Stirred, Not Shaken
Global MilSatcom was a real success last week with more people than ever gathering to learn about developments in the MilSatcom world. As predicted, the Airbus evening event on day two was a real highlight and this year the choice of venue was inspired. Just after the release of the latest James Bond Film, Spectre, we went to the London Film Museum and had a reception in the thrilling Bond in Motion exhibition.
Bond is known for his love of Martinis, shaken, not stirred. But after Global MilSatcom, I felt the other way around – Stirred, not shaken. I’ll explain.
I wasn’t shaken because there wasn’t really anything to be shaken by. One of the main themes was the need for greater collaboration between the defence organisations and the commercial satellite sector. Not a groundbreaking observation really. Partnerships are nothing new to iDirect and we’ve been working hand-in-glove with defence organisations for decades, developing products and platforms that have the defence and security community’s needs at their heart.
With market leading security features, Network Management System (NMS) and Quality of Service (QoS), iDirect have engaged with the defence users to provide a capable platform, which is resilient and affordable. The QoS options allow separation of welfare traffic and operational traffic and allows managers to distinguish between a myriad of levels of priority and allocate valuable resources as needed, guaranteeing the levels of service required. The NMS is the most powerful in the industry, allowing commercial partners and end users varying levels of control and monitoring. And the security with TRANSEC and FIPS-140-2 protection is second to none. With the introduction of the 9000 series remotes, the separate TRANSEC module allows for fast re-certification, meaning defence forces can keep pace with the technological advances and stay abreast of features the commercial sector enjoys, whilst maintaining security and accreditation.
Another common theme was disruptive technologies; the Googles and OneWebs of the world. But the defence world these days is not known for its ability to embrace untested technologies, like it once did. Decades ago, the defence community pushed the boundaries and mobile phone technology and the Internet are a direct result of this groundbreaking work. Nowadays, we rely much more on entrepreneurs to push what’s technically feasible and take the next leap on the technological path. There was speculation at the conference, but no real substance.
It’s well known that in the commercial sector, everyone is building “the next generation”; mostly, but not exclusively, High Throughput Satellites (HTS). The defence community seems to be hovering, waiting for these to come to fruition, so they can make best use of them. Denis Sutherland is known for his HTS blogs and is well worth following.
I’m hoping that next year, there will be more to shake me, to make me think and challenge my perceptions of the Global MilSatcom sector.
So why was I stirred? The New Zealand Defence Force presentation was, as always, superb. When you see how much of the planet they look after for search and rescue and other tasks it’s mind-boggling. They are responsible for an area the size of Europe and Northern Africa combined. A small nation of 4.5 million people, they punch well above their weight. We were “quietly” reminded that the Webb Ellis Trophy is staying in New Zealand for four more years; the Australians in the audience got a special mention for that one. And we were given a deeper understanding of how satellite technologies work.
But what stirred me was the short video of what makes New Zealand such a force to be reckoned with.
This really hits the nail on the head of how the defence community and the commercial sector CAN work. You engage, you understand and you help each other. Together we’re stronger.
First posted on iDirect Blog.
Technology Executive
9 年Dave Davis I agree entirely with your assessment of last week at Global Milsatcom. The messages from previous years have been quite consistent, and the need for collaboration nothing new to the conversation. What would have been nice, and might have shaken even you, would be for someone to report not on the identification that collaboration between military and commercial was desired, but rather a report on how they were already collaborating, and on what success or issues they had faced or were facing. We've talked for years about engaging at a more substantive level, but few have spoken about what that collaboration has brought to fruition. Perhaps next year? Philip