Space Power a Force Multiplier

Space power a force multiplier

CHAPTER - I

INTRODUCTION

1. The Space has always been a great matter of interest to human race, which gazed and tried to explore this cosmic world for thousands of years. Even our own epics talk a lot about space and its utilisation. However, Science flourished during the European Renaissance and fundamental physical laws governing planetary motion were discovered, and the orbits of the planets around the Sun were calculated. The Chinese were the first to develop a rocket in around 1212 AD. In 1883, a Russian schoolmaster, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, first explained the mechanics of how a rocket could fly into space.[2]. In the 17th century, astronomers pointed a new device called the telescope at the heavens and made startling discoveries[3]. On 03 Oct 1942, German scientists launched an A-4 rocket, which travelled a distance of 190 km and reached an altitude of over 80 km. Orbital operations started with Soviet Sputnik-1 satellite in 1957[4]. Since then exploration and exploitation of the space has been a continued effort. This led to the unfolding of mysteries of the space world and thus using it for own advantages.

2. Military use of space started with the launch of an American reconnaissance satellite in 1960.[5] Since then, the utilisation of space has been a matter of debate and controversies as far as direct war fighting military roles and missions are concerned. However, the support operations like Intelligence, communication and reconnaissance, which came first, did not face much of resistance. The benefits possible from the space-based support operations were realised very quickly and these operations were extended further to surveillance, mapping, navigation, ground mapping, environmental monitoring etc. Space systems have brought better intelligence and stronger defences by enabling the collection of new types of data and information; significantly increasing communications capabilities and capacities; revolutionizing precision navigation and timing; enriching science; establishing new markets; providing safer air, land, and sea transportation; and enabling faster disaster relief as well as more effective civil planning[6].

3. The phenomenal utilization and exploitation of the space medium has finally provided the users the power to gain advantage over the enemy. Traditionally, power has been related to explosive ordinance and target destruction. But in the post-Cold War world, the "power" most often delivered by airmen has taken the form of humanitarian aid: food, medical supplies, and heavy equipment.[7] Also Knowledge is the purest form of power and is the reason that overhead surveillance, reconnaissance, and intelligence-gathering efforts are so important in both war and peace. Information delivered from above can be used to strengthen a friendly regime, discredit an enemy regime, or directly attack the morale of an adversary's frontline troops. They can detect missile launches, nuclear tests and they can provide secure real time communications all over the world. The resolution available with satellite reconnaissance is more than adequate for military needs. The accuracy of GPS is known to us all. In less hostile circumstances, the information might consist of humanitarian warnings about impending natural disasters or news about disaster-relief efforts[8]. The meteorological satellites provide accurate weather data from any part of the world. Thus in past few years, space-based systems have enabled dramatic improvement in military and intelligence operations thus enhancing its capability, accuracy and fire power. Thus the Space medium emerging as Space Power and the most effective and widely used force multiplier.

METHODOLOGY

Statement Of Problem

4. To study and analyse the feasibility of Space Power to evolve as a frontline force multiplier for India and to critically examine the road ahead.

Justification Of Study

5. India's achievement in the field of space capability may not seem to be very advanced especially when compared with the accomplishments of the superpowers and elite members of the satellite club. However, one needs to look at the Indian space programme in isolation to fully understand the tremendous progress and achievements that have been made from such a humble beginning.

6. All the countries have developed launch vehicles as an offshoot of their ballistic missile projects, and their satellites were primarily intended for military use. Non- military applications were a spinoff of the military programmes, whereas India has developed space applications and launch vehicles for totally civilian use. The technology was also used within a broader framework to achieve socio-economic development, and military spin-offs have been incidental. Therefore, India has an inherent advantage as far as civilian support role is concerned however it needs special effort and attitude to develop military support application. Utilization of Space medium and Control of space based assets will be an important ingredient of future world power. President APJ Kalam has stated that accomplishments in space have traditionally been a barometer of international status, technological prowess and enhanced military capability. Rapid advancements in Information Technology, Internet and Communications are increasingly utilising space based assets. These assets play a decisive role in shaping the outcome of conflicts and are engines that drive economic growths. India and China are likely to be the economic powerhouses of the 21st Century. India is also emerging as a key balancer of Asian stability. By its combined military and space technology, India would be required to contain regional conflicts and prevent unscrupulous exploitation of the Indian Ocean region[9]. Therefore development of space power both for military and civilian use, especially as a force multiplier is must to climb up the pyramid of world power.

7. Perceptions determine actions. The military's perception of the air and space environment influences the type of space forces it will develop in the future[10]. Therefore we need to decide the kind of space force which we need to develop to exploit Space medium to the maximum as a force multiplier to maintain edge in the region.

Scope

8. This study analyses the exploitation of Space Force as a force multiplier in the Indian Context.

Methods Of Data Collection

9. The information and data for this dissertation has been gathered through internet, various books, papers, journals and newspapers. In addition, lectures delivered by dignitaries at DSSC have been utilised to gather information. The bibliography of sources is appended at the end of the dissertation.

Organisation Of The Dissertation

10. It is proposed to study the subject in the following manner:-

• Chapter I Introduction and Methodology.


• Chapter II Understanding Space power.


• Chapter III Roles and Application of Space Power.


• Chapter IV Space Power as Force Multiplier.


• Chapter V Indian Capability and the Road Ahead.


• Chapter VI Recommendations and Conclusion.

CHAPTER - II

UNDERSTANDING SPACE POWER

The beginning of wisdom is calling things by their right names.

—Confucius

1. Space has fascinated many thinkers, philosophers and Air Warriors equally for a long time. Many a researches and money has gone in exploring and exploiting space but still the concepts are not very clear to many of us. It is extremely important for us to have clear understanding of space before we can evaluate the role and utilization of space medium.

Definitions

2. Space Space is void of substance, offers no protection from harmful radiation, and allows only the balance between thrust and gravity with which to maneuver.[11] Space begins where satellites can maintain orbit (81 miles) and extends to infinity.[12] Power is control or authority to influence; the ability to produce an act or event.[13] And Space power is a nation's ability to exploit and control the space medium to support and achieve national goals.[14]

3. Escape Velocity Satellites maintain orbit around a planet (Earth in our case) at a particular speed at a given height. If the speed is increased, the satellite goes into a higher orbit. Escape velocity is the speed at which the centrifugal force becomes greater than the pull of planetary gravity. The object would then cease to be an Earth-satellite, and start moving away from the earth. At 500 km the escape velocity is 10.8 km/sec.[15]

4. Satellite Inclination Every satellite orbits within a plane that passes through Earth's gravitational centre. The angle formed between that plane and that of the Earth's equator, measured on its north bound pass over the equator, is known as satellite ‘inclination'. Orbits with inclination at or closer to 90 degrees are known as ‘polar' orbits. ‘Equatorial' orbits are those in or very close to the plane of the equator. The rest, between these two limits, are ‘inclined' orbits. The combination of the satellite's own motion and that of the rotating planet beneath produces a ‘ground track' joining the successive points on the planet which fall directly beneath the satellite. The surface area of the planet in line-of-sight or direct communication with any satellite is a function of its altitude and ground track. In the lowest feasible orbits, the area that can be ‘seen' by satellite sensors is no more than that of one of Earth's larger cities.

5. Decay With a perfectly spherical planet of even density, no air resistance, and no minute gravitational pulls from neighbouring bodies (such as Sun, the Moon, and the other planets), a satellite would stay in orbit forever. In the real world these factors upset the balance of forces which sustains the orbit, which causes it to ‘decay', so that the satellite eventually falls to the Earth. For practical purposes, satellites which go below 300 km encounter air resistance serious enough to require intermittent use of on-board boosters to maintain their orbits.[16]

6. Low Earth Orbit (LEO). This orbit ranges from a height of 200 and 5000 km. Polar and highly inclined orbits are favoured for general reconnaissance missions since they give planet-wide coverage. The periods of such range between 90 minutes and a few hours.

7. Semi-synchronous Orbit. This is circular orbit at 20,700 km with a period of 12 hours. The term is sometimes extended to all orbits between LEO and this orbit.

8. Molniya Orbit. This is a highly elliptical orbit, at an altitude of between 500 - 40000 km, with a 12 hour period. This orbit is most stable at an inclination of 63 degrees. (At other inclinations gravitational anomalies resulting from irregularities in the shape and density of the planet cause the major axis of such an orbit - the line joining the apogee and the perigee points - to rotate inconveniently.) This orbit was used by the Soviet Union to provide satellite spending 11 hours out of 12 hours above the northern hemisphere.[17]

9. Geostationary Orbit (GEO). This is a circular, equatorial orbit at an altitude of 35,700 km. With a period of 24 hours, such satellites appear to remain almost stationary above a fixed point over the equator. In practice, they sometimes describe a very small ‘figure of eight' ground tracks about such a point. Three or more evenly spaced geostationary satellites can cover most of the planet, except the Polar Regions. These satellites are mainly used for communications or early warning of missiles.

10. Geosynchronous Orbit. This orbit is also circular and inclined and is at an altitude of 35,700 km. This orbit has little military or other uses because of its large ‘figure of eight' ground tracks, depending on its inclination. In military discussions the term ‘geostationary', is tending to be replaced by ‘geosynchronous', because the former is the limiting case of the latter. Even a small inclination causes a geostationary satellite to become a ‘strictly speaking' geosynchronous one. Military geostationary satellites may sometimes have a use for such a ground track, though seldom for the much wider, true geosynchronous orbit.[18]

11. Super-synchronous Orbit. The orbits above GEO have had little use so far, but offer many options for future military satellites taking refuge from ground based or LEO anti-satellites. Certain points of equilibrium between solar, lunar and terrestrial gravitation are especially interesting.[19]

12. Near-Earth Orbit (NEO) or aerospace extends 50 to 200 kilometers above the Earth's surface, incorporating the mesosphere and the lower edge of the ionosphere in an intermediate region where aerodynamics and ballistics interact or succeed each other. In the short term, NEO will remain the primary location for the deployment of manned and unmanned military systems and probable major space industrialization facilities such as a manned space operations center (SOC)[20]. It is through this zone that ballistic missiles must proceed during and after their boost phase and are most vulnerable to antiballistic missile (ABM) systems. However, minimum long-range effects from nuclear explosions are found at altitudes between 50 and 150 kilometers: above 50 kilometers, the mechanical effects of shockwave pressures almost disappear as a consequence of the relatively low air density; below 150 kilometers, the air density is still high enough to reduce the range of corpuscular radiation through dispersion and absorption so that the long-range thermal effect is also not maximum.[21] Therefore, even very powerful nuclear devises in the megaton range must be detonated at relatively close proximity to their intended target at NEO to be effective, although electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects could seriously disrupt unhardened electronic systems at long-range distances. Nevertheless, targets at NEO, compared to those at higher gravity well zones, are relatively vulnerable to Earth-based intervention because of an inherently short warning time available for the implementation of countermeasures and the minimal amount of energy that the enemy must expend to reach this zone. Conversely, a weapon system such as a fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS) at NEO could attack targets on Earth with a minimum of warning[22].

