Special Feature

DYNAMIC SPACE
OPERATIONS John E. Shaw
Daniel R. Bourque
THE NEW SUSTAINED
Marcus Shaw
SPACE MANEUVER
IMPERATIVE

As in the battlespace on Earth, the force capable of sustaining maneuver in space will have
the advantage. This maneuver, however, will require a scale previously unknown to a do-
main thus far dominated by Keplerian and Newtonian thought. The paradigm of positional
space operations must be replaced by a paradigm of dynamic space operations, where
spaceborne combat forces are no longer static and predictable.

M ilitary history is replete with examples of combat forces employing maneuver

warfare to move quickly, sidestep defenses, achieve surprise, reorient quickly
in the battlespace, and hold centers of gravity at risk to achieve victory. 1 As
in domains of human endeavor on Earth, the advantage in space will go to the force
capable of sustaining maneuver on a scale previously unknown to a domain domi-
nated thus far by Keplerian and Newtonian thinking.
The current paradigm of positional space operations (PSO) must naturally give way
to dynamic space operations (DSO), where spaceborne combat forces are no longer
static and predictable. Moreover, a dynamic and dominant force in space will only be
as effective as its ability to sustain space maneuver—particularly in the face of an ad-
versary. Only then can that force maintain initiative, achieve surprise, and outma-
neuver an adversary in the space domain to achieve victory.

Lieutenant General John Shaw, USSF, Retired, served most recently as the deputy commander of US Space
Command.
Colonel Daniel Bourque, USAF, Retired, is a senior engineer specialist, C3 engineering and ops, at the
Aerospace Corporation.
Marcus Shaw is technical adviser to the commander, US Space Command, and technical support to US Space
Force at the Aerospace Corporation.

1. John E. Shaw (remarks, Space Foundation Space Symposium, Colorado Springs, CO, April 16,
2023); and John E. Shaw and Kevin Chilton, “7.6 Schriever Spacepower Series: Lt Gen John E. Shaw,” July 6,
2023, in Aerospace Nation, produced by Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, podcast and YouTube
presentation, 1:02, MP3 audio and video, https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/. All authors have been in-
strumental in the development of these emerging doctrinal and operational ideas.

8 ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER

 Shaw, Bourque & Shaw

The Timeless Value of Maneuver

In past warfare, the military advantage has often gone not to the larger or more
powerful force but rather to the one capable of placing its forces at a position of ad-
vantage over the adversary at the right time—US Joint doctrine calls this action
maneuver.2 But space operations to date have not focused on sustained maneuver as a
key capability. Rather, they have historically been characterized by Keplerian thinking.
Using Kepler’s laws of motion, satellites have been launched into desirable orbits to
achieve the objectives of their predominantly Earth-­­focused missions.
While these satellites move at great velocities relative to Earth, from an orbital me-
chanics perspective, they are actually energy-­­constant and static—relatively unchanging
and highly predictable. In these positional space operations, the mission of a satellite
drives the selection of its “parking spot” on orbit, and the satellite’s design, launch
vehicle, and supporting infrastructure are tailored to the needs of attaining and main-
taining this energy-­­constant position in an environment relatively free from human-­
made threats. Satellites designed for these PSOs generally carry only enough propul-
sion to maintain their position and perhaps conduct a handful of low-­­energy strategic
repositionings over the expected lifetime of the satellite.
Positional space operations dominated the beginning of the Space Age, an era
where space exploration and exploitation were extensions of strategic competition
between the United States and the Soviet Union. In these early decades, sustained
maneuver capability was technologically prohibitive. Combat in the space domain
was considered a likely prelude to nuclear war as satellites were strategic assets,
quickly escalating and making sustained space maneuver (SSM), or replenishment of
consumables used in combat, an unlikely need.3
After the fall of the Soviet Union, space operations were characterized by the rapid
proliferation of Earth-­­facing space capabilities—commercial, civil, and military—
made possible by technological advancements and relative freedom from threats.
These factors combined to push space-­­derived information and services down to indi-
vidual users and tactical operations on Earth, and the lack of threats emphasized the
Keplerian advantages of placing satellites in the right energy-­­constant orbits to achieve
the best effect on Earth.
But humanity is now in a new Space Age, where access to space-­­enabled capability
in daily life is ubiquitous, militaries are increasingly dependent on space to extend
their reach and lethality, and commerce and reach are expanding beyond the geosyn-
chronous belt with increasingly space-­­facing missions. Like any other domain of human
endeavor, threats have emerged to challenge freedom of action in the space domain.
These changes precipitated the creation of the new US Space Command and US Space

2. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), Joint Operations, Joint Publication (JP) 3-0 (Washington,
DC: CJCS, 2022).
3. Robin Dickey, The Rise and Fall of Space Sanctuary in U.S. Policy, 5-6 (El Segundo, CA: Aerospace
Corporation, September 1, 2020), https://csps.aerospace.org/.

ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER 9

 Dynamic Space Operations

Force in 2019 and require the United States and like-­­minded partners to think dif-
ferently about space operations.4
Traditional Earth-­­facing military missions now require space-­­facing, in-­­domain
military missions to expand reach, keep watch, deter adversaries, project effects, and
protect national and international interests. Keplerian “positional” thinking that treats
powered movement across orbits as a rare and costly event is no longer adequate. The
force capable of sustaining maneuver will gain and maintain the advantage over time;
indeed, competitors such as China are already demonstrating many of the technolo-
gies required to sustain maneuver and act dynamically in space.5
Maneuver is a timeless principle of war and involves identifying adversary centers
of gravity and vulnerabilities, sidestepping adversary strengths, complicating the
enemy's calculus, fogging the enemy’s battlespace picture, constantly changing
friendly positions and vulnerabilities to mitigate weaknesses, and arriving at decisive
points to gain the advantage and achieve objectives before reaching culmination, the
“point in time and/or space when the operation can no longer maintain momentum.”6
Sustained maneuver allows a force to maintain initiative, achieve surprise, and out-
maneuver an adversary in the field not just instantaneously but also over the course of
a campaign while forestalling the costly mistake of reaching culmination before of-
fensive or defensive objectives are achieved and ceding advantage to the adversary.
Maneuver is more than just movement; it is “movement for effect” and has often been
achieved and maintained through revolutions in logistics.
Napoleon famously used large-­­scale maneuver in his conquest of Europe, dividing
his forces into independent corps capable of moving rapidly and sustaining much of
their own needs before decisively converging on an objective.7 Admiral Chester Nimitz
hailed the US Navy’s ability to conduct underway replenishment as its “secret weapon”
in World War II, which enabled a high operations tempo and increased fleet sortie
rates.8 Aerial refueling was explored in the interwar years between World War I and
World War II and perfected in the 1950s to extend the operational range, loiter time,
and therefore overall capability of combat aircraft.9
These revolutions in combat logistics greatly improved combat capability by en-
abling the most dynamic portions of a force to operate flexibly to maintain initiative,
achieve surprise, outmaneuver adversaries in the field, and forestall culmination. Of

4. US Department of Defense (DoD), “Department of Defense Establishes U.S. Space Command,”

press release, DoD, August 29, 2019, https://www.defense.gov/.
5. XueAi Li, Dapeng Yang, and Hong Liu, “China’s Space Robotics for On-­­Orbit Servicing: the State of
the Art,” National Science Review 10 (2023): 1, https://academic.oup.com/.
6. CJCS, Joint Planning, JP 5-0 (Washington, DC: CJCS, 2020).
7. Jon Chavous, “Saddles and Sabers: Napoleon Bonaparte’s Contributions to Modern Warfare,” Armor
(March–June 2014).
8. John A. Lukacs IV, “A Century of Replenishment at Sea,” Naval History Magazine 32, no. 3 (2018),
https://www.usni.org/.
9. Erin Lasley, “Refueling through the Century,” USAF Air Mobility Command, March 26, 2018,
https://www.amc.af.mil/.

