldstein on that with the air land and sea fiber obligations. there are also designed to fight and win wars in a joint manner. general book, how to integrate space capabilities better into our work plans to me at such people and i'm interested in your perspective. >> thank you. i agree with you. i would like to get more space officers, general officers on the joint staff. the chiefs are very focused on developing joint officers and as a focused area for us as well. when we look across the enterprise, the strategic command, we have to space officers been in that joint jobs strategic command. i'm in a joint myself.
i serve as my days back of annenberg serves as for the command and command. they have reached back authority back to get that space the tax back out to the theater. as far as joint operations i think were doing a pretty good job and that focus areas the word. >> you bring up a great. the challenges that we face in the nation today are transregional, if not global. multi- domain, multifunctional. they are not confined to a line on a map. it's not just one geographic commander responsibility it's pretty much all the combat and command responsibility for each combat command has what's a coordinating authority for space each of those combatant commanders delegated that authority down to the air component of that and the air
components around the globe, we have probably, senior space officer call the director of space forces. general can testify to this. we have a senior space officer call the director of resources and he has a staff of about five and every single division in aoc we have space professionals embedded in those divisions. what we have done is prioritize putting the weight of effort in those aoc's for the combat commanders has designated that authority to and that's we do that multi- domain and integration work. that's the hope of that work. >> you mentioned that general goldstein was the space advisor. no sir. you the air force for centcom and in that role the centcom commander delegates to have that the authority for donating
authority and is aoc or where he operated out of is that multi- domain center that integrates airspace and cyber into that site and that's where we focus a significant portion of our space operation. >> i'm sorry tara. i will say that probably in centcom we have the preponderance of space officers. that are made of effort. if you look at centcom right now , director of the sports office, we have eight-ten space officers. it's a real win for us when we have not just the director of space for office they are but when we embedded space officers in isr d and cpt. that's a win when we not been an add-in but were baked into the processes over there. for doing better. our focus right now is on centcom but i'll tell you sir,
were getting better across the board. thank you. we recognize bringing tears. >> bank you mr. chairman. i'd like to focus on mike on how crowded space is and how it's going to get a lot crowded. he mentioned his testimony on page five that the last ten years with us like 1500 satellites go up in the next ten years something like 9000. that is to have satellite a day going up in space. that's amazing. pc launches like in india where they put up a hundred sat in just one want. as space gets more crowded it gets more treacherous. general buck mentioned in the spring, the the threat we face was debris but now we face traffic, we may face threats. i'm particularly interested in the idea that the nonmilitary space traffic management and i
understand general raymond, you embarked on a pilot program with the ils a on that? we have. as i testified before this program before. space is congested and conducted on this space, the congested side. general buck track 400,000 observations a day to keep track of all that and act as the space traffic control for the world. they keep the domain safe for all. it's very important and i think general buck agrees with me but it's important for national security purposes that we have the ability to have radars, to pass those readers, to collect the data from the data radars and to maintain the awareness that we need to make. however, i don't think we need to be the organization that makes the locations around the world as a traffic cop. i've met with the faa administrator a couple months
ago and asked if he would join us in developing a pilot program , if you will, to see if we could inform this going forward. general buck has the lead on pulling it together. david, if you will give an update on where we are. >> i'm really proud of the team and how far we've come. i talked to david neil directly and we've agreed jointly to begin that pilot program. it will begin in the summer, probably august time. i do agree with general raymond there are some aspects to the space traffic management that are not military inherently and we could locate them to civil agency. safety of flight, debris management, norms of behavior, i don't think those are inherently military. it's important to make a distinction between what is space traffic management and what is space situational learning. for me, as a war fighter, what i need is space situation old awareness.
i need to know where the object is, what if capabilities are, what vulnerabilities are and those types of things. but i don't need to be doing, i don't think, are things like notifications for conduction assessment and norms of behavior that's better suited for civil agency. after going for. >> let me add some color to your remarks. general raymond said, in a very calm session, let's keep space safe or something like that. we are protecting other countries billion dollars satellites from a piece of capital that might be traveling at 33000 miles an hour but to destroy the machine and for that we get not even a thank you note . it's kind of amazing that we provide this magnificent worldwide service and little appreciation. plus, as you said, when we consider load setting and the burden on our folks that doesn't need to be borne by them.
