Q&A: Brigadier General Jeffrey C. Horne

Written by Harrison Donnelly

Brigadier General Jeffrey C. Horne
Deputy Commander
Joint Functional Component Command for Space
U.S. Strategic Command
Deputy Director for Mission Support
National Reconnaissance Office

Army Brigadier General Jeffrey C. Horne is the deputy commander for Joint Functional Component Command for Space (JFCC-SPACE), U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM). He is also the deputy director for mission support (DDMS), National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). His previous assignment was as special assistant to the commanding general, Army Space and Missile Defense Command.

As deputy commander JFCC-SPACE, Horne helps lead all Department of Defense space forces aligned with USSTRATCOM and provides tailored, responsive, local and global effects in support of national, USSTRATCOM and combatant commander objectives.

As DDMS, he is responsible for understanding user needs to coordinate, integrate and deliver NRO-wide responsive solutions. DDMS also manages the NRO Operations Center, and, in collaboration with USSTRATCOM, provides space situational awareness and supports defense space control and space protection.

Horne entered the Army through the ROTC program. He attended Ohio State University, where he received a degree in business administration. He received a Master of Science in information systems management from the Naval Postgraduate School and an MSST in security and strategic studies from the Army War College.

Horne entered on duty in 1980 as a Vulcan platoon leader at Fort Bragg, N.C. He has served in various security systems analysis, technical management, leadership and staff positions during his career.

Horne was interviewed by GIF Editor Harrison Donnelly.

Q: What roles do you play in your dual-hatted position as deputy commander, Joint Functional Component for Space, USSTRATCOM, and deputy director for Mission Support, National Reconnaissance Office?

A: The intent of this arrangement was to bring DoD and the intelligence community together operationally. As a part of that, we decided to create a partnership with the various services and space organizations, our IC partners, and the senior staffs in Washington and around the world. The dual-hatted nature of these two jobs is designed to take that to the next level and create synergy at the tactical and operational level. These responsibilities changed in 2007, when we brought together the national support office and the military support office inside NRO, and also brought that together with JFCC Space at USSTRATCOM. That integrated our DoD, intelligence, national security and homeland security support structure together in one organization. It’s all about unity of effort.

The second objective of the dual-hatting was to operationalize our cross-spectrum space forces and our support efforts to enhance unity of effort there as well. This brings together about 12,000 personnel at more than 40 locations worldwide, and helps us accomplish missions and save lives every day. It provides critical information to our national leaders on a minute-to-minute basis if necessary, whereas before it would often take hours to coordinate among the various activities that were sometimes separate. It also helps us to ensure that the information support we give to the diplomatic, military and economic sides of the elements of national power is accelerated as well.

Q: How significant is space-based ISR in the overall realm of creating space effects and providing capabilities to our nation’s leaders and war fighting formations?

A: The key elements of space force capability include precision navigation and timing, missile warning, satellite communications and ISR. The level of importance of any one of those depends on where you’re sitting and what your job is, but I can tell you that all four of these are absolutely essential to our daily lives. They enable and facilitate everything from air traffic control to maritime navigation to wartime military targeting and all the way to our nuclear posture and the information distribution for economic systems, as well as diplomatic efforts. ISR clearly helps us understand what our potential adversaries are taking on, and helps us better understand what’s going on in the world.

In terms of wartime posture, I learned first-hand as the fires and effects coordinator in Iraq that ISR enabled us to bring security to the population in ways that we never envisioned before. It is critical to all aspects of tactical operations, to saving lives every day in those war fighting formations and making sure that we can give our coalition forces a good picture of what they are walking into so they are fully prepared. Sometimes pictures speak a thousand words. It certainly helps us in foundational intelligence as well. In the past, space-based ISR was used mostly at the strategic level. Today, it is used all the way down to the lowest levels of formations, with everything from individuals and platoons to battalions, brigades, fighter wings and individual pilots. Overhead ISR capabilities are used throughout the battlefield, in synergy with all our airborne and ground ISR as well. It is a thing of beauty to watch what are probably the most savvy operators we have ever had in history, who are able to assimilate all this on a real-time basis.