13. The cislunar zone consists of all space between NEO and Lunar Surface Orbit (LSO), including Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO). The cislunar zone provides military systems situated here the defensive option of a longer reaction time to implement countermeasures against Earth- or NEO-based intervention[23].

14. LSO consists of the zone of space where the Moon orbits the Earth, including Near Lunar Orbit (NLO) or the space immediately surrounding the Moon.

15. The translunar zone is comprised of the space from LSO to approximately one million kilometers from the Earth's surface, where the solar gravity well begins to predominate and includes the five Lagrangian points. These final zones will attain increasing military significance as the process of space industrialization evolves. Eventually the Moon and Lagrangian points could be used to dominate the entire Earth-Moon system.[24]

16. Outer Space In the denomination of legal material dealing with the space exploration and nearly the entire space law, the term 'outer space' is commonly used. But this term has not been defined to date with precision despite many attempts undertaken by jurists, International non-governmental and the United Nations bodies[25]. The difference between space and the outer space is generally not recognised. But the former term is wider than the latter and means the whole universe including the earth while outer space means all spaces other than the earth. In fact, outer space begins where the earth's atmosphere ends and extends on in all directions infinitely. The upper limit of the air space constitutes the lowest limit of outer space. The outer space in a broader sense also consists of the entire space beyond celestial bodies and their atmosphere. Celestial bodies include all land masses in space and their atmosphere except Earth. Therefore, air space is excluded from outer space. The difference between space and outer space is insignificant in so far as the exploration and use of such domain is concerned[26].

17. The tactical space environment The tactical space environment of the Earth-Moon system can be conceptualized as a series of gravity well zones that are somewhat analogous to terrestrial hills, promontories, and mountains in that much effort and energy must be initially expended to situate forces in such locations. Once attained, however, these positions can be used to dominate the terrain below with relative ease. Figure 1 illustrates in two-dimensional form the gravity well zones of the Earth-Moon system, which are in reality three dimensional spheres[27].

18. During the next two decades, military space activities and the development of various commercial space enterprises (or "space industrialization") will be primarily restricted to this system. Possible military missions in this tactical environment include direct intervention on the Earth's surface form space, regulation of the flow of space traffic, protection of military and industrial space facilities, denial of strategic areas of space to others (such as choice satellite orbits at Geosynchronous Earth Orbit and the various Lagrangian points at which objects revolve with the same period as the gravitational Earth-Moon system and thus remain effectively stationary), and various surveillance, reconnaissance, navigation, command, control, and communication functions[28].

CLICHÉ ABOUT SPACE POWER

19. The space power being the latest addition to the force of a Nation, there is still a huge dilemma about its placement, its use whether military or civilian and also its control. Currently, a fully developed space power theory does not exist. USSPACECOM, recognizing the void, has commissioned Dr. Brian R. Sullivan as lead author to develop this theory.[29] Therefore there is requirement to develop a fully fledged theory and doctrine to guide the developed of space power straight from its infancy.

20. Space is the next great arena for exploration and exploitation. We are limited only by imagination to the wonders, challenges and excitement the next century will bring as far as space forces are concerned. Already, civil and commercial sectors have invested billions of dollars in space and the nation's military recognizes its role to protect these interests. The debate within the military on how to best exploit this new medium continues. But there is a need to go over few of the basic issues about Space Power to understand it clearly. The military's current view of the air and space environment seems to simultaneously focus on opposing relationships between the two mediums. Air and space represent two distinct realms and at the same time, they are difficult to separate because of their similarities. These two relationships exist simultaneously and come together to form the following organizational paradigm of the air and space environment: Space and the atmosphere represent two distinct medium environments physically different from each other; while at the same time, they are physically linked, and theoretically and historically tied.[30] There are few of these set of fundamental issues which require to be vetted if we are to understand space power with the kind of clarity with which we now understand air power and if we are to understand their nexus[31].

21. First of the issue, is regarding direct use of space as a Space power or weaponising of space to use it as a force itself. We must determine whether space power "apply great power quickly to any tangible target on the planet"? Many people would answer no to this question because of political restraints on weaponising space. Others would argue for an affirmative answer based on technical, if not political, feasibility. In either case, the question concerning the applicability of the essence remains assumed but undemonstrated. Or perhaps there exists a space power version of the essence that differs from all other military operations, including air power[32]. Also there are concerns regarding the future of space power and the kinds of military operations that are likely to migrate to space. Space may become another "battle space," or it may become only a home to military operations focussed on non-lethal activities in support of combat elsewhere. So the major concern is whether space will be used as direct source of force or will continued to be used as a force multiplier only.

22. Why does the military need a space force? The answers to this question shape military space force development by providing a sense of long-term direction, describing how such a force would serve national interests, and prescribing a force structure to fulfill that need. They are foundational answers that ultimately form the basis for space power theory and enable the military to articulate and justify reasons for a military space force. As the military more clearly articulates why space forces are needed, the better it is able to identify specific requirements necessary to achieve those forces. Thus, this question and the next are closely tied together[33].

23. What should the military do in space? The answers to this question bring the focus from broad to specific. They help formulate the functions and missions of a military space force, and provide the framework for establishing detailed force requirements. To summarize, the answers to the question of who establish the advocates for a military space force development. The answers to the questions of why and what together develop and identify long term direction, and offer short-term input to the resource allocation process.[34]

24. The next issue is to do with the control of space power. This will mainly emerge from our innovation, imagination and farsightedness. Air Power being the strongest contender of claiming the control of space, there is need to deeply study the relationship between Space power and Air Power. This relationship can be well understood only by defining and studying the relationship between space and Air. Who should lead and develop military space forces? This question addresses the need to focus on finding the best organization, or mix of organizations, to advocate a military space force. Military space advocates must be able to justify—on military grounds alone—the necessity of military forces in space. These organizations are the stewards that provide both administrative control over the forces that support military space power, and the war-fighting control of these forces during employment of that power. A space force advocate embraces and promotes the ideals for a military space force, and garners the support necessary to establish such a force[35].

Air and Space relationship

25. The defining characteristic of air power is an operational regime ele­vated above the earth's surface. Conceptually, space power would seem to be more of the same at a higher elevation. The term aerospace, coined in the late 1950s, echoes this same theme, as do official pronouncements such as "although there are physical differences between the atmosphere and space, there is no absolute boundary between them. The same basic military activities can be performed in each, albeit with different platforms and methods."[36] The move from earth to space transitsis through the air environment, thereby inherently bringing about a linkage as no space launch or recovery can take place without transiting through the air medium. Any differentiation between the two would be superficial and indefinable. In future, the air and space mediums would provide a seamless environment where Trans Atmospheric Vehicles (TAVs) and re-usable hypersonic vehicles could exploit it freely. In addition, with increased proliferation of Ballistic Missiles and development of potent nuclear warheads, there is a need to extend the current Air Defence capabilities to space to ensure that the threats emanating from the air and space environment can be effectively tackled.[37] While the physical borders between the land, sea and air are readily evident, the physical border between air and space is not as clear. The atmosphere gradually disappears and space gradually starts. Furthermore, from a physical point of view, earth's entire connection to space is through the atmosphere. Every movement into space begins with movement through air. Thus, from a physical point of view, space is linked with air.[38]

26. Conceptually thinking, we cannot easily ignore the vast differences between operations in the atmosphere and in space? Current military thought suggests that space is a medium separate and distinct from the atmosphere with physical characteristics unique enough that a barrier forms between the two. The atmosphere is a realm of substance offering the advantages of protection from radiation, thermal transfer of heat and the ability to produce and control lift and drag. These aspects of the air medium make it considerably different than the realm of space.[39] Space assets are differentiated from air platforms by being non-air breathing. Military force includes all of the civilian elements such as contractor support that are required to sustain air or space operations.[40]

27. It is difficult to analyse these and many more issues dealing with space without a general, overarching theory of space power. The task is made even more difficult by several other factors, such as the limited experience base in military space operations, the tight security classification concerning much of what goes on in space, and the thoroughly sub-divided responsibility for space operations. Thus, we have a conundrum-a jig-saw puzzle that will someday picture how space power fits or doesn't fit with air power. Solving the puzzle represents a major leadership challenge.[41] The answers to these questions will drive the future direction the military takes in space. Fundamentally influencing these answers is the military's organizationally held perceptions of the air and space environment itself. The military's view of this environment not only shapes the role the military sees for itself in space, but affects how it develops space forces necessary to support that role.[42]

CHAPTER - III

Air and space power is a critical—and decisive—element in protecting our nation and deterring aggression. It will only remain so if we as professional airmen study, evaluate, and debate our capabilities and the environment of the future. Just as technology and world threat and opportunities change, so must our doctrine. We, each of us, must be the articulate and knowledgeable advocates of air and space power.

—General Michael E. Ryan

ROLES AND APPLICATIONS OF SPACE POWER

Victory smiles upon those who anticipate the changes in the character of war not upon those who wait to adapt themselves after the changes occur.