>> not all countries, do countries send a thank you note some do. others don't but were really doing it because you want to keep the space domain safe for all users, including us. that's the emphasis behind that we need to be able to operate in space and it's our way of helping to make certain we can do that. >> is also an essential truth telling function. if you look at the downing of the ablation airliner over ukraine, there was a worldwide debate and dispute over what caused that plane to crash and even though we have excellent air traffic control in most parts of the world there was still a significant dispute and when it comes to separating news from fake news and propaganda, i think the space domain it would be nice if we established a sort of gold standard of truth so that we would know if it was debris, if it was something less benign than that. so, i'm worried that this mike i
hope the pilot program gets off to a good start this summer. i hope it will soon be able to accept the standard and even with air traffic were having difficulty isolating causes when it should be with all of our plane radars and things like that and easier thing to prove that it is in space. i hope we will get on that test. thank you mr. chairman. >> recognized for any questions you may have. thank you all for the great service that you provide for our country. general raymond, i'm going to follow up on the question we touched on in our conversation yesterday. with bmc to i remain concerned about the prospect of repeating the same mistakes that with jms whereby lab prototypes and custom government development efforts were prioritized over utilizing improvement commercial capabilities which, unfortunately led to huge scheduling and cost overruns.
can i get your commitment that you will prioritize the utilization of commercial capabilities to the maximum extent practicable first and then fill in with government development for the truly unique military requirements that don't reside in the commercial marketplace #-number-sign. >> i'm a big proponent of commercial data. i said for many years in front of this committee that we need offices of data. on our strategy going forward that you reference is to do just that these commercial companies in a for him to help us develop those requirements that is analogous to the iphone. you have the iphone and you have apps. we want to have open consortium so that all players can play in feeding that data into do so.
we have to get it on the floor and we have to get in the national space center we as we can. therefore, what we did switched the program and i gave that to the air force rapid capabilities office was already done this. they've always taken the capability, built an open architecture system, have a consortium of post and his work. well. for fast forwarding this capability by giving it to the folks that can move rapidly and that have already done it in another capability in the air domain and this will allow us to get at that multi- domain integration. the whole purpose of this program going forward is to enable a lot of commercial data and other source data to be integrated into give a general but the data he needs to have to do the mission is responsible for. >> if i could just make a comment along that same line. ranking member cooper, he discussed the importance of domain awareness. it's really important that we
ingest nontraditional data into our space surveillance network as well. that's a hard thing to do. we are making progress and i think this summer sometime will bring on a capability called a nontraditional data preprocessor that will begin to allow ingestion of commercial data into our space surveillance network. that's a move in the right direction for domain awareness and nontraditional like commercial sensors if you will connect thank you both. changing gears. i've heard some rumors about insufficient funding for the ps3 in the fiscal year 18. what are we doing to keep them on track. >> we have not submitted the 18 budget going forward. in my opinion, have a pretty healthy gps constellation and that we have 31 satellites in orbit, 37 in orbit and 31 are
operational. we are moving forward although with the ocx program, although that as many folks have testified previously would not be the model program that we would hold up is standard and we are clearly not out of the woods yet and it will be comfortable until that capability is operational on the floor for general box team to be able to operate. i'm comfortable where we are the relatively healthy gps that's on orbit and progress being made on the ground. >> what does that mean for the budget next year? >> the budget will be released next week and so, i prefer not to speculate on what might be released until it gets released. >> okay. ms. app, in 40 seconds i will give you a huge question. you referred to how we don't have the commitment we need for space going forward.
what can we do better as a country to show that commitment and that results back i think we really need help on the budget side. not just in investment in space but the ability to use the investment. we are fielding new things to improve are really resiliency and it's very hard to move ahead with new things under a continuing resolution that is not allowed. that is just slowing the pace of progress. even after we get it out of the executive branch which is no mean feat. you can have a lot on that front >> thank you so much. >> i would echo that on behalf of air force space command. >> recognized them general in from california. >> i'm going to forgo the usual gps backup. i assume that's moving along and if not, there will be legislation that will move along perhaps even faster.
