The US Space Force is rebranding its naming scheme for military satellites, moving away from the complex and confusing system currently in use. The new scheme will feature a two-letter prefix that describes the satellite's primary mission, followed by an orbital regime designator.
The first letter of the prefix will indicate the main purpose of the satellite. For example, "A" would represent attack systems, "B" would be for battle management systems, and so on. The second letter would denote the specific orbital regime in which the system operates.
This new naming scheme is designed to provide clarity and consistency across the military's satellite fleet. According to the Space Force, compliance with this instruction is mandatory for all new programs, but existing satellites will not be required to update their names immediately.
The change comes after years of internal discussions about revamping the military's satellite naming system. John Shaw, a retired Space Force lieutenant general, was part of those discussions and expressed relief that the Space Force has finally adopted a new system.
Shaw noted that the current system is "horrible" and that having multiple names for the same satellite can be confusing. The new system aims to simplify this problem by providing a standardized way of naming satellites.
The first program to use the new designation guidelines is the Space Force's replacement program for the Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program (GSSAP) constellation, known as RG-XX. This program will include refuelable space-based satellite platforms that can overcome the limitations of existing GSSAP platforms.
According to Shaw, this new approach is significant because it marks a first step towards making operational platforms refuelable in space. The Space Force plans to purchase these new satellites from multiple manufacturers, which officials hope will lower costs and yield a larger fleet in orbit.
The use of popular names for the satellite designations has also been made possible, similar to those used by fighter jets like the F-16 (Fighting Falcon) and the F/A-18 (Hornet). The Space Force instruction states that "names must be brief" and that the chosen name should characterize the mission and operational capabilities of the weapon system.
The RG-XX satellites will have exceptionally good vision to detect other objects in space, earning them a nickname like the "Owl". This is just one example of how the new naming scheme might be used, with many more possibilities for names inspired by nature.
The first letter of the prefix will indicate the main purpose of the satellite. For example, "A" would represent attack systems, "B" would be for battle management systems, and so on. The second letter would denote the specific orbital regime in which the system operates.
This new naming scheme is designed to provide clarity and consistency across the military's satellite fleet. According to the Space Force, compliance with this instruction is mandatory for all new programs, but existing satellites will not be required to update their names immediately.
The change comes after years of internal discussions about revamping the military's satellite naming system. John Shaw, a retired Space Force lieutenant general, was part of those discussions and expressed relief that the Space Force has finally adopted a new system.
Shaw noted that the current system is "horrible" and that having multiple names for the same satellite can be confusing. The new system aims to simplify this problem by providing a standardized way of naming satellites.
The first program to use the new designation guidelines is the Space Force's replacement program for the Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Program (GSSAP) constellation, known as RG-XX. This program will include refuelable space-based satellite platforms that can overcome the limitations of existing GSSAP platforms.
According to Shaw, this new approach is significant because it marks a first step towards making operational platforms refuelable in space. The Space Force plans to purchase these new satellites from multiple manufacturers, which officials hope will lower costs and yield a larger fleet in orbit.
The use of popular names for the satellite designations has also been made possible, similar to those used by fighter jets like the F-16 (Fighting Falcon) and the F/A-18 (Hornet). The Space Force instruction states that "names must be brief" and that the chosen name should characterize the mission and operational capabilities of the weapon system.
The RG-XX satellites will have exceptionally good vision to detect other objects in space, earning them a nickname like the "Owl". This is just one example of how the new naming scheme might be used, with many more possibilities for names inspired by nature.
i'm so down for this change in satellite naming scheme!!! it's about time we ditched that complicated system 
and get some clarity on what our space force satellites are all about 
. having multiple names for the same sat is just, like, confusing and stuff 
. but now we can have a standardized way of doing things and make it easier to track them down 
. i love that they're using nature-inspired names too 
owl, huh? 
that's so cool! and refuelable space platforms? 
that's the future right there 
. gotta say, i'm hyped about this change 
i mean can you imagine having multiple names for one satellite like that? it's just confusing 
... I mean, who wants to deal with confusing satellite names? but what's up with the "Owl" nickname for the RG-XX satellites tho? space owls sound kinda cool though 
I'm thinking, why do they need all these complicated names? Can't we just use something simple and straightforward? Like, I get it, clarity is key, but can't we make it a bit more fun too? 
Let's see how this new system plays out, maybe it'll bring some personality to the space program. And hey, using nature-inspired names like the "Owl" is a great idea! 
. And don't even get me started on the whole 'inspired by nature' thing... I mean, sure, it's cute for fighter jets like the F-16, but satellites? Come on 
.
it's like, so much clearer now that they're ditching those complicated and confusing names 
"Attack systems" was just a weird name to me 
I mean, can you imagine trying to keep track of all those different satellites with their own unique names? 
it makes total sense to have a clear and consistent way of labeling their satellites, especially after all those years of confusion 
and making operational platforms refuelable in space is a huge deal - it could really change the game for space exploration 
. I mean, think about it, having a standardized way to name satellites is like, super important for clarity and all that jazz. It's crazy how they had to change the whole system 'cause it was too confusing 
. Plus, having a clear naming scheme will definitely make it easier to identify these satellites in space, which is like, super important for national security and all that 
.