Maj. Gen. Salty Saltzman was the first U.S. Air Force general officer transferred and promoted to lieutenant general in the U.S. Space Force during a ceremony at the Pentagon Aug. 14.
WASHINGTON: DoD has to undertake a foundational “redesign of how we manage our data” in order to succeed at creating a Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) network for orchestrating future information-centric warfare against peer adversaries, says Lt. Gen. Salty Saltzman, deputy chief of space operations for operations, cyber and nuclear.
“Data management and the policies that go with security of that data management I see as one of the big hurdles,” he told the Mitchell Institute Friday.
There are both technical and policy challenges to overhauling the way DoD and the services handle data sharing, Saltzman explained. JADC2 will be dependent on allowing the rapid, seamless flow of vast amounts of data around the world to operators in the field — and across various levels of security, from unclassified to top secret. Nonetheless, access to that data has to be secured from enemy interception and/or disruption.
There are problems, he said, with “sharing information across multiple security layers,” Saltzman said, on top of the challenges in gathering all the data needed and making it easily available to those who need it.
“These are currently things which are technically feasible, and that we’re struggling to implement because of the way we built our data structures, our pipes, etc. inside the Department of Defense,” he elaborated. “Our links-and-node structure is not really built for cloud-based structures and moving data around like that. We still like direct feeds, we like firewalls.”
And despite the growing understanding among military leaders that information will need to flow freely, security policies used by DoD and the services are difficult to reform. Indeed, different services often apply security classification and access to data in different ways — complicating streamlining efforts.
Further, Saltzman said, many at DoD continue to take an overly conservative attitude toward secrecy. “We’re still a little bit locked in an older mindset, if you will, about how to manage data in the more responsive way that’s required by JADC2.” There is a need, he said, for “getting everybody on board that we’re not taking risk, we are shifting risk and managing risk across how we move data. That’s a mindset change that we’ve got to get to.”
He explained that the way to protect data and networks could no longer be based on a “moat with high walls.” Instead, a key to thinking about cybersecurity risks — particularly for the Space Force which is providing many of the data networks required to underpin JADC2 and for which cybersecurity is a fundamental part of its mission — is to recognize there will always be “bad actors infiltrating” networks.
“I like to think of it more like an immune system in your body,” he said. “Things are going to come in because we have to stay connected, because we have to share information. There are going to be some vulnerabilities in there. We just have to recognize them immediately, and then be able to sort it out and mitigate it rapidly.”
Saltzman ought to know. Back in 2017, he was charged with creating the Air Force’s forerunner to JADC2, the Multi-Domain Command and Control (MDC2) program. “I’m a proud father of Multi-Domain C2, and watched it grow up into Joint All-Domain Command and Control,” he said with a smile.
Most of the key principles that underpin JADC2 were developed under the MDC2 effort, Saltzman said. These include the reliance on common data standards, common Internet protocols, widely accessible data, and resilient, self-healing networks — all of which are now being demonstrated as feasible by the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) On Ramps and the Army’s Project Convergence exercises, he said.
“So, I know we are on the right track,” he said. “What makes me happy is that I really do feel like the MDC2 team set a foundation of principles that are now being applied tangibly as we start to develop the systems and bring it to life, if you will.”
“So, what doesn’t make me as happy is how long it takes,” he added. “This is just the nature sometimes, I think, of a large organization trying to synchronize across multiple fronts multiple services, multiple budget drills, multiple acquisition projects. And, and so, you know, there has to be a level of patience.”
Space Force Warfighting Construct
In his wide-ranging discussion, Saltzman also addressed what the Space Force has accomplished and where it still has serious work to do as it nears its first anniversary. One key issue that has raised criticism from both some within DoD and many in the expert community is the need to flesh out a “warfighting construct” to guide service priorities and resource investments.
This includes the question of how to balance between the service’s missions, as stated in the new Capstone “Spacepower” Doctrine, to “protect and defend” and to “provide independent options” for “strategic affects.” Indeed, the Aerospace Corporation earlier this month called out the need for the Space Force, and the US government writ large, to have an robust and transparent debate about the use of offensive space weapons. That question is also at the heart of relations with allies, as well as stated US intentions of leading a global conversation on norms of responsible and acceptable behavior in space.
“We don’t know exactly how we want to behave in space,” Saltzman conceded.
However, he explained that no one should be waiting for the Space Force to come out with “an 80-page document” that explains how it will prosecute future wars.
“This will sound like I’m dodging, and I’m really trying to explain it as realistically as I can, because it’s so foundational. We don’t want to wait and wait and wait and design this perfect construct, and then roll it out, and then that’s the answer that we all have to march to for years to come. We think that’s not the right approach,” Saltzman said. “So, when you hear us talk about a ‘warfighting construct’ it’s not a singular thing, it’s actually a set of actions and processes that are going to be ongoing forever. And so it’s going to be incrementally rolled out as individual decisions are made that generally move us in the direction of the vision that Gen. [Jay] Raymond is trying to lay out for us.”
That said, he stressed that it is the Space Force’s job to figure out how to fight in space.
“The nation, the Department of Defense is going to turn to the Space Force and say: ‘How are we going to contest and compete in the space domain to ensure that we maintain the strategic advantage that we’ve joined enjoyed for years?’ And that is squarely on our shoulders. Now you have service-level discussions — saying ‘how do we protect and defend what we already have’?”
“And sometimes the best defense is a good offense,” he added. “And so we are exploring all those opportunities. Right now it’s mostly science and technology and R&D, because again we don’t want to throw good money after bad, but those discussions are ongoing because we think it’s our responsibility to take it on.”
Saltzman noted that the Space Force is already looking, for example, to future platforms, including whether to continue with the X-37B experimental spaceplane, work on a follow-on program or do something totally new and different.
“We’ve gotten a lot of great utility out of those vehicles — mostly from lessons learned and how to apply a reusable vehicle, how to get the most out of it, how to refurbish it. And so the lessons learned there are going to live forever, and we’re gonna try to apply those as much as we can,” he said.
“Do we need to produce another one just like it? I it seems like that’s that’s kind of status quo,” he added. “I think that’s an example where maybe that technology has served its purpose and it’s time to start looking at the next available capability. … I can tell you we’re looking at it from a broader lens than just trying to enhance an older capability and technology.”
However, Saltzman said, for the moment the Space Force is focusing on current needs, while at the same time trying to flesh out the longer-term “warfighting construct.”
“I think, in the near term, you’re going to see enhancements to existing capabilities,” he said, citing the planned “block” upgrades GPS satellites and improved extremely high-frequency communications capabilities. The Space Force launched its fourth GPS III satellite on Sept. 29, with six more in the pipleline. Lockheed Martin further is on contract to provide up to 22 more advanced versions called GPS Follow-On. Meanwhile, the service continues to work on its Protected Anti-Jam Satellite Communications (PATS) family of systems for replacing the alternative to the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite network for classified communications.
“You’re going to see new capabilities to protect and defend,” Saltzman elaborated, “and satellites that are maybe more resilient than the big targets they’ve been in the past. That’s going to be our kind of near-term focus. And then, as we get the resources that play out over the next three four or five years, that’s when you might see, kind of like, where the new warfighting construct starts to be instantiated on orbit.”