not exactly sure how far to go with this, i represent the old air force base, there are certain activities going on and i'm not sure we should be talking about them here but i would like to take that up. i think it integrates with most of what is being discussed here. just in general, the integration between information between a variety of sources something that is happening just in general, your views on that progress. >> in general, i think it's going really well. in fact, largely the model that i use to make the decision to go with the approach that we talked about in the management control conversation we had with senator and i be more happy in close 20. >> i will let it go at that point. wait, one more. we pick this up yesterday and going on a plan for the next
decade of critical assets that need to be developed and deployed in the approximate cost of those. i think we need to have a long-term vision here of where were going to deploy in the most essential asset of all which is our financial resources. i've not seen such a display of those things that we, you, military in general and certainly the air force specifically in the space area, need, want and must have. i think it's essential that we look at that, there will be insufficient money for everything particularly if the tax cuts are real. so, will need to make some tough
decisions about prioritization and that needs a longview, ten years minimum. we need to say these things are going to be funded, those are not or will find all of it and not fund something else. if mr. chairman, can move in that direction. we had that long-term vision. >> i'd welcome the opportunity to come back and walk you through the space enterprise vision. that's our longer term vision for space and it's done in very close partnership, integrated vision with the nro. i want to take a moment and i do this every time i can, not just saying this but it's a huge partner for us back to minutes and eight seconds. >> i'd be more than welcome to come back and walk you through that vision. walking to the priorities that as we see them and inform you that. >> we heard some of this yesterday from general goldstein in different directions or at least different set of priorities for the future.
much of it involved your work and so i wanted to get a fix on that and other things that we may not put as a priority. thank you for that. i didn't mean to cut you off. i met you had to minutes and eight seconds to answer. >> i didn't want to take your time. i wanted to see if you have more questions. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when you think about the consortium, general raymond, that you talked about for the bmc to piece of the national defense state plan center that consortium of course, is trying to rapidly develop a capability where we are currently lagging behind and of course, everybody on this committee fully support that effort. in the meantime, is there an sfa gap that needs to be felt that could be commercial could help? maybe general block if you could answer that as well. >> thank you sir.
i mentioned the non- traditional processor and that is the right direction. some of the district that helps. what else we had is spss that is online, on orbit right now that is been extended. the life on that is extended passage i think the dates are classified but that will be extended. plus ors five gives provides us that gap for capability as well. think those three things together give us the capability to fill the gap. >> just as a general statement. more data is better. more data is better. we need data across the full spectrum and we do get that across the full spectrum but the other thing we've done is develop partnerships and then we have numbers over 50-60 fsa
sharing agreements partners and is largely a one way of sharing that there is, are, to where sharing pieces of that and i'd like to make that stronger when we get the new jms system with more capacity and more ability to adjust that data will take off. more is better. >> more is better. i'd like to maybe continue on what ranking member cooper was saying about this effort to create a partnership with the faa for space situational awareness specifically. can you share with us how that is being funded and is it coming out of your budget, is it out of their budget, is it the congress should do to help. >> my understanding is there's going to be an fy 18 budget request coming out of the faa but i'm hesitant to say that because i'm getting in the faa lane a little bit but i think
there's a funding request for 18 is coming out of the faa, sir. i don't have specifics spec is good here. again, i know that's not your lane and i don't want to get you in trouble but this committee would be very supportive of that partnership. right now, we have heard testimony over and over again of how you were providing free situational environs to the entire world and all commercial partners and at the same time the testing that is imposed on our war fighters at that dates back has been problematic to the extent that i hear from other members of congress that they want -- and i heard you were the load load shed, they want to load shed the mission but they don't want to load shed the funny. i want everyone on this committee to know the air force has never funded to provide space situational awareness for the entire world and commercial operators for free.