Guilio Douhet

1. Man has a compelling urge to explore, to discover and to try to go where no one has ever been before. As most of the Earth has already been explored and even though it is going to be there for a very long time, men have now turned to space exploration as their next objective.[43]

2. Thus as we race into the next decade, a new frontier seems to be opening up in space with vast potential for military, science and exploration activities. So far as the armed forces are concerned, like the sensor technology, satellites would provide them with unheard-of capabilities in a large number of fields.[44]

3.

4. Today, events unfold before our eyes around the world as if we were there. We have advance warning of adverse weather as it develops. We can communicate with people 10 or 10,000 miles away with equal ease, and a small re­ceiver tells us our exact position and how fast we are moving in the air, on land, or at sea.

5. Space power is becoming an in­creasingly important aspect of na­tional strength, but experts disagree about how best to develop its poten­tial. Like airpower, space power relies heavily upon advanced technology, but technology is useless unless space professionals apply it properly. Air Force leaders recognize that the service needs to nurture a team of highly dedicated space professionals who are pre-pared to exploit advanced technologies and operating concepts. Today, space power pro­vides supporting functions such as commu­nications, reconnaissance, and signals from global positioning system (GPS) satellites— tomorrow, space may become the site of combat operations. Concern about the fu­ture direction of military activities in space has spurred debate over which technologies to produce and how best to develop space professionals. Moral, theoretical, and doc­trinal questions also loom large. Underlying all of these considerations are political and diplomatic factors[45].

6. New technologies move large amounts of data around the world at the speed of light. Al-though a century ago people would have con­sidered such feats science fiction, modern space capabilities make these, and so many more things, unquestionable facts. Space power has transformed our society and our military. Today, at the outset of the twenty-first century, we simply cannot live—or fight and win—without it.

7. Although many people refer to Operation Desert Storm as the first space war, it did not mark the first use of space capabilities during conflict. During the war in Vietnam, space sys­tems—communications and meteorological satellites—provided near-real-time data that was essential for combat operation The Gulf War of 1991, however, was the “first conflict in history to make comprehensive use of space systems support.” Since then, we have worked hard to integrate the high-tech advantages provided by speed-of-light space capabilities into all our forces—air, land, and sea. Those efforts significantly improved our American joint way of war, and they paid off during Op­eration Iraqi Freedom.

8. American forces led a coalition that set benchmarks for speed, precision, lethality, reach, and flexibility. As President George W. Bush said on 1 May 2003 aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, “Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of preci­sion and speed and boldness the enemy did not expect, and the world had not seen be-fore. From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division, or strike a single bunker.” In a matter of minutes—not hours, days, or weeks as in past wars—commanders identified and engaged targets and received timely battle damage assessment. Lt Gen T. Michael “Buzz” Moseley, the combined force air component commander, reinforced the role that space capabilities played when he said, “The satel­lites have been just unbelievably capable . . . supporting conventional surface, naval, spe­cial ops and air forces. They've made a huge difference for us.”

9. The need to protect ones own space assets, and if necessary attack those of the bad guy, will equally inevitably move the war in the air into space. The USAF already has an F15-borne anti-satellite system. Other potential systems include a co-orbital satellite equipped with an explosive warhead or anti-satellite mines.- For every offensive system deployed, a potential adversary whose finances permit this sort of warfare, would have to field a defensive mechanism. This level of Star Wars may be beyond most nations. But the scope for information operations should not be underestimated - particularly against commercial satellites the performance information for which is readily available on the Internet.[46]

10. Supporting Role

11. Ocean reconnaissance satellites can carry side-ways looking radars to enable them to locate ships and take other maritime measurements in all weather, and at all times of the day. Very precise satellite radars, using ‘synthetic aperture' techniques, may shortly be able to measure the level of the sea so accurately that they would be able to detect passage of a submarine beneath it in some areas.[47]

12. The most commonly used sensor in satellites is the camera. The photo reconnaissance cameras on satellites are sensitive to em radiation with a wave length of between 0.004 mm to 0.007 mm and in the IR region of wave length between 0.3 mm and 3000 mm.[48]

13. Photo reconnaissance satellites are the most important of reconnaissance satellites especially during peace time, and for monitoring conflicts around the world. Of all the satellites by China, USA and the erstwhile Soviet Union, about 40% have been used for photographic reconnaissance from LEO. Orbiting at altitudes as low as 200 km, some of these photo reconnaissance satellites are thought to resolve details smaller than 30 cm.[49] The Soviet satellites have a life span of between two weeks and two months. Until the early eighties their films were recovered only when the satellite was brought down, using re-entry trajectory and parachutes. Since they orbit below 200 km at their lowest point, they need regular boosting from on-board rockets to maintain orbit. It is believed that the digital film scanning and transmission is being used by the Russians now. In comparison the American LEO satellites have longer life spans than those of their Soviet counter-part. They are known to have been in orbit for several months and can return film capsules to earth by ejecting them over sea (near Hawaii). These are either caught by aircraft or picked up by a back up ship. Photographs can also be developed and scanned on board the satellite and the information relayed back to ground stations immediately by use of radio signals.

14. Early warning satellites are equipped with infra-red detectors which can detect an ICBM, thereby providing the threatened country with a 30 minute warning. The United States has three geostationary early warning Defence Support Programme (DSP) satellites. One watches the Russian ICBM fields, and the other two the Pacific and Atlantic oceans for SLBM attacks. For geographical reasons, GEO was less attractive to the Soviet Union, and therefore they launched their early warning satellites in Molniya orbits. Complete coverage was obtained by a constellation of nine satellites, with shorter life spans than their American counter-parts. By ensuring the virtual impossibility of a surprise missile attack ‘out of the blue', early warning satellites may be regarded as playing a stabilising role during peace time

15. These satellites have a dual character since during peace time they can help monitor the Limited Test Ban and Non-Proliferation Treaties by watching for above ground nuclear tests. The Unites States launched six successive pairs of super-synchronous Vela satellites for this purpose between 1963 and 1970. Designed at firs to operate for only six months, the first three pairs exceeded this limit by enormous margins, often working for nearly than 10 years.

16. Active Military Application Space can be defined as the new battlefield after Land, Sea and Air. It is the final frontier or final goal, which every one desires to conquer or reach. Space is fast emerging as not only the new ‘Economic High Ground' but also as the new military frontier of becoming a new ‘Strategic High Ground'.[50]

17. By the end of 1999, at least 2300 military oriented satellites have been launched. The functions of military satellites, which constitute about 75% of all satellites orbited, ranged from navigation, communications, meteorological and reconnaissance[51]. Space Based Lasers for Ballistic Missile Defense

18. Interest in utilizing space-based lasers (SBLs) for ballistic missile defense (BMD) arose when two facts emerged. First, ballistic missiles are relatively fragile and do not resist laser energy and secondly, chemical lasers could project missile killing amounts of energy over 3,000 kilometers. These two facts peaked political interest over the possibility of placing laser weapons in space. SBLs could be used to intercept ballistic missiles in their boost phase, thus dropping disabled missiles on an enemy's own territory.

19. The Lethality of A Space-Based Laser

20. Delivering a high-intensity laser beam for a long enough time to disable a target is the objective of a laser weapon. Laser energy can damage missile boosters if the laser has a moderate intensity combined with a sustained dwell time on the booster, the laser will then burn through the missile skin. A 10 meter mirror with a hydrogen fluoride (HF) laser beam would yield a 0.32 micro radian divergence angle and create a laser spot 1.3 meters in diameter at a range of 4,000 meters. The distribution of 20 MW over the laser spot would create an energy flux of 1.5 kilowatts per square centimeter (kW/cm2). The laser spot would need to dwell on the target for 6.6 seconds to create the nominal lethal energy of 10 kilojoules per square centimeter (kJ/cm2).[52] At a range of 2,000 meters the destruction of the booster would require 1.7 seconds of illumination.[53]A solid fuelled booster could probably absorb, without disruption, approximately 10 kJ/cm2 on its skin,[54] the energy from a 1 second illumination at 10kW/cm2. The application of an ablative material would probably double or maybe even triple the lethal energy required. It is sometimes argued that the use of a mirrored reflective coating to the booster would deflect the laser, but the abrasion during the boost phase could cause it to lose its reflective capabilities. Another method of countering lasers is spinning the missile, which could raise its hardness by a factor of three[55] by shortening the period that any single spot on the missile is illuminated by the laser. However, it is possible that the uniform heating around the spinning circumference of the missile could introduce a lethal mechanism that could also destroy the booster.A SBL with a 20 MW HF laser and 10 meter mirrors would have a 2.7 micron wavelength. The beam would be attenuated as it disseminated through the atmosphere with most of the beam reaching down to an altitude of around 10 kilometers.[56] Penetration deeper than this would not be required since the laser would not be in a position to attack missiles in flight until they had reached this altitude. Also, clouds could obscure the booster below a ceiling of 10 kilometers.

Table 1: Requirements for several laser weapons

	ASAT Space	ASAT Ground	Space-based BMD
Laser type	chem (HF)	chem (DF)	chem (HF)
Laser wavelength	2.7:m	3.8:m	2.7:m
Laser location	space	ground	space
Target distance	3,000km	10km	3,000km
Mirror diameter	4m	4m	10m
Laser output	2.5MW	2MW	20MW
Time/shot (at maximum range)	75 secs	75 secs	8 secs
Beam spread	0.8:rad	1.2:rad	0.33:rad
Beam size at target	2.5m	2.5m	1m
Incident energy for kill	56W/cm2	56W/cm2	20kJ/cm2
Atmospheric transmission	100%	50%	100%
Laser efficiency	20%	20%	20%
Fuel energy content	1.4MJ/kg	1.4MJ/kg	1.4MJ/kg
Fuel per shot	720kg	est. 720kg	560kg

Source: Adapted from Dietrich Schroeer, "Directed-Energy Weapons and Strategic Defence: A Primer," Adelphi Papers 221, (IISS: London, Summer 1987)

21. Characteristics of a SBL

22. SBLs would be located on satellites placed in low-earth orbit. The type of orbit would depend on the nature of the threat. A satellite's orbital altitude is an important factor since it must place the laser, as frequently as possible, in a position where it can destroy the largest number of missiles in their boost phase. The satellite needs to be at an altitude sufficient to enable it to intercept the farthest boosting missile it can see without focusing the beam in such a way that closer and more vulnerable missiles are missed. The optimal altitude depends upon the height at which the booster's engines stop firing, the capacity of the laser, and the hardness of the missiles. When the Soviet Union's ICBMs were considered the main threat, polar orbits were chosen since they provided good coverage of the northern latitudes. However, polar orbits concentrate SBLs at the poles where there are no ballistic missiles deployed. The optimum configuration would be a number of orbital planes inclined about 70o to the equator.[57]

23. It is generally accepted that SBLs would be incapable of lasing a missile re-entry vehicle with a destructive dose of energy during its midcourse and re-entry trajectory. Re-entry vehicles are hardened to survive the launch, midcourse and thermal re-entry phases of missile flight, then successfully detonate and destroy even hard targets.[58] The missile must therefore be targeted during the time when it is above the clouds and atmosphere and before it deploys re-entry vehicles.