Space-based ISR gives us the opportunity to monitor places that we would otherwise not be able to reach—areas that are otherwise denied to us for one reason or another. It could be we don’t have overflight rights, or that it is terribly difficult terrain, as in Afghanistan. Overhead ISR enables us to see locations we need to be able to see, and to get additional data. We can then cross-correlate such information with our airborne and ground sensors, and bring it all together in one spot, such as at our deployed infantry divisions. Our challenge is to listen to those operators and figure out what they need, and turn that around very quickly.

The last piece involves integration—bringing air and ground together—which is truly the wave of the future. It’s more than space-based systems. We cannot talk anymore about just another satellite, or what a particular satellite adds. We have to figure out, just as we did with the missile defense system, that the sum of the parts exceeds the original intent by some significant factor, because we are able to integrate them properly. In that light, space-based ISR has taken on incredible proportions for a country at war.

Q: What are your top priorities in your two positions and how broad is your user base?

A: I’ll start with a broad definition of our priorities. General James, the commander of JFCC Space and the 14th Air Force—and my boss on the DoD side—with General Chilton, has laid out that the fundamental top priorities are warfighter support, command and control, integration and readiness. Specifically, what we have to do is look daily at the operational readiness of all our space forces. That status is kept on a minute-to-minute basis via our 24/7 ops centers that exist at Vandenberg AFB, Calif., and with the NRO team here in Northern Virginia. That situational awareness is cross-correlated with many other operations centers throughout the country, and we talk frequently to our allies as well to disseminate and share information. Keeping our satellites on orbit and keeping track of them all, as well as 19,000 pieces of space debris flying around, is difficult from day to day. We have to maintain command and control and know what’s going on, to make sure we give the right commands to all those satellites we “fly” to avoid collisions in space.

On the NRO side of the equation, my priorities involve three complementary mission areas, all in some way involving understanding and acting upon user needs. User sets used to be fairly well defined and narrow for some systems 10 to 15 years ago. Today the user base is exploding because of our transformation and how we are able to make the data accessible to a growing list of others who need it. We define user needs, work with system engineers, and translate those into technical specifications for contracts so we can develop solutions and systems quickly. Part of this is determining what we can solve right away. For this process we have a rapid reaction program that identifies problems that can be solved in hours, days or weeks, as opposed to the years it takes to put new satellites up. After seven years of war, that is a very active part of what the NRO offers, and one that is going very well.

Q: We have heard that the NRO is transforming. What does this mean for the operational warfighter, and what initiatives do you have under way to improve the contribution that our use of space is making to the overall ISR spectrum?

A: First of all, I should acknowledge the NRO’s illustrious history. We are approaching our 50th anniversary. We were present at the beginning of the Space Age. We have been known for our innovation and unprecedented capability to procure, launch and fly satellites. However, like most of the space industry, we’ve had our challenges with acquisition and quality control. Those perceived shortfalls have been addressed through a recent reorganization and transformation. We have a very robust systems engineering shop that is embracing all the new system and quality control practices. We have a new ground enterprise directorate, which is focused entirely on the business of moving the data and connecting the data to the users. We are very focused on timeliness, access and value to make sure that the right data and services get to people as quickly as possible. We are increasingly providing forward processing and making sure that data standards are set such that we can share information among agencies in an appropriate and expeditious manner.

