Most space systems consist of satellites, ground control systems, and user  terminals, though some space systems only require ground control  systems to provide capability to users. Of the eight major space system acquisitions, five ground control  system efforts are optimally aligned to deliver capability with their  companion satellites, while three are not optimally aligned. Alignment of Ground Control Systems and Satellites

Ground systems deployment for three of DOD’s major space system  acquisitions is lagging behind delivery of satellites. In some of these instances, schedule slips  in satellite development allowed more time for ground control system  development. Alignment of User Terminals

Five of the eight major space systems we reviewed had user terminals  scheduled to be delivered and become operational after, and in some  cases long after, their associated space systems achieved initial capability. Implications on Warfighters and the Testing Community

When space capabilities are not delivered in a coordinated manner or are  partially delivered, the warfighter will either not have certain capabilities  available when expected or may have to develop short-term solutions  while waiting for the expected capability. Acquisition and Other Problems Contribute to a Lack of Space System Component Alignment

Though there are inherent difficulties in aligning delivery of satellites,  ground control systems, and user terminals, the lack of synchronization  between segments of space acquisition programs is largely the result of  the same core issues that hamper acquisition in general—requirements  instability, funding instability, insufficient technology maturity,  underestimation of complexity, and poor contractor oversight, among  other issues. This means that  software development for ground control systems is oftentimes the higher  risk. For example, when the GPS IIF satellite program  encountered development problems, the program shifted funds set aside  for the GPS ground control system to address the satellite problems,  causing a delay in the delivery of some ground control capabilities. Thus, user terminal programs need to have timely funding and  be well-coordinated. A  January 2001 study by DOD’s U.S. Space Commission noted that when  satellites and ground control systems are funded in one budget and user  terminals in another, the result can be a lack of synchronization in the  acquisition of satellites and their associated user terminals because of this  decentralized arrangement. Officials from a third program, AEHF, agreed that space system  synchronization challenges often result from the way the military services  are organized to manage the various space system components. Efforts Are Being Made to Achieve Better Alignment of Satellite, Ground Control System, and User Terminal Deliveries, but They Are Limited by Lack of Guidance and Cost Data

There are efforts in place focused specifically at better aligning delivery of  satellite, ground system, and user terminals as well as reducing the kinds  of acquisition problems that contribute to delays that make alignment  difficult. Moreover, improvements are likely to be hampered by a lack of guidance  to help plan for and coordinate the development of satellite and ground  systems and a lack of transparency into the costs of ground control  systems and user terminals. In addition, the Air Force is attempting to mitigate some of the  contributing factors that create synchronization issues by separating the  acquisition of satellites and their ground control systems, intending to  ensure that ground systems receive increased oversight. Officials also indicated that when programs use the  same contractor to develop both the satellite and ground control systems,  the government can be beholden to the single contractor to deliver some  capability, even if contractor performance falls below expectations. As a result, it can be difficult to identify, track,  and report separate cost information for satellites and ground control  systems. Opportunities Exist to Enhance the Capabilities of Satellite Ground Systems

DOD has typically developed and operated its ground systems in a  stovepiped manner. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help DOD space systems provide more capability to the warfighter  through better synchronization and increased commonality, and to provide  increased insight into the costs associated with ground assets, we are  making five recommendations to the Secretary of Defense. This can also negatively affect the warfighter.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Defense (DOD) expects to spend more than $50 billion to develop and procure eight major space systems. Typically, the systems have two main components: satellites and ground control systems. Some also have a third component--user terminals--that can allow access from remote locations. If the delivery of these three components is not synchronized, there can be delays in providing full capabilities to the warfighter, and satellites on orbit can remain underutilized for years. Given preliminary indication of uncoordinated deployment, GAO was asked to examine (1) the extent to which satellite, ground control, and user terminal deployments are aligned; (2) the reasons deployments have not always been well coordinated; (3) actions being taken to enhance coordination; and (4) whether enhancements to ground systems could optimize the government's investment. To accomplish this, GAO analyzed plans for all major DOD satellite acquisitions and interviewed key officials.

What GAO Found

Satellites, ground control systems, and user terminals in most of DOD's major space system acquisitions are not optimally aligned, leading to underutilized satellites and limited capability provided to the warfighter. Of the eight major space system acquisitions we studied, three systems anticipated that their satellites will be launched well before their associated ground control systems are fully capable of operating on-orbit capabilities. Furthermore, for five of the eight major space systems GAO reviewed, user terminals were to become operational after their associated satellites reach initial capability--in some cases, years after. When the deployments of satellites, ground control systems, and user terminals are not well synchronized, problems arise that can affect both the warfighter and the space systems themselves. When capabilities are delayed because of lack of alignment between satellite and ground control systems or user terminals, the warfighter may develop short-term solutions, often at diminished capability and added cost. In addition, according to DOD testing officials, when the deployment of space system components is not properly timed, components may be ready for system testing at different times. This means that the space system may not be tested as a whole, connected system. DOD has inherent challenges in aligning its satellite and ground control systems. However, long-standing acquisition problems, a tendency to shift funds from ground control system development to satellite development when satellite development problems arise and the underestimation of software complexity on several major space systems have exacerbated the problem. The primary cause for user terminals not being well synchronized with their associated space systems is that user terminal development programs are typically managed by different military acquisition organizations than those managing the satellites and ground control systems. DOD does have several efforts in place to help achieve better synchronization. The Air Force has also made some attempts to improve acquisition management and increase oversight of contractors by separating the acquisition of satellites and their ground control systems. However, the outcomes of these efforts are still pending. Moreover, there is a lack of guidance needed to help plan for and coordinate the development of satellite and ground systems and a lack of transparency into costs for ground control systems and user terminals. DOD representatives in the satellite acquisition community agree that opportunities exist for DOD to transition to a more common type of architecture for satellite ground control systems in order to achieve additional efficiencies, capabilities, and a higher degree of information sharing among space systems, ultimately resulting in increased capability to the warfighter. All of the officials GAO spoke with agreed that ground control systems can be developed to provide data and information to other systems, and expect the same in return, to potentially enhance the flow and timeliness of information and better exploit satellite capabilities.