24. DEWs have an advantage over interceptor missiles with high explosive warheads for BMD in that destructive amounts of energy can be transmitted to the target at the speed of light. Consequently, only laser weapons are currently capable of intercepting an intercontinental ballistic missile during the boost phase of its flight. One disadvantage of laser weapons vice conventional interceptors is that the beam must hit the target, which at long range raises serious target acquisition and tracking problems. Whereas, with a conventional warhead a kill could occur if the warhead blast is sufficiently close to the target missile.

25. History of the SBL Program

26. Throughout the 1980s the SBL testing and development were conducted under the auspices of the Strategic Defense Initiative. However, in the early 1990s developmental work was not given a high priority within the U.S. defense budget. The Republican take over of the Congress in 1996 saw resumption of high energy laser testing after a two year hold. The Republican controlled Congress added $70 million to the $30 million the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) had requested for SBL activities in 1997.[59]

27. A half-scale SBL demonstrator, known as Star Lite, was planned to fly as early as 2005. The demonstration test would cost around $1.5 billion.[60] The Star Lite program was born out of the Strategic Defense Initiative's Zenith Star program. Prior to Zenith Star's demise in 1993, due to funding and technical problems, it was going to be a 45,000 kg spacecraft with a primary mirror 8 meters in diameter. The program was restarted in 1995 due to breakthroughs in high-reflectivity coatings and adaptive, uncooled glass optics. In March 1997, TRW and Lockheed Martin completed the first integrated ground test with a 0.5 second long firing of the laser.

28. In March 1998, Boeing and TRW, together known as "Team SBL" (Table 2), were awarded a six-month contract worth $10 million to define the concepts for a Space-Based Laser Readiness Demonstrator (SBLRD). The SBLRD would prove the technical feasibility of using a SBL to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles in their boost phase. Under the contract, Team SBL defined concepts for several issues of the SBLRD program: a concept for the demonstrator space vehicle, a concept for a SBLRD test program, and a risk-mitigation concept.[61] The contract addressed a fast and normal schedule. The fast schedule envisioned a 2005-6 launch using existing technologies, whereas the slow schedule planned a 2008 launch date examining newer technologies. Several technologies have been demonstrated that will reduce the weight of the SBL by 10%. These include more efficient rocket nozzles for producing HF laser fuel and reducing fuel consumption, lightweight spacecraft buses, die to composite materials, and better structural analysis.[62] In February 1999, the USAF awarded a contract for the SBL Integrated Flight Experiment (SBL-IFX), the new name for SBLRD. SBL-IFX is jointly funded by the USAF and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. In 1999, $168 million was allocated for the development.[63]

Table 2: The Team SBL-Integrated Flight Experiment (SBL-IFX) and the companies involved

Company	Areas of Responsibility
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space Operations	Leading development of the SBL-IFX spacecraft & its payload integration; developing and maturing beam director technologies; leading development of the SBL-IFX ground support segment; & leading operational SBL architectural definition
TRW Space & Electronics Group	Leading definition & development of operational SBL-IFX technologies; leading integration of the SBL-IFX payload, developing and maturing laser payload techniques; & leading development of the test facility
Boeing Space & Communications Group	Leading SBL-IFX systems engineering, integration, and test; developing and maturing SBL-IFX beam control technologies, including those needed for acquisition, tracking and pointing leading optical integration in the SBL-IFX payload segment; & leading the SBL-IFX mission operation segment

Source: Adapted from . R. Wilson, "Putting Space Weapons on the Fast Track", Aerospace America, July 2001.

18. Current SBL Program

19. The US fiscal year 2002 (FY02) defense budget request for the SBL-IFX program is $110 million. SBL-IFX may be ready for an initial test in around three years.[64] The chemical HF laser was chosen for the SBL-IFX because it's reactants absorb waste heat as they are used and emit any excess heat into space. The stability and long shelf lives of hydrogen and fluorine are also positive factors.[65] The experimental demonstration vehicle will weigh between 40,000 and 42,000 pounds and will carry a megawatt-class laser and a 2.8 meter beam-directing optical mirror. The actual operational system would be equipped with a multi-megawatt laser and carry an 8-12 meter mirror. The demonstration vehicle is now planned to be in orbit in 2012.[66] The major participants in the $4 billion SBL-IFX are Lockheed Martin, Boeing and TRW.

20. The operational SBL is to be capable of intercepting ballistic missiles in the upper reaches of the stratosphere (40,000 to 50,000 feet above the earth) and in space. The SBL will consist of a constellation of 20 laser firing satellites and is intended to operate an altitude of 1,300 kilometers and would have a lethal range of 4,000-5,000 kilometers. A single satellite could cover as much as 10 percent of the Earth's surface.[67] The inability of the laser to penetrate beneath the earth's atmosphere, since the HF laser's effects are diminished by water vapor in the earth's atmosphere, is considered to be an advantage politically, i.e. SBL will not have the stigma of being a "death ray weapon" from space to the ground The use of directed energy weapons on the modern battlefield will enable new missions that include theater missile defense and national missile defense. The Airborne Laser is at the forefront of this mission and the recent cancellation of the navy area wide program means that the ABL has been given increased funding priority. The SBL is an area where directed energy weapons could contribute to the national missile defense role, especially in providing boost phase interception..[68]

CHAPTER - IV

"Mankind will not remain for ever on earth, but, in a quest for light and space, will, had first timidly, penetrate the atmosphere and later conquer the whole of the solar system."

-Founder of Erstwhile Soviet Space Engineering, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky in 1903.

SPACE POWER AS FORCE MULTIPLIER

1. When Britain dominated the seas, he said it ruled the world. The Americans have been leaders of the free world ever since they gained superiority in the air. Now the dominating position will belong to those who gain supremacy in outer space.[69]

2. Operation Eagle Claw, the failed mission to rescue the American hostages in Iran in April 1980, showed how central satellites have become to U.S. military operations. The would-be rescuers in the Joint Task Force carried satellite maps and pictures of Tehran and the Embassy area - materials they had to leave behind in the abandoned helicopters at Desert One. A satellite communications link between Washington, the Task Force headquarters in Egypt, and the deputy commander's C-130 air transport let President Carter pronounce final approval of the decision to abort the mission after the loss of three out of eight helicopters. Then, finally, we saw a demonstration of blind bombing - using the global positioning system with what we called dumb bombs. Iron bombs with no electronic guidance in them were dropped to within ten to twenty feet of the indicated target with no other assistance again other than the global positioning system.' He pointed out that while the U.S. was developing a 'whole family' of 'smart' weapons with internal electronic guidance systems, each weapon costs tens of thousands of dollars. But, he said, 'There is a technique by simply putting a global positioning system satellite receiver on an airplane where we can convert the ordinary Mark 82, and Mark 84 bombs we have in the inventory to weapons with equivalent accuracy.' This is the kind of leverage the military call a 'force multiplier.' And it can literally multiply the value of a given set of weapons. According to Americans, one reconnaissance satellites operating from a distance of 400 kilometers can survey an area of approximately hundred million square kilometers, a satellite can keep under surveillance upto 30% of worlds total land area. So reconnaissance satellites were regarded as the primary means of discovering military installations in the potential enemies territory and in the oceans.[70]

3. Space operations will play an increasing role in the provision of near real time information to commanders at all levels. Existing access, already impressive by 1999, will be further enhanced with the ability to deploy mini-satellites from the Common Aerospace Vehicle (CAV). The well-understood concepts of protecting conventional intelligence gathering assets and denying the enemy use of his vehicles will extend to space resulting in an inevitable militarization of the last frontier.[71]

4. Space futurists such as Dandridge M. Cole and Michael Golovine have predicted the militarization of strategic areas of space within the Earth-Moon system which dominates this system, the so-called Panama Hypothesis of Space. Today, the military use of space is still at a relatively preliminary stage, but certain rapidly developing technologies are making very probable the realization of some aspects of the militarization of space that were foreseen by these earlier visionaries. These technological developments may well augur the beginnings of a great revolution in the history of warfare.[72]

5. Artificial earth satellites, space probes, sounding rockets, and manned spacecraft have been used to explore the physical conditions in space, on stars, and all planets and their moons. Such scientific prowess in the use of outer space, however, has been by and large overshadowed by the more aggressive uses of the environment: that is the military uses. The latter uses basically fall into two categories: the use of satellites- military satellites- to enhance the performance of weapons on earth and the development of space weapons to counter such spacecraft and missiles and their nuclear warheads travelling towards their targets.[73]

6. Presuming that no other nation acquires both the resources and the strategic imperative to field space-based weapons, there is a likelihood that the predominant military use of near-earth space will remain force enhancement through 2020-25 rather than becoming an actual battleground. [74]

7. There will be increased automation in the conduct of conventional wars with space assets assisting in locating, fixing and detecting enemy targets and their engagement with appropriate weapons[75].