Our restructuring and transformation is designed to take on all of those significant 21st century challenges: not only the building, launching and operation of satellites, but equally the movement of the data itself. That is a fundamental change to our emphasis. The stovepipes and divisions between users, DoD, the intelligence community, allies and even industry are beginning to fade, and this is very important to our future. Our partners at NSA and NGA do the analysis work and produce the products from the collection that takes place on the NRO side, and then, in turn, we distribute the information to the intermediate and end users. Our recently enacted NRO 2009 Strategic Plan is the governing document and set of processes to ensure that we deliver high quality acquisition and meet our 24/7 operational requirements. The plan involves determining what our critical enablers are, making sure that we have a work force that is trained and ready to task, and executing a solid leadership development plan for future people to take over here when we old guys are gone.

Outside of the physical boundaries of the NRO, we now have the largest forward presence in Iraq and Afghanistan that the organization has ever had. We’ve pushed our engineers forward, and they are solving problems at the point of presence every day. Now instead of our users having to reach back through time zones and the multiple challenges of communication, we have our people engaging in the same challenges hourly that the analysts and warfighters are experiencing. They’re seeing it firsthand, talking to their buddies back at our labs, and solving problems in minutes, hours and days. We have a combination of long-term acquisition excellence, tied to a shortterm rapid response program enabling us to meet people’s needs much more quickly than we have in the past. I hear every day from senior operational commanders about the value of that.

Q: You have had substantial experience as a tactical and operational leader as well as with representing end-user needs. Can you tell us about how the process is going and the types of problems you are taking on?

A: As I mentioned, our user base is exploding. The space-based missions and the NRO systems that are now being used in everything from tactical to national strategic means—by user sets we never envisioned before—are a growth industry. We work with the combatant commanders, advising them through their directors of space forces that they have on staff to solve their real-time needs. In addition, we support the Department of Homeland Security and all their agencies here in the NCR and around the nation. We also have the responsibility of coordinating and sharing data in a responsible way with our allies for all the constellation impacts they might have along the way.

Along with that, we have the challenge of what I call compression. The tactics, techniques and procedures of our adversaries are changing every few days or months. Combine that with the facts that software releases are coming out faster and faster, and that our integrated systems are becoming more capable. All of that generates an incredibly demanding user community. Keeping up with that is a tremendous challenge, because we want to be relevant and timely, and provide access to all of those who can benefit from our data. Most importantly, we want to be value-added. Our work is not just a matter of providing the data, but also sorting and correlating the data properly so that someone can use it quickly in today’s tough environment, where targets are fleeting and move in seconds and minutes rather than days, weeks or months.

Q: How have your previous assignments, particularly your service as effects coordinator with forces in Iraq, shaped your approach to providing mission support?

A: Like a good number of my peers, I have seen the effects of space across the elements of national power and have witnessed its war fighting power firsthand at the tactical, operational and strategic level. After more than seven continuous years of war, we can see that we’re delivering capability that we never envisioned when a particular satellite or ground system was originally developed. It is very clear to us that our future is inextricably linked to our ability to maintain that assured access to all those systems, to keep the data moving, to protect the constellations that we have, and to be able to integrate those with our airborne and ground systems.

Our military leaders, regardless of their branch backgrounds as an infantryman, pilot or ship driver, are getting to the point where they all know that they have to understand the space business, just like they do any other weapons system for which they’re responsible. The days of regarding space warriors as a special breed or “space cowboys” is largely past, and people are embracing that. As an example of this, we’re growing the Army Space Force above the level at which we thought we would, and we recently brought about 2,000 soldiers into the “space enabler” category as new cadre. There are about 14,000 space warriors in the Air Force, and the Navy and Marine Corps are following similar suit. Our task, though, is to get those guys and gals beyond being space warriors, and instead get them to be operationally integrated throughout the war fighting formations.