10 VOL. 2, SPECIAL EDITION, WINTER 2023

 Shaw, Bourque & Shaw

note, each of these advances in combat capability could be looked at through a certain
lens as cost-­­saving measures, but to do so would miss the point. The increased combat
effectiveness of the military force was—and should remain— the driver for advance-
ments in military logistics and maneuver.
Like the castle walls, trenches, Maginot Lines, fixed logistics points, static air de-
fenses, and hardened aircraft shelters of past conflicts, positional space operations are
no longer adequate to maintain the advantage in space. The continued adherence to
PSO approaches for military space capabilities will also become increasingly risky and
dangerous, analogous to warships in port, or combat aircraft on the ground. Instead,
dynamic space operations will be the key to success, and sustained space maneuver
will enable effective and sustained DSO. Like other advancements, cost savings may
be a benefit of sustained space maneuver, but enhanced combat capability is the pri-
mary driver. Combat readiness and deterrence are also greatly enhanced through ro-
bust test and training, which are not possible without the ability to replenish capability
through SSM capability.
Imagine a new main battle tank is delivered from the factory with its fuel tank and
magazine permanently sealed, and its projected replacement will not arrive for eight
years. Every time the tank moves a meter or fires a round, its capability is incremen-
tally yet permanently diminished with no immediate replacement. Regardless of the
size of the fuel tank or magazine, commanders would be driven to continually con-
strain movement and fires to avoid untenable future risk. Such a system that turns every
action for short-­­term advantage over the adversary into long-­­term risk of future capa-
bility loss would be unacceptable to any military commander, yet this is exactly how
today’s space-­­domain systems are built and delivered to combatant commanders, even
those designed for dynamic space operations.
The Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program (GSSAP) is one such
contemporary system designed for dynamic, space-­­facing operations.10 GSSAP mis-
sions require the spacecraft to maneuver around the geosynchronous belt to maintain
awareness on objects and activities in this congested and valuable Earth-­­facing orbit.
While GSSAP is designed to maneuver routinely, like the imaginary unrefuellable
main battle tank, it arrives on-­­orbit with fuel tanks sealed at the factory and pro-
grammed replacement spacecraft many years in the future.
GSSAP’s limited capacity to sustain maneuver dramatically hinders an operational
commander’s ability and willingness to routinely maintain a position of advantage
over competitors in space. The system’s ability to conduct dynamic space operations is
constrained by the risk of future mission failure if the limited consumable of fuel is
not mission planned and heavily managed across the projected lifetime of the space-
craft. Immediate maneuver constrained by significant future risk is a poor and myopic
way to compete in the emerging age of DSOs.

10. “Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program,” US Space Force, October 2020, https://
www.spaceforce.mil/.

ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER 11

 Dynamic Space Operations

As it is in other domains, the advantage in space will go to the force able to fully
utilize maneuver to maintain initiative, achieve surprise, outmaneuver an adversary in
the field, and forestall culmination. The better a force is able to create and sustain
maneuver over time and distance, the more capable that force will be in achieving
both offensive and defensive objectives without ceding advantage to the adversary. In
the terrestrial domains, otherwise stationary objects achieve movement for maneuver
through engines and motors which consume fuel to provide the energy to turn them
from Newton’s objects at rest to objects in motion.
Likewise, otherwise static objects in orbit require routine and sometimes aggressive
and continuous propulsion to provide the energy to avoid remaining stationary and
predictable in a Keplerian sense. A good portion of operational satellites are already
capable of maneuver in space for short durations, but they have very limited capability
to sustain such maneuvers, potentially reaching culmination well before operational
and strategic objectives can be met and increasing the opportunity for an adversary to
seize the advantage. Sustained space maneuver is the ability to keep a space capability
operating dynamically over time to continually gain and maintain advantage. The
force able to achieve SSM will have a clear advantage in the space domain.

Acquisition versus Operations Cost Curves: Space Imbalance?

Resource use for weapon systems over time across domains is particularly reveal-
ing in the value—or, rather, lack thereof—the space enterprise has historically put on
sustainment and maneuver. At a high level, US weapon system lifecycle costs can be
broken into two major categories: 1) systems acquisition (research and development
plus procurement), and 2) operating and support (sustainment, maintenance, con-
sumables, and disposal), which includes replenishment of consumables important to
maneuver such as fuel.
A historical comparison of the ratios between these two categories at the turn of
the twenty-first century when positional space operations were the norm shows the
great disparity between space and other domains (fig. 1). For space weapon systems,
systems acquisition accounted for approximately 84 percent of lifecycle cost, while
only 16 percent was dedicated to operating and support. Conversely, weapon system
lifecycle costs for ships and aircraft were approximately 30 to 50 percent for systems
acquisition and 50 to 70 percent for operating and support.11
The Keplerian nature of orbits allows PSO spacecraft to perform most of their Earth­­
facing missions with little operating and support costs in a benign environment, but as
DSO platforms and missions increase the need for sustained space maneuver, the ratio
of acquisition to operations cost should naturally shift to be more in line with weapon
systems in other domains where maneuver is routine.