8. Military satellites contribute considerably to the accuracy with which nuclear as well as non-nuclear weapons can be navigated to their targets. The prediction of weather conditions using meteorological satellites not only facilitates bombing but also contributes to improve accuracy by constantly refining the missile trajectory through the atmosphere. Communications satellites provide better centralised command and control of forces, and geodetic and reconnaissance satellites help to determine the position of potential targets with great precision. The latter type of satellites are used to determine the characteristics of targets as well and, hence, they have played an important role in monitoring compliance with the terms of a number of arms control agreements.[76]

9. A look at the space powers activities and their arsenals reveals that, satellites have already become the backbone for reconnaissance and surveillance (of events on ground and sea), intelligence, electronics, global communications, early warning of long-range missile attacks, navigation and on the Soviet side anti-satellite warfare systems. Today, 75% of the communications of the US for military proposes are via communication satellites.[77]

10. Man's military ambition has extended his armed activities from land to the high seas, into the air and more recently beyond into outer space. Man has sought to enhance his military aims on Earth by deploying a number of types of satellite, including navigation, communications, weather, geodetic, reconnaissance and early warning satellites.[78]

11.

CHAPTER - V

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

- Sun Tzu

INDIAN CAPABILITY AND THE ROAD AHEAD

1. As you are aware, India has been continuously striving to excel in every sphere of human life, be it social, political, economic, military, arts, culture or science. Since the advent of economic reforms in the early nineties, the country has achieved remarkable economic groMh and sincere governmental efforts are on in partnership with the private sector to accelerate and sustain the growth momentum[79].

2. While a lot of attention in the last few years has focused on China's growing space program, including its human spaceflight efforts and lunar exploration program, India is hardly standing still in space, either. Once a small space program focused on providing specific services for the country, such as communications and imagery, India's space program is branching out into new fields, including satellite navigation and space science. India has also recently indicated that is revisiting its previous opposition to a human spaceflight program, and is already taking steps towards developing the technology needed for such missions. These developments all provide a new opportunity for cooperation for the US, with far less geopolitical baggage for America than dealing with China or even Russia India's space program is hardly a new development. Its origins date back more than four decades, when the Indian government established the Indian National Committee for Space Research (INCOSPAR) in 1962 to conduct sounding rocket research. As the program grew in the late 1960s INCOSPAR became the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), and by 1975 ISRO launched its first satellite, Aryabhata, on a Soviet rocket. India's first indigenously-built orbital launch vehicle, the SLV-3, successfully put a satellite in orbit in 1980 (a year after an earlier flight failed), and ISRO continued a series of larger satellites and rockets in the years that followed ISRO has been devoted for most of its history to efforts with primarily practical applications, rather than for national prestige. This has meant a focus on communication satellites to provide critical services, including telemedicine and distance learning, to many parts of the nation that had little existing communications infrastructure; meteorology payloads (often flown on the same geosynchronous satellites that performed communications missions) to improve weather forecasting; and remote sensing satellites to identify and map the nation's natural resources. India adopted an unusually pragmatic approach to providing these services as it built up its own satellite manufacturing and launch capabilities: the first generation of INSAT communications satellites were built by a US company, Ford Aerospace (now Space Systems/Loral), and launched on Delta and Shuttle missions in the 1980s; later INSAT models, while built domestically, have been launched on Ariane vehicles. Now, though, as India has built up its domestic space infrastructure, the government has shown a willingness to move beyond communications and remote sensing applications. While India is a partner in Europe's Galileo satellite navigation system currently under development, and has agreed to work with Russia to repopulate its GLONASS navigation system, ISRO announced earlier this year plans to develop its own regional satellite navigation system, building the satellites, ground stations, and receivers all within India. India is also looking at applications that, unlike navigation, communications, or remote sensing, don't have an obvious practical role in aiding the country's development. ISRO is developing its first planetary science mission, the Chandrayaan-1 lunar orbiter, scheduled for launch in early 2008. That spacecraft is not intended to be a one-time mission, as the “1” designation after its name suggests: other science missions to the Moon and even Mars are in the early planning stages. [80].

3. The Government of India has always placed considerable importance on the achievement of technological self reliance at an early date. The Scientific Policy Resolution adopted by the Indian parliament in 1958 reveals the spirit of this endeavour. It assumes that adoption of scientific approach and use of scientific knowledge is essential for providing "reasonable material and cultural amenities and services for every member of the community", and it is aimed at securing for the people "all benefits that can accrue from acquisition and application of scientific knowledge". This objective necessitated the establishment of a strong scientific and technological base, and a modest infrastructure in nuclear, space, electronics and other fields. This was essential not only for economic development but also for national integration and security. The space programme was an important component of this endeavour. The major goals set for the programme included socio-economic development through applications in areas of telecommunications, weather forecasting and remote sensing, and the appropriate technology had to be developed indigenously as required.

4. Four years after the dawn of the space age, in Aug 1961 the Government of India allocated the subject of space research to the Department of Atomic Energy. One year later it established the Indian National Committee for Space Research (INCOSPAR), under the chairmanship of Dr Vikram Sarabhai, to look after all aspects of space research in India. It set up a range for sounding rockets at Thumba, near Trivandrum and this became operational in Nov 1963 with the launch of a US sounding rocket. This marked the humble beginning of the Indian space programme. In 1964, an agreement was reached with Sud Aviation of France for licensed production of Centaur sounding rockets in India. In 1965, the Space Science and Technology Centre at Veli Hill near Trivandrum was established for research and development of space systems and components. The increased requirement for research and development led to the establishment of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) at Bangalore. Increased scope and higher goals necessitated a separate administrative structure, and thus in 1972 the Space Commission and Department of Space was formed. The importance given to the space programme is evident since responsibility for the Department of Science and Technology, of which the Department of Space is a part, has always been held by the Prime Minister.

5. India have always been at the forefront in the global efforts to establish peace and stability. With that pursuit in mind, we supported and became party to the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967. The treaty inter alia is important for the following reasons:

• It states that the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit of mankind;


• It prohibits the use of Space for the placement of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction;


• It states that the Moon and all celestial bodies would be exclusively used for peaceful purposes only.


• In the UN General Assembly, we have supported resolutions on Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space, One of the objectives of this resolution is to refrain from action, which are contrary to the objectives of peaceful use of outer space.[81]

6. This country is ramping up its space capabilities in an effort to be seen as a major global space power. It is moving beyond its traditional missions of developing communications and remote sensing satellites to focus on new areas, like navigation. It is also working on its first mission to the Moon, as reports—although incomplete and controversial—indicate it is interested in undertaking a manned lunar mission, perhaps by the end of the next decade. It has attracted the attention of the United States as a potential partner in space endeavors, despite a history of rocky relations[82].

7. We are all aware that Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has been developing space technology and its application to various national organisations. Since 1969, when it was set up, launching the first Indian satellite Aryabhatta, ISRO has established several spatial technologies including INSAT for telecommunications, television broadcasting and remote sensing activities etc[83].

8. The Indian space programme has three distinct phases:

• Phase I. The first phase was the one in which the infrastructure and trained manpower resources were developed. During this phase, in addition to VSSC and ISRO, more infra-structural facilities were established such as the Rocket Propellant Plant, Propellant Fuel Complex, Experimental Satellite Communication Earth Station, Rocket Fabrication Facility and Sriharikota range. Activities were limited to the launch of sounding rockets.


• Phase II. The second phase was the period of planned experiments in space applications and design of satellites and launch vehicles. The important projects during this phase were:-


• Satellite Instructional Television Experiment. The Satellite Instructional Television Experiment (SITE), using an American ATS-6 satellite, beamed instructional programmes into the villages of six states for one year.


• Satellite Telecommunication Experimental Project. The Satellite Telecommunication Experimental Project (STEP) began in Jun 1977. Using a Franco-German 'Symphonie' satellite, this project continued for two years. The purpose was to gain experience in use of geo-stationary satellites for telecommunication.


• Aryabhatta. Aryabhatta was the first Indian satellite designed and developed indigenously. It was launched by a Soviet rocket in Apr 1985, and enabled Indian scientists to acquire skills in orbital management.


• Bhaskara-I & II. The Bhaskara-I & II satellites were designed and developed by Indian scientists and were launched by Soviet rockets in Jun 1979 and Nov 1981 respectively. These were remote sensing satellites.


• Ariane Passenger Pay Load Experiment. The Ariane Passenger Pay Load Experiment (APPLE) involved design and development of a telecommunication satellite launched into geo-stationary orbit by the Ariane rocket in Jun 1981. This provided experience in development and operation of a geo-stationary satellite.


• Satellite Launch Vehicle. Satellite Launch Vehicles (SLV) were developed by Indian scientists in the 1970s, but the first experimental launch in 1979 was a failure. The second, in Jul 1980, successfully placed a Rohini satellite into orbit. The third, in May 1981, was a partial failure as it was only able to place the satellite in a very low orbit which resulted in a premature re-entry after only nine days. The fourth successful test in Apr 1983 marked the completion of the project. This was a small beginning which gave expertise and confidence in fabricating and launching larger launch vehicles.


• Phase III. During the third phase, operational space systems were established and larger space launch vehicles were successfully designed and developed . Satellite based telecommunications, weather forecasting and remote sensing systems were made operational . Important milestones of this phase are listed as follows:-


• Indian National Satellite. The first four satellites of the Indian National Satellite (INSAT) series (IA to ID) were designed and built by the Ford Aerospace Agency and Communication Corporation of the USA. These were used for telecommunications networking of terrestrial transmitters, and transmission of radio and television programmes. INSAT-IA and IC, launched in Apr 1982 and Jul 1988 by the US Delta and French Ariane rockets, were failures. INSAT-IB, launched by the space shuttle Challenger in Aug 1983, was successful and completed its life span. INSAT-ID, launched in Jun 1990, is still operational. The INSAT-II series, which were designed and developed by Indian scientists, have enhanced capabilities compared to the INSAT-I series. The INSAT- IIA and IIB were launched by Ariane rockets in Jul 1992 and Jul 1993 respectively. In addition to telecommunications, they provide weather data which, when processed, is disseminated by Indian Meteorological Department (I Met D) using these same satellites.


• Indian Remote Sensing Satellites. The Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellites, which constitute the space segment of the National Resource Management System, provide remote sensing services. These have been indigenously designed and built. The IRS-IA and IB were put into orbit by Soviet launchers in 1988 and 1991 respectively. The launch of IRS-P1 by the Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) in Sep 1993 failed, but IRS-P2 was put into orbit by PSLV-D2 on 15 Oct 1994. These satellites have provided invaluable data which is still being extensively used.