It’s all about integration. After Grenada, we talked about jointness, but we’re far beyond military jointness today. Anyone who has been deployed realizes that now it’s more about interagency coordination—being able to work with the State Department, the 16 intelligence agencies and other federal departments. In all of this, a unifying factor is ISR. Everyone has to know whether where they’re going is safe or not, and how to avoid peril. They need to know if the crops are growing. Recent deployments have proved to me that we have to use our ISR in ways that we’ve never thought of before. It’s hard not to feel the intensity of that, because of our young people’s hunger for information and the ferocity of their desire to not be put at a disadvantage. They want the very best they can get. The demands of that basic tactical warrior, who nowadays could be a State Department agricultural expert who is going out into the hinterlands of Afghanistan, absolutely require our interagency pieces to collaborate in ways that we have never been able to do before. In all of this airborne and space integration business, how do we best provide the data in a way that everyone has access to it, while respecting need to know and other challenges? How do you share the data in a responsible manner? How should we present and display it to this much expanded user base? These will be the great thrusts for the future.

Q: Space, like cyber, is becoming a fairly well-contested domain. What experiences can you share with us that could give us a better idea of the gravity of the problem?

A: As we discussed, the space domain has fundamentally reshaped our lives in the last 40 years. This change—some people say dependence— has really grown exponentially in the last 10 years. It applies to most any aspect of our lives, but we depend on it primarily to conduct commerce, advance our national interests, and defend our nation. Space holds promise for exploration at multiple levels, from greenhouse gases to future forms of fuel and life in other parts of the universe. The bottom line is that the space domain has become a fact of life similar to our telephone system. When you pick up a telephone and don’t hear a dial tone, initially you’re frustrated, and then you get angry. We’re there with space. People expect those capabilities to be available, and it’s very much a problem when they’re not. That’s becoming increasingly true around the world. There are 43 nations in space today, and we anticipate that to double within the next decade. As a part of that, many countries are doing satellite launches.

The international space race has resulted in some interesting problems for us. For instance, in 2007, there were 14,000 pieces of space debris; today there are more than 19,000. Routinely, we have objects passing each other in space with fewer than 50 meter error ellipses, traveling at speeds of from 14,000 to 38,000 mph. A golf ball-sized piece of debris can do a lot of damage. Beyond those unintentional possible threats to our space systems and capabilities, it’s also pretty clear that we have potential adversaries who hold a very different view of space than we do with our current space policy. We Americans have sought to stay away from the weaponization of space. However, like other domains within which we operate, especially the cyberdomain, space is indeed becoming a contested environment. As a result, we have to gain a better understanding of foreign capabilities, and get insights into their intent. When something goes wrong with one of our own systems, we have to be able to attribute who was involved in an event, and do so in seconds and minutes rather than hours, days or weeks.

There is a full range of capabilities that other nations seek to invest in, from kinetic to non-kinetic means. The media has routinely reported news about cyber-attacks. However, that’s just the tip of the iceberg of things aggressors might do, not only to our satellites but also to the ground stations and the people who work at them. Some countries even state openly that their intent is to be able to disable entire networks of other nations, so we have to be conscious of that and figure out how to deal with it. We must be able to attribute hostile acts to the right parties, so we can go into our diplomatic procedures and work through challenges with them in a way that doesn’t escalate too quickly. The bottom line is that we have to be vigilant, to acknowledge that these interruptions can take place and plan for them, to train our leaders, and to have some tough exercises that give us some practicable experience in combating threats. We have to avoid wishing away our space problems and push our folks hard to work through the challenges in every endeavor they take on, so it becomes part of routine everyday life, just as we expect them to do in our other domains of air, land and sea.

Q: What additional tools and processes do we need to enhance our position in space, and what is required to enhance the collaborative protection of our overhead capabilities?

A: We must achieve redundancy, reliability and recuperation. Our nation’s Operationally Responsive Space program is engaged in dealing with that, trying to give us some options to respond if we have a challenge either from a launch that didn’t go well, some natural event, or a disruption caused by an adversary. We’re looking at a lot of great opportunities there that will give us options in the future.