11. Gary Jones et al., “Investigation into the Ratio of Operating and Support Costs to Life-­­Cycle Costs
for DoD Weapon Systems,” Defense Acquisition Research Journal 21, no. 1 (2014), https://www.dau.edu/.

12 VOL. 2, SPECIAL EDITION, WINTER 2023

 Shaw, Bourque & Shaw

Figure 1. Lifecycle costs between acquisition and operating and support,

circa 2000—when military space was focused on positional space opera-
tions12

Solution Vectors
Sustained space maneuver is a capability rather than a system, so there are many
potential ways to achieve it. Perhaps the most obvious—and, in the near-­­term, most
viable—approach is on-­­orbit servicing to replace consumables such as fuel as they are
depleted. This approach might be similar to a terrestrial depot or port. Even better,
on-­­orbit servicing could employ space maneuver itself to be more analogous to aerial
refueling or underway replenishment at sea—akin to supply ships and oilers rather
than ports—moving to the place of need in the space domain to keep the serviced
spacecraft closer to their missions and objectives.
Another in-­­domain solution might come from a separate system of expendable or
replenishable jetpacks. These devices would be able to connect to mission satellites
and provide separate maneuver or even augmenting capabilities such as power gen-
eration that could be replaced as needed to sustain maneuver. This approach has the
potential to add SSM capability to older-­­generation satellites that were deployed to the
space domain without organic sustainable maneuver capability. These on-­­orbit servic-
ing approaches also open possibilities for more agile launch operations by using
smaller and more flexible launch methods to place incomplete or lighter and smaller
spacecraft in the space domain to be fueled or paired with jetpacks on orbit.
More advanced propulsion technologies can also contribute to SSM, particularly
ones that provide more efficient use of fuel and greater thrust-­­to-­­weight ratios. Gains
in efficiency could enable significantly greater maneuver for a given propellant mass.
Efficiency alone, however, is not a silver bullet for dynamic space operations. The key
to sustaining DSO is the ability to remove the long-­­term capability risk from short-­
term maneuver decisions, so even spacecraft with hyperefficient propulsion systems
would likely still need replenishment, just less often.
On-­­orbit servicing capabilities and more efficient propulsion address the challenges
of DSO by removing the constraint of limited consumables over time. An alternative
approach to SSM is to remove the constraint of lifetime required from a single

12. Jones et al., table 1, table 7.

ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER 13

 Dynamic Space Operations

spacecraft. Instead of replacing consumables on an individual spacecraft, the space-

craft itself would be the consumable, and an on-­­call replacement spacecraft would be
deployed as a replacement when consumables are depleted rather than on a fixed re-
placement timeline.
This commoditization approach has the additional challenge of storing replace-
ments or building them on demand, improving rapid launch capability, and disposing
of depleted spacecraft, but it also opens new possibilities for surge operations to rap-
idly expand capability by increasing the maximum sortie rate for particularly advanta-
geous periods of time.
A force capable of robust sustained space maneuver will likely employ a combina-
tion of all these capabilities and more. Regardless of the means, a force enabled by sus-
tained space maneuver will enjoy numerous advantages with significant military utility:
• Increased capability and flexibility – provide a better range of operations,
greater reach, more frequent operations, improved timelines for force movement
and execution, improved posturing, and increased ambiguity for an adversary to
overcome. It allows for more simultaneous dilemmas imposed on an adversary
and an improved ability to strategically message through spacecraft posturing.
• A more resilient force – is able to respond to unplanned changes in adversary
force size or effectiveness, is less susceptible to incorrect assumptions on dura-
tion of operations or adversary approach, and is more responsive to changing
assumptions of probability of success.
• Increased technical opportunities – create more maneuverable spacecraft that are
inherently more difficult to track and target, opening new avenues for protec-
tion and defense. They provide the ability to outfit spacecraft to best meet short-­
term mission needs and upgrade capabilities over spacecraft lifetime.
• Greater decentralization of execution – creates reversible decisions that can be
pushed to lower levels with less risk and opportunities for more expansive and
resilient use of artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomy. It decreases response
times and increases the ability to improvise and pursue fleeting opportunities.
• Improved readiness – enables routine and robust live training with on-­­orbit
forces without sacrificing long-­­term mission success. It establishes better av-
enues to reversibly explore new operating concepts, provides more robust test-
ing opportunities for new systems and tactics, improves deterrence through
demonstrated strength, and ensures capabilities can be quickly reconstituted to
deter opportunistic third parties.
The aggregate solution set to SSM needs and challenges will likely lead to a sophis-
ticated and versatile logistics infrastructure in the space domain, one that can benefit
not only DSO platforms but traditional PSO capabilities as well. These solutions also
offer many potential benefits to the civil and commercial sectors.