• Launch Vehicles. After the SLV experiment, Indian scientists developed the Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicles (ASLV), using strap on booster technology. The first two launches failed, but the last two in May 1992 and May 1994 were successful. The next stage was the development of Polar Satellite Launch Vehicles (PSLV). The first flight of PSLV-D1 in Sep 1993 was a failure, but the second one, PSLV -D2, placed the IRS-P2 in orbit on 15 Oct 1994. The Geo-stationary Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) is presently under development. However, the USA has applied pressure to the Russians (Glavcosmos) to stop the supply of a cryogenic engine for use in the last stage of GSLV, and the programme has consequently suffered a set back . This set back has only strengthened the resolve of Indian scientists, and the cryogenic engine is now being developed indigenously. Basic design of the cryogenic engine and stage has already been completed.

9. Western technology controls can delay and impede the development of the Indian space programme, but it can never stop it. In another decade or two India will emerge as a space power with adequate technological infrastructure to undertake design and development of any kind of satellites and launch vehicles. The country would have the ability to undertake commercial launches of geo-stationary satellites and, if it desires, could easily exploit the military fall-outs of this expertise.

10. Aeronautics and aerospace are important technologies that have the capacity to take India into the league of developed countries.[84]

11. The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) has awarded a new $82 million contract to Raytheon Company to modernize the Indian air navigation system Raytheon will build the ground stations for the GPS-Aided Geosynchronous Augmented Navigation System (GAGAN), and the Indian Space Research Organization will provide the space segment and additional ground equipment. GAGAN will provide satellite-based navigation for civil aviation over Indian airspace and adjoining areas in south and east Asia. The Indian satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) is expected to bridge the gap between the European EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service) and the Japanese MSAS (MTSAT Satellite-Based Augmentation System) to provide seamless navigation of aircraft across a wide portion of the Earth.Raytheon will continue the work it began several years ago and expects to have the GAGAN system fully functional by 2013. Raytheon offers a broad range of automation and surveillance systems in use today in more than 50 countries around the world. The company developed the Federal Aviation Administration's GPS Wide Area Augmentation System and was engaged in the Japan Civil Aviation Bureau's Multi-Function Transport Satellite Augmentation System Our GAGAN solution addresses the four essential elements of safe air navigation: accuracy, integrity, availability and continuity,” said Fritz Treyz, director of business development for Raytheon Network Centric Systems who led the Raytheon team pursuing the GAGAN initiative[85].

12. Satish Dhawan ex-director of Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, in a lecture to Astronautical Society of India in 1996, presented a techno-scenario diagram in which he talked about Kinetic Attack Loitering Interceptor (KALI), Directionally Unrestricted Ray-Gun Array (DURGA) and Aerobic Vehicle for Advanced Trans-Atmospheric Research (AVATAR) being deployed as dual use systems by the year 2010.[86]

13. The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) in India is in the final stages of assembling a powerful electron accelerating machine named ''Kali-5000 (kilo-ampere linear injector)” which, its scientists say, can potentially be used as a beam weapon[87]. ASAT weapon systems are being designed to destroy those satellites, which are posing a threat or are just sneaking around in space over a country with dubious intentions. Such systems have become necessary and the concepts which are being kept in view while designing such systems should be of interest to the emerging space powers like India as they would be thinking in the same terms within the next decade.[88] India should design ASAT systems to attack the strategic space systems which may be part of nuclear weapon systems. Further, space is considered a strategic area which is vital for military, commercial and scientific programmes. And India as an emerging space power certainly would like free entry without any restrictions whatsoever.[89]

14.

CHAPTER - V

The biggest mistake we can make today is to impede our development as a Space and Air Force. We must all work together to reconcile our dreams and our vision for the future…to arrive at the most actionable and doable parts of our shared vision and to bring these to reality.

—General Howell M. Estes III

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Space power will be as decisive in future combat as airpower is today.

- Hon. EC Aldridge Jr

USAF Space Policy,1988.

1. There is a familiar correlation between early twenty-first-century space power and airpower's infancy in the post-World War I era. The parallels in the development of airpower and space power are interesting if not predictable—the space community is currently wrestling with many of the same issues that plagued early airpower. Similar to post-World War I airpower, there is no question that today's space forces provide a wealth of force enhancement to joint war fighters. Additionally, from a national perspective, space systems provide essential economic, commercial, and scientific capabilities resulting in potential centers of gravity (COG). Already, many commercial and economic ventures are entirely dependent on space assets for modern commercial and economic growth and operations. For example, the global positioning system is critical for transportation-systems navigation (air, sea, rail, and highway) and also provides precise timing for international stock-market trades affecting national economies; weather satellites provide key environmental information and forecasts to predict potential weather disasters, facilitate agricultural planning, and monitor forest fires and solar (sun) phenomena; and information technologies depend exclusively on satellite communications for global communications, direct satellite TV/radio broadcasts, and emergency services. Just as nations protect their land, sea, and air assets for economic, commercial, and military purposes, the protection of space capabilities is becoming increasingly important (space control). Like the early airpower advocates wrestling with how to achieve effective airpower, today's space community wrestles with very similar doctrinal, organizational, and operational issues. Lessons learned from the history of airpower development allow national space power to avoid similar mistakes and pain. Recall that airpower emerged during the post-World War I era as a legitimate military capability, bringing with it the great airpower theorists William “Billy” Mitchell, Giulio Douhet, and Hugh Trenchard (to name a few), and leading to an eventual independent US Air Force. This author suggests that, based on the parallels with the birth of airpower, the space community is on the brink of undisputable space power, with the emergence of space-power theorists and the birth of an independent space force in the next decade.[90]

2. Space is the ultimate high ground. Great military leaders realize the strategic, operational, and tactical advantages of controlling the high ground. From Sun Tzu's ancient Chinese warriors securing a hill, to US Civil War manned balloons, World War I aeroplane pioneers, World War II aviation heroes, and Cold War high-flying SR-71s and U-2s, the high ground provides the strategic advantages of security, situational awareness, reconnaissance, targeting, and offensive force to dominate the battlespace. The space medium is the ultimate high ground, with unparalleled speed, range, altitude, and stealth. High-ground space systems provide a conduit to channel instruments of national power (diplomatic, informational, military, and economic) to coerce an enemy to capitulate. The twenty-first-century information age, the global information grid, information technology, and network-centric warfare all depend on real-time global collection and dissemination of information, often only possible from space systems. The informational and military instruments of national power are closely linked. Information operations, information warfare, and information-in-war likewise depend on robust space platforms and illustrate that “bullets win battles; information wins wars.” Space systems are one of the main pipelines for network-centricity, powering digital networks to distribute information instantly without borders. Satellite communications (SATCOM) provides real-time, secure, jam-resistant C2 to enable diplomatic actions among nations. Space systems support or disrupt a nation's economy by moving large data streams at the speed of light around the world, reshaping national economies with global connectivity (SATCOM, weather, navigation, environmental, scientific, etc.).[91] The White House's national security strategy of 1998 benchmarked the importance of space.[92]

Space has emerged as a new global information utility with extensive political, diplomatic, military, and economic implications for the United States. Unimpeded access to and use of space is essential for protecting U.S. national security and promoting our prosperity

A National Security Strategy for a New Century, October 1998.

3. As the ultimate high ground, the space medium is potentially the most geopolitical, perhaps more so than any other medium in which the military operates. Space is global by nature. The space medium holds no geographic or nation-state boundaries. Satellites traverse in their orbits above every nation in the world, usually unnoticed and eluding traditional terrestrial choke points. In space, territorial sovereignty is nonexistent (with the exception of equatorial geosynchronous Earth orbit [GEO] slots directly above each country) but still highly geopolitical with numerous complicated space treaties, international policy, and the laws of armed conflict.[93]

4. Space is a distinct medium; space forces require space-focused theory, doctrine, and policy Just as ground, naval, and air forces operate in their own distinct environments (mediums), space forces operate in their own distinct medium—the vacuum of space. Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 2-2, Space Operations, clearly states, “Space is a medium of warfare like air, land, and sea.”[94] Physical laws constrain, empower, and distinguish each medium. Land forces are bound by gravity in two dimensions; sea and air forces are three--dimensional and fully dependent upon Bernoulli's laws of fluid dynamics; and space forces function via Kepler's laws of planetary motion. Accordingly, if ground, naval, and air forces are governed and optimized by their own medium-unique theory, doctrine, and policy, it makes sense that space forces would benefit from their own space-unique theory, doctrine, and policy. Because of each distinct operating environment, sea-power theory clearly does not translate to airpower theory; nor would it seem logical for airpower theory to transfer to space-power theory.[95]

5. Space power is a force multiplier for every combatant commander and military service. Space power provides military leaders, operators, and planners with enormous force-enhancement effects that multiply joint combat effectiveness in prosecuting theater campaigns. Space systems significantly improve friendly forces' ability to strike at the enemy's heart or COGs, paralyzing an adversary to allow land, sea, and air forces to achieve rapid dominance of the battlespace. Space assets reduce the Clausewitzian “fog of war” by providing synergistic, effects-based operations to terrestrial forces, producing effects that achieve campaign objectives in ways that air, land, and sea forces alone cannot (fig. 1). The emergence of military space following the Vietnam War produced monumental combat advances using 24 hours a day/seven days a week (24/7) space assets such as global precision navigation/targeting; global-reach SATCOM; strategic and theater missile warning; global weather data; phenomenal intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); and highly integrated combat search and rescue. In addition to being a huge force multiplier, space power is joint by nature; its effects to earthbound land, sea, and air combat operations can be direct or indirect, immediate or delayed. Integration of space into the joint force commander's (JFC) theater campaign plan, as well as deliberate and crisis-action planning, has come a long way since Operation Desert Storm, providing even more lethal and rapid dominance of the battlespace.[96]