that is not ever been in your mission description and yet, that's what you're doing by default out of the goodness of your heart. i say the goodness of your heart but the reality is we need to protect our own assets and we all know that. i just want to reiterate the fact that if we can create space situational awareness environment that can be led by a civilian agency and free your manpower to actually be focused on fighting and winning wars, i think everyone on this panel will fully support that effort and if we need to do an appropriation, i think that's something we can be advocating for. with that -- go ahead. >> i agree with everything they said i just want to make sure that we state the criticality that the national security space commission need to make sure that we have the space situational awareness to make absolutely. >> there's a roll here for others but it's critical to our
national security that we maintain the awareness. >> hundred awareness hundred%. space defense, hundred% agree with that. if the not just the conjunction analysis but it's a warning that takes a lot of the man for a way >> i'm with you. >> with that, you'll back. >> i recognize the gentleman from washington state. >> thanks, mr. chairman. given on the ranking member of aviation subcommittee on transportation and the writing of a bill i would be reluctant to have the satellite tracking be dumped on as a as well. you're not saying it's happening , general block, i'm more concerned about congress gets out over the tips of this and assigned it without money or help rather negotiating out of
solutions is a because there's a better place for it in fact. one question i'm sure that they would have as the ranking member is what advantage is the faa get , what can it get from it for doing the activity as opposed to doing another set of activities. >> my discussions with doctor neil and his staff is that they see this is a real opportunity to do things that are more like air centric, establishing norms of behavior, establish patterns of safety of plate space, not to speak for faa but my conversations with them have led me to believe that there are goodness it was rather anxious to take on specific aspects of the management mission. >> that's great and i look forward to hearing from doctor meal. i'd love to discuss about
getting together and discussing this. certainly, some oversight given there's a lot of debate right in the faa about reorganization overall and posthumously into the mix it will get done but putting it in context all the other things trying to do it the faa is supported. that's my main point. thanks. i healed back. >> the gentleman mr. cochran from 545 minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. general raymond, the air force has previously expressed that rocket systems development is a better way to maintain or dominance in space. therefore, is it still the air force is versus only rocket components. would you tell us how you see the government collaborating with industry and fronting the
rocket system development and what is your vision of how industry should meet the air force's evaluation criteria? back to you for the question. the air force strategy remains threefold: first of all, it's critical that we remain assured access to face space. the second is that we would like to support competition. we see the benefit of competition in the launch industry. the third aspect of that is we would like to get off the already 180 engine. that strategy remains the same. we are investing in launch services and we don't procure rockets, we cure launch services and that remains the same and is on track. >> general raymond, i understand price is an important consideration. in my expense, other factors are given the cost of many of the
payloads and how essential they are to our national security, can you discuss how the air force evaluates and includes in its procurement decisions quality of items such as reliability or maintaining the industrial base? >> all that comes to place. it's a full-spectrum analysis. there is a pretty high bar that we go through for certification. we were not put on contract a launch if we do not think it would be assured to get on the space. its mission by mission. some are more complex than others. >> okay. anyone on this can answer this. it's my understanding that the space-based infrared system is the current and primary method to detect ballistic missile defense threats and we are dependent on servers since the 70s. are there other systems and
vision to complement severus? that may be for the classified brief. how vital my the air force be in to our space mission. >> this is a national security. it's probably one of the most critical systems that we operate and the wing up at berkeley, the wing led by colonel dave muller is a premier organization as it is extremely critical to the success of that mission. i was just up there a month or so ago and they're doing great work. as we look to the future, we look to make the constellations more resilient and i would have further conversations with the. [inaudible] to get into more specifics.
