US awards $244M to Northrop for most advanced global missile tracking stations yet
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways
The US Space Force (USSF) has awarded Northrop Grumman a $244 million contract to develop advanced relay ground stations in the United States and the United Kingdom.
These installations will support the Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared (Next-Gen OPIR) program, a key element of America's evolving missile warning and tracking infrastructure.
The new stations are expected to improve global coverage and resilience for satellites designed to detect missile launches and potential threats, while ensuring compatibility with legacy systems and newer constellations.
Scalable ground systems for evolving threats
Northrop Grumman will deploy a flexible, modular ground station design that builds upon the company's experience with the Relay Ground Station-Asia (RGS-A), currently under development in Guam.
The new stations will provide adaptable infrastructure to accommodate changes in satellite bandwidth and operational demands.
'We are developing advanced relay ground stations that are scalable and upgradeable, and prioritize high performance, reliability and mission flexibility for the Next-Gen OPIR program,' said Calvin Pennamon, director of operational exploitation systems at Northrop Grumman, in an official press release.
'Our ground systems will enhance communications between Space System Command's legacy and future Space Based Infrared Systems, providing access to multiple constellations enabling warfighters to maintain a decisive edge against enemy threats.'
The Naval Information Warfare Center Pacific, acting on behalf of the Space Systems Command, selected Northrop Grumman for the multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract.
Strengthening the FORGE modernization framework
The ground stations are a critical part of the USSF's Future Operationally Resilient Ground Evolution (FORGE) system—an expansive effort to upgrade and integrate US missile warning capabilities.
FORGE aims to establish a government-owned ground network that links current and future missile detection satellites through modernized command and control operations.
Complementing Northrop's contract, the Space Systems Command recently announced a $259 million award to SciTec, a New Jersey-based software developer, to further FORGE's integrated enterprise buildout.
The company will develop a ground system supporting FORGE and non-FORGE assets, enhancing continuity across legacy SBIRS and Next-Gen OPIR data pipelines.
SciTec's prior involvement includes a $272 million contract in 2022 for data processing tools, $45.8 million in 2023 for SBIRS sensor processing applications, and $5 million in 2021 for prototype development.
Much of SciTec's specialized software is engineered at its Boulder, Colorado, facility.
S2E2 and ATLAS systems deepen space-based defenses
As part of the broader modernization push, the USSF also activated the Survivable Endurable Evolution (S2E2) ground system earlier this month.
Designed to replace the aging 1960s-era Mobile Ground System, S2E2 processes infrared data and integrates a nuclear detonation detection system.
Additionally, L3Harris secured a contract in March to upgrade the Advanced Tracking and Launch Analysis System (ATLAS), which monitors anti-satellite activity and threats in orbit.
Global coverage through distributed relay networks
The new US- and UK-based stations complement the ongoing construction of RGS-A in Guam, reinforcing the USSF's goal of achieving global, persistent missile warning capabilities.
These relay hubs allow early-warning signals from infrared satellites to reach command networks and deployed forces more reliably.
Next-Gen OPIR remains a cornerstone of the US defense architecture, offering critical situational awareness and real-time missile launch detection to protect national and allied interests.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
31 minutes ago
- Forbes
What Leaders Need To Know About Open-Source Vs Proprietary Models
HONG KONG, CHINA - JANUARY 28: In this photo illustration, the DeepSeek logo is seen next to the ... More Chat GPT logo on a phone on January 28, 2025 in Hong Kong, China. (Photo illustration by) As business leaders adopt generative artificial intelligence they must decide whether to build their AI capabilities using open-source models or rely on proprietary, closed-source alternatives. Understanding the implications of this choice can be the difference between a sustainable competitive advantage and a strategic misstep. But what exactly is 'open source?' According to the Open-Source Initiative (OSI), for software to be considered open, it must offer users the freedom to use the software for any purpose, to study how it works, to modify it, and to share both the original and modified versions. When applied to AI, true open-source AI include model architecture (the blueprint for how the AI processes data); training data recipes (documenting how data was selected and used to train the model); and weights (the numerical values representing the AI's learned knowledge). But very few AI models are truly open according to the OSI definition. The Gradient of Openness While fully open-source models provide complete transparency, few model developers want to publish their full source code, and even fewer are transparent about the data their models were trained on. Many so-called foundation models – the largest generative AI models – were trained on data whose copyrights may be fuzzy at best and blatantly infringed at worst. More common are open-weight systems that offer public access to model weights without disclosing the full training data or architecture. This allows faster deployment and experimentation with fewer resources, though it limits the ability to diagnose biases or improve accuracy without full transparency. Some companies adopt a staggered openness model. They may release previous versions of proprietary models once a successor is launched, providing limited insight into the architecture while restricting access to the most current innovations. Even here, training data is