6. Space forces can support all levels of war simultaneously. Space systems produce global and theater effects simultaneously due to their speed, range, precision, and global presence. Satellites, because of their high-ground advantage, have the ability to simultaneously cover multiple theaters. GEO constellations provide 24/7 SATCOM and missile warning due to their stationary position; LEO ISR satellites in populated constellations provide rapid revisits within hours; and global positioning system satellites provide 24/7 global navigation, tailored for specific theater operations. These capabilities allow space forces to directly impact combat operations at the global, theater, and local levels simultaneously.[97]

Legend:

BRAT CAOC JTAGS M3P TES

Beyond Line of Sight Reporting and Targeting Combined Air Operations Center Joint Tactical Ground Station Multimission Mobile Processor Technology Experiment Satellite

Figure 1. Effects-based operations

Likewise, because of its unique high-ground medium, space power delivers information critical to planning and execution of military operations in all levels of war—strategic, operational, and tactical (fig. 2). While terrestrial forces generally fight sequential tactical battles before they can move on to operational or strategic objectives, space forces (and to a limited extent, air forces) have the ability to engage in separate, parallel campaigns at all levels of war.[98] For example, the Defense Support Program constellation detects, identifies, tracks, and warns of strategic missile launches (intercontinental ballistic missiles), while also providing tactical theater missile warning from short-range enemy missiles.[99]

Finally, space systems provide information across the spectrum of conflict, including conventional warfare, unconventional warfare (nuclear), asymmetric warfare (global war on terrorism), and military operations other than war, which include humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, peacekeeping operations, noncombatant evacuation operations, and so forth. As the US military's operations tempo continues to increase in quantity and duration (fig. 3), often at austere global locations that have limited or no existing infrastructure, military forces increasingly depend upon immediate space-based capabilities.Space systems are usually first in-theater by virtue of their high-ground, ubiquitous orbits, ready to provide 24/7 navigation, weather, SATCOM, and ISR from the start of a conflict.[100]

The key for space power to support all levels of war simultaneously and across the spectrum of conflict is to ensure that space systems have global access to the entire depth and breadth of an adversary or a regional conflict. However, if space assets are limited in number, capability, or constellation size, they quickly become very scarce, high-demand, low-density (HD/LD) assets that military leaders compete for in priority and support, ultimately reducing their ability to support all levels of war simultaneously.[101]

7. Space power leverages a nation's economic and military centers of gravity. Conducted properly, space power leverages military and economic COGs, providing an avenue for all instruments of national power to more effectively respond to global situations. Space is emerging as a military and economic COG for nations that conduct information--dependent military and economic operations.[102]

8. Space is a lucrative COG for other nations as well; it is no longer a “sanctuary” for the United States alone to enjoy. Other nations are rapidly getting into the space race. Currently, 58 nations have satellites on orbit for military or economic purposes; 15 nations have their own indigenous space-lift capability; and there are five international-consortium space-launch providers to launch satellites for those who cannot do so themselves.[103]

9. National space power reaches its full potential when a nation commits to a separate, independent space force. True national space power cannot reach its full potential until a nation commits itself to a separate, independent space force. War fighters would do well to recall the prophetic words of arguably the most ardent forefather of a separate, independent US Air Force, Gen Billy Mitchell.[104] Plug in the word “space” for “air,” and it is a close fit to the current twenty-first-century status of space-power development. It was right for the Army to nurture and shelter airpower in the Army construct until airpower demonstrated decisively that it warranted its own separate military service. Once the Air Force became an independent service, airpower rapidly grew into a global, strategic instrument of national power. Likewise, it was right for the USAF to shelter and nurture the vertical dimension of space—it has been the best place to foster space power since its inception 50 years ago. However, as airpower was constrained during the post-World War I era, US space power was constrained during the Cold War and morphed to airpower doctrine, policy, and theory. In spite of this restraint, military space power has grown to be a pervasive influence on nearly every facet of military operations. The United States holds a decisive asymmetric space-power advantage—clearly it is too critical to be considered a subset of airpower. An independent space-force organization would fully unleash the true potential of space power, allowing freedom to explore, develop, and refine space theory, doctrine, and policy without undue influence from other service cultures.[105]

10. US Space Force: No Longer a Question of “If” but “When” This may be an unpopular statement, but it is irrefutable, based on the historical precedent of the creation of separate and distinct land, sea, and air services. Nearly half of the surveys conducted in this research indicated that a separate space force was the eventual and necessary path of US space power. This does not mean that space power cannot positively influence joint military operations while under the umbrella of the USAF—it can and has proven so, as discussed throughout this article. The issue becomes availability of resources (e.g., budget, manpower, and equipment), for which both airpower and space power compete in the USAF. In today's realistic environment of finite resources, space systems have historically received lower priority than terrestrial weapon systems. Today US space power has grown to the point where either a bigger USAF umbrella is needed (more resources to pursue space power) or an entirely separate umbrella is created (an independent space force).[106]An independent space force will foster a space-force culture, reduce competition for resources, and allow space-power theory and resulting combat capability to develop more effectively to counter future space threats.The strength of space contributions in strategic military, commercial, and economic operations is undeniable. Space power is not just a continuation of airpower; space is a unique, distinct, war-fighting medium.[107]

11. How do we worst the AEW-symmetry in our unfriendly neighbourhood? One obvious first step is creating asymmetry through the assimilation of our space prowess. We need to develop and deploy space-based assets so as to cumulate sensor inputs, datalink it to the networked military command and control system from where it can be fed to the field units and commanders. This will enhance the battlefield situational awareness through real-time projection of the battlefield. For this, the Indian armed forces will have to attain network centric warfare (NCW) capability, but they are just inching, not marching towards that goal. NCW will pivot upon the networking of terrestrial, nautical & aerospatial radars; AEW platforms; air defence fighters, missiles & artillery batteries; communication centres; electronic warfare systems and aggregation of other air defence assets of army and navy. Thus, a net-centric apparatus will enable the military to interlock geographically scattered units to operate as a unified force, thus maximising our reach and offensive power, thus maximising our chances of aerospace dominance. Hence, the government's present piecemeal approach and hesitation to found an integrated, triservices NCW system are truly baffling. Though we enjoy the edge over Pakistan in satellite technology, one cannot rule out China -- Pakistan's soul mate and an alleged, unapologetic proliferator -- sharing its know-how and intelligence with Pakistan. China is light years ahead of us in offensive space technology; so our endeavour should be 'space denial.' In case of Pakistan, we must go all out to achieve total 'space control.' India must also prepare a contingency plan for the worst-case scenario -- China emerging as a 'rogue space power.' These are easier professed than done. For, high-tech structures like an aerospace command require dedicated military satellites interlinked with other ISR infrastructure. Leave alone establishing a fully-operational aerospace command, we are aeons away from using space for real-time snooping, warning, jamming and guiding precision-strike munitions. With space having emerged as the fourth medium for military operations, the IAF had brought out its blueprint titled 'Defence Space Vision 2020' two years ago. The IAF had also laid claim to the aerospace command as natural progression for them, and therefore, wanted its bureaucracy to run it. Since space-related technologies will be accessed by all three services, since future wars will be fought jointly and at theatre levels, since command and control will be executed via military networks, the Integrated Defence Staff is the most deserving agency to host the aerospace department. Acknowledging this logic, last June, the defence minister announced the formation of an Integrated Space Cell under the IDS headquarters in Delhi to counter what he called 'the growing threat to our space assets.' The remit of this cell is, however, rudimentary -- to liaise with the relevant elements among the armed forces, the department of space and ISRO -- and the cell could degenerate into another talking-shop! Though China's ASAT shocker and Pakistan's pains to attain AEW symmetry should have galvanised us into action, our establishment (the unhurried politico-bureaucratic setup) seems to be reading the hare and the tortoise fable, not 'Vision 2020' or related literature, and daydreaming about the Indian tortoise breasting the tape ahead of the Chinese hare! Well, the establishment is travelling mostly in time, not much in space! (The US Department of Defense in 1973 created an Office of Net Assessment -- the Pentagon's internal think-tank. Many militaries have constituted a body comparable to the ONA since. Unlike military or national power, hard or soft power, Net Assessment focuses on intangible, even inconspicuous aspects that could be taken advantage of during a conflict. For example, if a country's governmental decision-making is slack, strategists will flag this national character for exploitation. Hence somebody needs to drive home this point to our slowcoach mandarins that their chronic tardiness is in effect making them a fifth column.) With space and time collapsing rapidly in modern warfare, the establishment of a triservices Space Command (under the IDS) cannot suffer further deferral. The Space Command should be charged with total administrative and operational control over the whole gamut of space warfare. As space assets must be seen as auxiliary tools to serve our security requirements, let us develop a military space programme by investing in space technologies without being apologetic about it, without the typical Indian ambivalence, fence-squatting and dilly-dallying. Given the national security implications, one can only hope that the defence minister will goad the lazybones and will infuse much-needed urgency, energy, purpose and direction to our military space programme. Let me sign off on an optimistic note by quoting what General Colin Powell had said: 'Perpetual optimism is a force-multiplier.'

12. The US report ‘Vision for 2020' declares, "Historically, military forces have evolved to protect national interests and investments—both military and economic." Nations built navies "to protect and enhance their commercial interests" and during "the westward expansion of the United States, military outposts and the cavalry emerged to protect our wagon trains, settlements and railroads. The emergence of space power follows both of these models. During the early portion of the 2lst Century, space power will also evolve into a separate and equal medium of warfare." [108]

13. Space and space power are subjects of obvious and growing importance, but our consideration of them is hobbled by a dearth of conceptual thinking about the role of space in military operational matters. For much of its history, scientific wizards rather than operational warriors dominated the military space commu­nity. As a result, military space power is still looking for its great theorist. A mod­ern-day, space power version of Alfred Thayer Mahan or Billy Mitchell has yet to make his or her presence felt.[109]

14. Deception will be out of place because of an adversary's ability for all-weather surveillance. On the other hand, effective surprise will still be possible due to long range of missiles, electronic deception and the ability with hyper-mobile transport to complete deployment in hours instead of days and weeks now needed to do so.[110]

15. India was quick to recognise the potential of space exploration in it's development of the country. The vast size of the country and the difficulty of communication with many areas make satellite technology practically essential in a modern world. To India's credit, she has concentrated her efforts on civilian applications of space technology in an effort to make economic and social improvements. However, the military applications of this technology cannot be ignored; if India is to maintain itself as a credible military power into the 21st century, it must exploit this medium.