14 VOL. 2, SPECIAL EDITION, WINTER 2023

 Shaw, Bourque & Shaw

Space Domain Awareness Implications

Dynamic space operations will also change the nature of foundational space capa-
bilities such as space domain awareness. Positional space operations of the past have
led to the assumption that an accurate picture of the space domain can be maintained
by keeping track of each object’s Keplerian orbit parking spot. If these parking spots
are constantly changing due to DSO, maintaining a catalog of previously observed or-
bital parameters for satellites is no longer adequate to address the emerging dynamic
nature of space.
As in other domains, maneuvering objects must be tracked nearly continuously and
in real time for the information to be of operational value. Maintaining real-­­time tracks
of large numbers of objects over long periods of time may no longer be feasible or even
desirable. Rather than maintain tracks of individual objects, space will need a more dy-
namic traffic management framework and a battle management framework like other
domains where objects relevant to operations are quickly observed, identified, desig-
nated as threats or factors, and tracked as needed until they are no longer factors.

Impacts on Multidomain Operations

The risks of continued PSO and lack of sustainable DSO capabilities are not limited
to the space domain or battlespace itself. In the era of Joint warfare and multidomain
operations, maneuver in one domain can have dramatic impacts on other domains.
Conversely, a lack of maneuver in one domain can create a liability for the Joint Force.
Multidomain operations rely on combinations of effects or asymmetric effects
across domains with each domain maneuvering as needed to gain and maintain ad-
vantage. Any domain whose maneuver is significantly restricted will be unable to con-
tribute its full potential to the Joint fight and will likely require significant effort in
other domains to overcome its lack of effective maneuver. Even if maneuver within a
conflict is possible, any domain whose short-­­term maneuver creates significant long­­
term gaps could be exploited by other strategic competitors postconflict. Sustained
space maneuver is imperative to avoiding these significant risks in space and to make
space forces an effective partner within the Joint Force.

Conclusion
Maneuver has historically given decisive advantages to one force over another in
every domain of human endeavor and conflict, and space will be no different. Current
space forces are not designed to sustain maneuver. These forces severely limit both
short-­­term and long-­­term combat capability by making every maneuver decision a
choice between immediate gain and long-­­term loss.
Military forces in space need the essential capability to continually gain and maintain
decisive advantage over an adversary in both competition and conflict. This decisive ad-
vantage will allow military forces in space to maintain the initiative, achieve surprise,
outmaneuver an adversary, and forestall culmination without sacrificing long-­­term
capability. Regardless of how it is obtained, the ability to conduct dynamic space

ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER 15

 Dynamic Space Operations

operations through sustained space maneuver will give space commanders and forces
the essential advantage necessary to fulfill their role within the Joint Force and com-
pete and prevail in future conflicts. Æ

Disclaimer and Copyright

The views and opinions in Æther are those of the authors and are not officially sanctioned by any agency or
department of the US government. This document and trademarks(s) contained herein are protected by law
and provided for noncommercial use only. Any reproduction is subject to the Copyright Act of 1976 and
applicable treaties of the United States. The authors retain all rights granted under 17 U.S.C. §106. Any repro-
duction requires author permission and a standard source credit line. Contact the Æther editor for assistance:
[email protected].

16 VOL. 2, SPECIAL EDITION, WINTER 2023