>> general but, you reference the position of training are satellite officers from a technician based focus to a war fighter -based focus. i think this depicts the increasing counterspace efforts of our adversaries and the threats they pose to our national security. you go into detail regarding the training to counter these threats and the transition to a war fighter focus. >> what i was referring to was the space mission first contract that we had implanted in the wings, it's complete is currently the 21st space wing and their looking at the same transformation. what this does in the space mission force contract performance at a time we have space crews that are in the fight, focused on the current fight while the other portion of the crew force at these things are focused on advanced training , tactics, techniques and procedure development for the future fight.
and how they can codify those into those doctrine. that's what i was referring to. i'm proud of the progress they've made in the way had general raymond. >> i would also add it's broader than space for space take. were also integrating our space operators into joint exercises and exercise called red flag in wargames that are joint and international. we just developed a displaced flag contract. developing depths of space expertise and then also working the multi- domain integration this is in space for space sake, this is cyber for the goodness of our nation. were tackling both portions. >> to you. i healed back. >> thank you gentlemen, will recognize the gentleman from hawaii. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general raymond, i have to admit when i see air force i've been thinking about missile defense
as well as your role in the triad system. reading your testimony has raised a different set of questions for me. worst of all, what i couldn't get past was this one paragraph and if you could explain this to me. in your testimony on page three you talk about the first seven months of your command, you were aggressively pushed implementation of the basically af at pc and the national reconnaissance nro space and provides vision with the new space or fighting contract. the were starting with the paper turning the space enterprise mission into reality. what i'm interested in is what is this war fighting constructs that you are talking about in terms of space? >> thank you. it's nice to meet you. the space enterprise vision as i mentioned earlier, is a vision that shared vision and the national reconnaissance office and passes over to betty as well
the shared vision for moving forward is how to make the domain are architecture more resilient to be able to survive the contested domain that we find today. the were fighting constructs really talked about several things that we talked about this morning. it takes a vision and build a concert. how do we operate together? that's the foundation of this. we worked closely with the nro to develop that kind of. we know how will work together. there's another layer is also part that we just talked about on developing and training our forces. the space mission force contract is part of that. there's another layer on it. how do you develop partnerships that we need both interagency with our commercial partners and with our allies to be able to respond to the strategic environment of today connect before you pass me on, let me
explain to you why. why my curiosity. in mr. hale's testimony, maybe i'll bypass no offense, his testimony speaks about the quote unquote threats that we hear about all the time in here. russia, china. he also speaks about eight to 80 and the concerns that we have. he says both will continue to pursue a full range of anti- satellite weapons as a means to reduce us military effectiveness what i thought you were going to tell me about the work construct was that it was in line -- in other words when we think about the oceans, the land, and so forth this is another layer of cold war that we must be ready to fight. quite candidly, i'm not sure when you brush in china that can undermine everything in terms of diplomatic operation that were
all talking about here, i would like to know to what extent that you can tell me here today, what exactly does this all mean in terms of our military and what do you need when you come to see us to fight that battle? >> first of all, we don't talk about a war in space. we talk about a war that extends into space. it's not space for space. >> is that something is unrealistic is it conceivable that we could actually have post war in space but are satellite be the first target? once you take out our satellites you are basically destroyed our effective communication mechanism. could they not be a first line of offense against us? >> if you look at our potential adversaries are talking about, they're talking about a full range of capabilities that range from everywhere from reversible
jamming applications and gps satellites like to have seen all the way up to the direct a scent from china in 2017, 2007. our posture is that we want to deter that. we have no interest in fighting that fight. as i said, when we do we do that is prepare for it. this helps prepare the concepts of operations, training, needed to respond. >> the minutes, second have left , mr. hale would you comment on it? it's your testimony that triggered my line. >> i say in my testimony, this evidence that anyone looking for war in space. it's about the terrestrial issues that they have, political differences the countries have and it is their conclusion that if they want a military option they have to be able to act in space as well. as your suggesting, that could be early.
>> thank you, mr. chair. i yelled back. >> mr. the gentleman from arizona. thank you. thank you for all that you do for the cause of human freedom. general raymond, just a quick direct pressure. you believe it's fair to say that space has been left iced? >> i believe is bent is fair to say that at the contested domain it's a war fighting ranges like air, land, and the. >> do we need a more robust space censored layer to adequately identify the latest emerging threats to our space as the. >> it's imperative that we have a level of domain awareness that's required to operate just like any other war fighting domain. >> should this us -- should be treat space as they were fighting domain?