16. Thus, the functions currently described by Air Force doctrine can be considered a linking mechanism, drawing air and space together.[111]

[1] https://www.militaryquotes.com

[2] https://www.indiandefencereview.com/2008/01/the-final-frontier dated 13 Dec 09.

[3] https://www.solarviews.com

[4] https://www.indiandefencereview.com/2008/01/the-final-frontier dated 13 Dec 09.

[5] ibid

[6] The essence of aerospace power: what leaders need to know Dennis m. Drew

[7] ibid

[8] ibid

[9] https://www.indiandefencereview.com/2008/01/the-final-frontier dated 13 Dec 09.

[10] “How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces” by Lyndon S. Anderson, Major, USAF Stephen M. Rothstein, Major, USAF

[11] Global Engagement: A Vision for the 21st Century Air Force, United States Air Force.

[12] Jerry Jon Sellers, Understanding Space (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994), 60-61; and AU-18, Space Handbook, An Analyst's Guide (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press, 1993), 4-5.

[13] . Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 973.

[14] Definition is consistent with current joint-operations definitions of space power as defined in Joint Publications (JP) 1-02 and 3-14, and similar to Lt Col David Lupton's definition of the term in his book On Space Warfare: A Space Power Doctrine (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press, 1988).

[15] Bulkeley and Spinardi. Space Weapons. Polity Press, Cambridge, 1986, p 39.

[16] Bulkeley and Spinardi. Space Weapons. Polity Press, Cambridge, 1986, p 40.

[17] Bulkeley and Spinardi. op cit., p 39.

[18] . Carter, 1986; Marsh P, 1985.

[19] . Bulkeley and Spinardi. op cit., p 40.

[20] Clarke Covington and Robert 0. Piland, "Space Operations Center: The Next Goal for Manned Space Flight?" Astronautics and Aeronautics, September 1980, pp. 30-37.

[21] Sänger, pp. 140-41.

[22] Space Warfare in Perspective by Ronald D. Humble

[23] ibid

[24] Space Warfare in Perspective by Ronald D. Humble

[25] Kailash Thakur, Outer Space and Military Supermacy, New Delhi, Deep and Deep Publications.

[26] ibid

[27] Space Warfare in Perspective by Ronald D. Humble

[28] ibid

[29] “All You Ever Wanted to Know About Theory Development,” United States Space Command, Volume I, Issue, 4 July,1997, 17a.

[30] How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces by Lyndon S. Anderson, Major, USAF Stephen M. Rothstein, Major, USAF

[31] The essence of aerospace power: what leaders need to know Dennis m. Drew

[32] ibid

[33] ibid

[34] ibid

[35] “How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces” by Lyndon S. Anderson, Major, USAF Stephen M. Rothstein, Major, USAF

[36] The essence of aerospace power: what leaders need to know Dennis m. Drew

[37] https://www.indiandefencereview.com/2008/01/the-final-frontier dated 13 Dec 09.

[38] ibid

[39]How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces by Lyndon S. Anderson, Major, USAF Stephen M. Rothstein, Major, USAF

[40] By Group Captain Peter W Gray RAF, D Def S (RAF), JDCC Shrivenham

[41] The essence of aerospace power: what leaders need to know Dennis m. Drew

[42] How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces by Lyndon S. Anderson, Major, USAF Stephen M. Rothstein, Major, USAF

[43] V K Madhok. Space - Profiles of the Future. New Delhi, M/s Sujay, 1988, p. 40.

[44] Madhok. op.cit., pp. 91.

[45] Space power by LT COL PAUL D. BERG air and space power journal summer 2004

[46] By Group Captain Peter W Gray RAF, D Def S (RAF), JDCC Shrivenham

[47] . Bulkeley and Spinardi. Space Weapons. Polity Press, Cambridge, 1986, p 43.

[48] . B Jasani. Outer Space- Battlefield of the Future? Sipri, Taylor & Francis Ltd, London 1978. p 12.

[49] . B Jasani and C Lee. Countdown to Space War. London, 1982, p 43, 46.

[50]. Vice Admiral Raman Puri, PVSM, AVSM, VSM (Retd) : Space Assets and their integration with Land, Air and Maritime Warfare for enabling National Security Strategy Part I. US I Journal; Jul-Sep 06.

[51] Bhupinder Jasani : Space Weapons- The Arms Control Dilemma, Great Britain, 1984, Taylor & Francis (Printers) Ltd, pp.5.

[52] Ashton B. Carter, Directed Energy Missile Defence in Space, (Background Paper), (Washington D.C.: US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-BP-ISC-26, April 1984), p. 18.

[53] ibid

[54] Ashton B. Carter, Directed Energy Missile Defence in Space, (Background Paper), (Washington D.C.: US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-BP-ISC-26, April 1984), p. 17.

[55] ibid

[56] ibid., p. 18.

[57] Ashton B. Carter, op. cit., p. 19.

[58] Keith B. Payne, eds., Laser Weapons in Space: Policy and Doctrine, (Westview Press: Boulder, Colorado, 1983), p. 24.

[59] Joseph C. Anselmo, "New Funding Spurs Laser Efforts", Aviation Week & Space Technology, October 14, 1996, p. 67.

[60] Dave Dooling, "Space Sentries", IEEE Spectrum, September 1997, p. 58.

[61] "TRW Wins Space Laser Contract", Space Daily, March 19, 1998, https://www.spacedaily.com/nes/laser-98a.html .

[62] Michael A. Dornheim, "Pentagon Mulls Space Laser Test", Aviation Week & Space Technology, March 23, 1998, p. 32.

[63] Frank Vizard, "Return to Star Wars", Popular Science, April 1999, p. 2.

[64] John G. Roos, "Militarizing Space," Armed Forces Journal International, September 2001, p. 32.

[65] ibid., p. 35.

[66] ibid

[67] Joseph C. Anselmo, "New Funding Spurs Laser Efforts", Aviation Week & Space Technology, October 14, 1996, p. 67.

[68] The Revolution in Military Affairs and Directed Energy Weapons by Matthew Mowthorpe 8March02Air & Space Power Chronicles

[69] Kosmos:Kakin Yego Vidyot Vashingtona, Moscow, 1985, Progress Publishers, pp.4.

[70] Vladimir Belons: Star Wars or star Peace , New Delhi, 1988, Allied Publishers, pp.4.

[71] By Group Captain Peter W Gray RAF, D Def S (RAF), JDCC Shrivenham

[72] Space Warfare in Perspective by Ronald D. Humble

[73] Bhupendra Jasani. Outer Space: A Source of Conflict or Co-operation. Japan, United Nations University Press, 1991, p. 3.

[74] The Military Use of Space: A Diagnostic Assessment <https://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/Archive/H.20010111.The_Military_Use_o/H.20010111.The_Military_Use_o.htm>

[75] Madhok.op.cit., pp. 94.

[76] Ibid.

[77] Ibid.

[78] Bhupendra Jasani. Outer Space - A New Dimension of the Arms Race. London, Taylor and Francis Ltd., 1982, p. 41.

[79] India's Emergence as an Aerospace Power and its, Responsibility to the Region Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Hon'ble Raksha Mantri

[80] The other rising space power by jeff foust dec 18 2006 https://www.thespacereview.com/article/768/1

[81] India's Emergence as an Aerospace Power and its, Responsibility to the Region Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Hon'ble Raksha Mantri

[82] The other rising space power by jeff foust dec 18 2006

[83] India's Emergence as an Aerospace Power and its, Responsibility to the Region Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Hon'ble Raksha Mantri

[84] India's Emergence as an Aerospace Power and its, Responsibility to the Region Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Hon'ble Raksha Mantri

[85] July 20, 2009 Inside GNSS, July/August 2009 Share via: Technorati Twitter

[86] Military Dimensions in the Future of the Indian Presence in Space by Dr V Siddharta - USI Journal June 2000.

[87] <https://www.deccanherald.com/index.html> dated 20 Aug 99.

[88] Madhok.op.cit., pp. 82.

[89] Ibid., pp. 29.

[90] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[91] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[92] The White House, A National Security Strategy for a New Century (Washington, DC: The White House, October 1998), 25-26.

[93] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[94] Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 2-2, Space Operations, 27 November 2001, 4; and AFDD 2-2, draft, 15 May 2005, 3. Headquarters AFDC/DR, Maxwell AFB, AL.

[95] Lt Col Peter B. Hays, USAF, United States Military Space into the Twenty-first Century, Institute for National Strategic Studies Occasional Paper 42 (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press, 2002), 25-26.

[96] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[97] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[98] Meilinger, 10 Propositions Regarding Airpower, 35. “Parallel Operations occur when different campaigns, against different targets, and at different levels of war, are conducted simultaneously.”

[99] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[100] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[101] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[102] United States Space Command Long-Range Plan: Implementing USSPACECOM Vision for 2020 (Peterson AFB, CO: US Space Command, Director of Plans, April 1998), 4-5.

[103] “Rest of World Space Launch,” Air University Space Primer, chap. 20 (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air War College, July 2003), https://space.au.af.mil/primer/rest_of_world_launch.pdf.

[104] Gen William “Billy” Mitchell, USA, Winged Defense: The Development and Possibilities of Modern Air Power—Economic and Military (1925: repr., New York: Dover Publications, 1988), 160, 248-49.

[105] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[106] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[107] The Dawn of a Space Force Lt Col Mark E. Harter, USAF Document created: 1 June 06 Air & Space Power Journal - Summer 2006

[108] The Phantom Menace by Karl Grossman available at <https://www.fair.org/extra/writers/grossman.html>

[109] The essence of aerospace power: what leaders need to know Dennis m. Drew*

[110] Ibid., pp. 96.

[111] “How the current view of the air and space environment influences development of military space forces” by Lyndon S. Anderson

Cite this page