We seriously need space situational awareness, learning what’s going on around us, so we can see first, understand first, decide, act, and then figure out what happened from our decision, so we can go back through the cycle and be able to maintain control of whatever challenge took place and make sure it doesn’t over-escalate. To do that, we have to have fusion tools to be able to integrate all the various information systems that come into the Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg AFB, as well as to the NRO Operations Center.

Additionally, we have to define a common operational picture of the constellation and where everything is, which is usable by all the different warfighters in the field. We want something similar to what we have in the missile defense business, where everyone has a user-defined operational picture where, based on how they process information, they can filter out what they don’t need to see, and look at what they need to focus on. We need to be able to export that out at the COCOMs, joint task forces and joint force commanders in the field. To do this, we may need some infrastructure investments to provide those enhanced SA tools.

And last, we have to learn how to better integrate the sensors we already have. The natural tendency is to want to put more sensors out, but that’s probably not the right answer—economically or from an iteration standpoint. More sensors means more challenges in integration, more lines of code and more things to bring together. Seen in that light, launching a new sensor, which has always been the option in the past, may not be the correct choice for the future. That’s not to say we don’t need satellites of specific types, but that we need to have multi-use sensors that can be used for multiple missions. For those that weren’t originally designed for that, we need to figure out how to change their software and hardware configurations to give them that multimission capability, and integrate those into the operations centers around the world.

Q: Is there anything else you would like to add?

A: The biggest thing I have learned in this business is that the partnership and collaboration that has to go on among DoD, the intelligence community and other agencies are beyond anything we envisioned 10 to 15 years ago. All of us depend on each other. The cooperation that we have with our partners at NSA and NGA is phenomenal. The interaction we have with STRATCOM as they advocate for the capabilities that we sort out with our user groups worldwide is also a very good thing. Rather than the intelligence community advocating separately from DoD, we are now starting to merge those views as best we can. There will always be differences, but the linkages between the NRO, STRATCOM and the requirements piece are providing good returns on investment for all of us.

The national security space enterprise—the NRO and the space industry—has had a fairly good level of scrutiny in recent years, which I would say is similar to what the aircraft industry had 10 to 15 years ago, or the American automobile industry is experiencing today. Like most large organizations, we go through periods in which we have to be introspective and re-evaluate what we are doing and how. What I’ve witnessed as an operator in an acquisition world is a tremendous desire to openly look at what our challenges are, lay out all of the problems on the table, deal with them realistically, and respond appropriately with applying best practices, not only from our industry, but across multiple industries. We’re looking at all the different types of things we can do to assure quality control for the future and ensure that our space capabilities are viable for the nation in the next 20 to 30 years. I see an amazing effort by the acquisition team to get after the challenges that face the space industry, whether it be the commercial industry or the military and intelligence portion of it. I see incredible teamwork building to get through the challenges we face today, and I have every confidence that we will be able to do that.

I am glad that I also see a tremendous IC support to America’s wounded military veterans. At the NRO, we have a program called Operation Warfighter, which enables us to take wounded veterans who are rehabilitating at Walter Reed and other medical facilities, and expose them to this community. In the end, when it comes time for them to transition, if they choose to or must transition out of the military, they may be able to move into this world, either the space or intelligence side of it. We’re finding that’s incredibly valuable, because we’re taking their operational experience and injecting that into the acquisition community. For instance, let’s say that a young soldier has experienced an IED blast firsthand and has an amazing desire and tenacity to defeat the IED problem; he wants that business to stop. We can get clearances for such young men and women in less than two months, get them into the system and get them working. They’re showing an amazing resilience to jump off into this new career field that most had no prior exposure to. From its humble beginnings as more of a homegrown, grassroots volunteer effort, we now have a program supported by the director of national intelligence. This program takes care of the servicemembers and the families, and is good for everyone.

And finally, what I see all around me is a very caring, introspective community that wants to make sure that it meets America’s needs for the future. The NRO is a great place to work, the IC is a great group of people and I’m proud of them all.  ♦

Back to Top