SATCOM is a critical enabler of airborne ISR mission success. However, separating market promises from mission realities and selecting a system that fits your ISR mission requirements can be challenging.
Over Eclipse’s more than 30 years of experience delivering such solutions, the team has learned that it comes down to four primary factors:
- The type(s) of aircraft, their sizes, number in fleet and fuselage real estate – It’s critical to contemplate the system’s Size, Weight and Power (SWAP).
- Mission type(s), lengths and operational geographies – Obtaining the appropriate service to match mission needs and locations.
- Types of communications required for each mission – Who needs to connect with whom, and what data do they need to exchange?
- Budget, including certification, capital and ongoing operational costs – Aircraft equipment is one element; ongoing operations are linked to communication types and the amount of data required.
When considering SATCOM solutions for airborne ISR missions, it's essential that these factors be contemplated in the context of whether you are upgrading an existing system or implementing a completely new one. Upgrades may be more straightforward, while new system certifications can increase downtime. A thorough understanding of key selection factors—aircraft type, mission requirements, communications needs, and budget—is essential for developing clear requirements and collaborating effectively with an integrator. These factors are not only important individually but also interconnected. Understanding how they relate will help you ask the right questions and build a solid knowledge base to select the best system for your mission's success.
Factor 1: Aircraft type(s), size(s), number in fleet, and fuselage real estate
The size of the aircraft to be equipped dictates the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of the equipment that can be installed. Think: large, small, fixed-or rotary-wing.
Evaluating the interior space for avionics and the exterior space for antennas is fundamental. Limited fuselage space for antennas limits selection to specific systems, potentially constraining capability and utility. This is an especially important consideration when adding new SATCOM capabilities to an already SATCOM-equipped aircraft. Maintaining structural integrity while avoiding EMC and RF interference is an additional element to note. The more constrained the platform, the fewer options are available.
It shouldn’t be a surprise that equipping an entire fleet will cost more. A fleet with varied aircraft types also adds complexity. The good news? Cost-reducing options are available for some aircraft types, and Eclipse Global Connectivity builds Roll-on/Roll-off (RO/RO) solutions to support multiple SATCOM systems on C-130 and other platforms.
Factor 2: Operational geographies, mission types and lengths.
Thinking about the type of mission an aircraft will fly and the possible geographic location is essential to choosing the correct solution. Are missions likely to be in one region or a variety? Are all aircraft performing the same tasks, or are there various objectives for various aircraft? Could RO/RO solution help manage multiple requirements? A solid understanding of these issues will help narrow the field to Service Providers that truly offer what you will need. This, then, establishes the antenna, transceiver, networking equipment and other systems that may be installed.
Services like Viasat, OneWeb and Starlink offer global coverage. Perfect, right? Not all services are alike, and not all have obtained regulatory approval to operate in all parts of the world. Long-standing services, such as Iridium and Viasat (including Inmarsat), have legal permissions to operate in most regions of the world, while some newer constellations, such as Starlink, are still working to meet this important requirement.
Assessing mission length and which aircraft require connectivity will also drive system selection. Longer missions may use more data—impacting operational costs. As the name implies, RO/RO systems save weight and space when not required. In some cases, they can facilitate use across a fleet and, with the appropriate Service Provider, reduce those operational costs.
Factor 3: Communication types and latency requirements
ISR mission operators are in the business of securely collecting and transmitting MASSIVE amounts of data of various types to C2 and other fleet members. Static images, video, VoIP, chat, sensors, etc., require varying data rates, which will point towards a specific satellite service and the requisite equipment to be installed.
It is worth noting that “supersizing” the data pipe is often considered the ultimate goal. However, balancing the ongoing operations budget, mission length, and the required bandwidth for the communication type will be informative. Not only does this link to Service Provider selection, where the latest and greatest may not actually fit mission objectives, but the type of data to be transmitted may also bring trade-offs, including with respect to the first high-level factor: the aircraft’s interior and exterior real estate.
On top of the type of transmission, who it will be transmitted to and from, how fast, how much and how long, ISR operators require secure transmission—ALWAYS. Additionally, knowing where communications traffic will land is an important concern for most. Choosing an integrator with deep experience in these critical realms is clearly key.
Lastly, regarding communication types, managing the variety of inbound and outbound data sources and allocating the data pipe’s resources can pose a significant challenge. Many operators are choosing multi-layered (multi-frequency and multi-orbit solutions), and this will likely be the case for the foreseeable future. An integrator with solutions for handling these elements will add value to your project and make operational life much simpler.
Factor 4: Budget, including capital and operational expenditures
Developing a budget for an airborne connectivity project can be daunting. Capital and ongoing operational costs can be large, and certification and modification to military or civilian airworthiness authority standards can also add cost and complexity. One way to mitigate some project costs is to choose an integrator with a comprehensive certification catalogue. It can reduce aircraft downtime and complexity.
Airtime is a significant operational cost consideration. With costs varying across providers, they are inextricably tied to how many aircraft will require connectivity, how often it will be used, and how much—think megabytes or gigabytes. For example, a Viasat L-MAX leased service allows operators to share dedicated bandwidth, offering a cost-effective high-bandwidth solution. Couple this with a RO/RO system, and there may be potential additional cost savings.
In our final blog post, we’ll wrestle the whole project to the ground and provide a brief summary of why ISR operators rely on Eclipse to help wade through SATCOM’s ongoing complexity.
Read enough? Want to explore your options now? Connect with us.