>> space is a war fighting domain. just like air, land and sea and we need to treated that way. should the us develop defensive capabilities to counter attacks against the space security architecture. >> it is imperative in my opinion that we develop resilient architectures to be able to operate in contested environment that we face today. >> general box, do you have any thoughts on the? back if they were fighting domain and if you look at the other domains, air, land, sea they have a defensive capabilities and they have other capabilities that we can't afford to treat space any differently. >> is it fair to say that are near adversaries is offensive space key plays have outpaced our ability to defend our space assets? i might ask that you do you see
an offer this out to the entire panel, do you see value in establishing an annual capstone training exercise the equivalence of the red flag or say a space flag event for space operators? >> we have had our first space flag this year. although, for having the conversation and were moving in the right direction. i see this first base bag is the first of many to follow. john. >> i agree. >> as i mentioned earlier, that's important but there's the other aspect of it that it's got to be how do you integrate air space and fiber together and how to integrate it without the land and sea and there's other opportunities in addition to space flag that provides that capability as well. >> those are space specific
wargames, global theories, on and on, the jays back in an ftc participative and north of 70 exercises last year integrating space into the larger fight. i'm part of that effort. >> mr. chairman, i think i'll leave the rest of my questions for the classified session. i think all of you so much and thank you, mr. chairman. spec thanked the gentleman. gentleman from california, he recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you for being here today. i represent the billionaire air force base and recently had the great privilege of joining general box on a tour of the facility. in addition to other facilities there. for my colleagues and just for me for it to see again, you can never hear enough, could you share the contribution of the
vanderburgh air force base, dates back to our, national basic strategy and capability and perhaps close with how that relates or what the next. [inaudible] in colorado. thank you, sir. the to see you again. we have two primary command and control centers. vanderburgh air force base we have an operation center that the commercial partners on the floor and their allied partners on the for and they are doing the day-to-day heavy lifting support to the terrestrial fight when ecstatic commander needs space support, space attacks, they go to the. [inaudible] in a provide sanitary precision navigation and timing and although space affects they do it better than anyone else. national space defense center located in treiber first is for looking out for protecting the
space joint operating if you will. in the current right now they support to the pressure fight at treiber air force in colorado responsible for protecting and defending space joint operating environment. pylon did say that the stock is the operational dod control facility. it is secular work. i've been stationed at vanderburgh. they are absolutely wonderful airmen. not only joint airmen but joint partners that provide critical capability to all of the war fighters around the globe and is the only operational dod space that we have today. >> that was extremely impressive i want to think general buck for being hospitable and given me an
opportunity to interface with many of the troops and many of the command team there. it was a great visit and it was a great learning opportunity. i want to thank you and appreciate you for what you do. >> it was our pleasure. for joining us. >> we like to ask a few more questions before you go to procession. talk about the launch. general raymond, how long do you plan to maintain the delta for and i like for you to differentiate between the delta four and do you plan to keep the delta four heavy and if so, how? >> there's three delta four mediums that are left. the final launch for the delta four is scheduled for fy 19 and we have seven more delta four heavy's, six of those are
nationals classified and one is a national launch and one more final launch will be in fy 23 and were comfortable that we will have new capabilities on line to support the requirements going forward. >> you just heard mishap make reference to the national security payloads and how important is it to our mission. >> is essential to my mission. i tell you, general raymond has mentioned the partnership between us in the and sdc and in operations we could inhabit better launch partners that we do in the air force. they had taken care of our mission, we buy on their contract and they major we had delta four heavy coverage with a lot of transition margin to get to the booster. we spent very satisfied with their support. >> you heard general raymond say
that he believes about 2023 will have a replacement certified. i hope so too. but if we don't, do you believe that we should let the delta for mac heavy go for we have an alternative certified? >> i believe we have time to see how they mature before we cannot go back on the delta four heavy. i wouldn't carry it in the near term. we have them funded through launches in 2023 so we have some time here to make the right decision for the nation. >> that was a lawyerly response. as a lawyer, i have to see that. happily, general raymond said they developed the commercial. [inaudible] earlier this year, blue origin and on its get commercial customers for the new glenn vehicle. maybe they will even compete for the launch services.