rarely disclosed. Navigating the Gradient Deciding whether an enterprise wants to leverage a proprietary model like GPT-4o, or some level of openness, such as LlaMA 3.3, depends, of course on the use case. Many organizations end up using a mix of open and closed models. The main decision is where the model will reside. For regulated industries like banking, where data can't leave the premises due to regulatory constraints, open-source models are the only viable option. Because proprietary model owners need to protect their intellectual property, those models can only be accessed remotely via an application programming interface (API). Open-source models can be deployed on a company's premises or in the cloud. Both open and closed models can be fine-tuned to specific use cases, but open-source models offer more flexibility and allow deeper customization. Again, the data used in that fine tuning need not leave the company's hardware. Fine-tuning proprietary models requires less expertise but must be done in the cloud. Still, cost and latency can tip the scales in favor of proprietary AI. Proprietary providers often operate large-scale infrastructure designed to ensure fast response times and predictable performance, especially in consumer applications like chatbots or virtual assistants handling millions of queries per day. Open-source AI, although cheaper to operate in the long run, requires significant investment in infrastructure and expertise to achieve similar latency and uptime. Navigating the regulatory landscape is another concern for companies deploying AI. The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act sets stricter transparency and accountability standards for proprietary AI models. Yet proprietary providers often assume greater compliance responsibility, reducing the regulatory burden on businesses. In the U.S., the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is considering guidelines that assess AI openness through a risk-based lens. Of course, a major consideration is security. By using a proprietary model, companies place their trust in the provider that the model is secure. But that opacity can hide vulnerabilities, leaving companies reliant on vendors to disclose and address threats. Open-source models, on the other hand, benefit from global security research communities that rapidly detect and patch vulnerabilities. Still, businesses often prefer the convenience of API access to proprietary models for rapid prototyping. And for consumer facing applications, proprietary models are fast and easy to integrate into products. Will Open-Source Overtake Proprietary Models? But an even larger issue looms over the future of closed and open source. As open models increase in performance, closing the gap with or even exceeding the performance of the best proprietary models, the financial viability of closed models and the companies that provide them remains uncertain. China is pursuing an aggressive open-source strategy, cutting the cost of its models to steal market share of companies like OpenAI. By openly releasing their research, code, and models, China hopes to make advanced AI accessible at a fraction of the cost of Western proprietary solutions. Key Takeaways for Business Leaders Remember Betamax, the proprietary video cassette recording format developed and tightly controlled by Japan's Sony in the 1970s. It lost to the more open VHS format for the same reason many people think closed AI models will eventually be eclipsed by open-source AI, Leaders must define what they want to achieve with AI, whether it be efficiency, innovation, risk reduction, or compliance, and let these goals guide their model selection and deployment strategy. For example, they can leverage open-source communities for innovation and rapid prototyping, while relying on proprietary solutions for mission-critical, high-security applications. Collaborating with external partners and leveraging both open-source and proprietary models as appropriate will position organizations to innovate responsibly and remain competitive. The key is for leaders to understand their unique operational needs, data sensitivities, and technical capabilities—then choose accordingly. But choosing between open-source and proprietary AI models is less a binary decision than it is finding the optimal model on a continuum from closed to fully open.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Louis Vuitton Korea's data breach exposes customer information
Luxury brand Louis Vuitton Korea has confirmed a data breach that compromised some customer data, including contact information. The South Korean unit has announced that an unauthorised third party accessed its system, leading to the leak. The breach, however, did not involve customers' sensitive financial information, such as passwords, credit card or bank account details. The compromised personal information may vary for each customer. It potential includes names, genders, contact details and other customer-provided information. Louis Vuitton Korea has taken steps to contain the breach and enhance system security. The company became aware of the breach on 2 July 2025 and immediately notified government authorities. Louis Vuitton Korea said in a statement: 'Considering the characteristics of leaked information, we recommend that you pay special attention to the unexpected communication or other suspicious contact. Also, please never share your Louis Vuitton password with others. "The accident is currently blocked, and we are further strengthening system security and working with the best experts in cyber security." The South Korean units of Christian Dior Couture and Tiffany, also part of the world's largest luxury group, have been under investigation by the country's Personal Information Protection Commission since May 2025 for reported customer data leaks earlier. "Louis Vuitton Korea's data breach exposes customer information" was originally created and published by Retail Insight Network, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Sign in to access your portfolio
Bloomberg
42 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
China's Car Wars Seen Lasting for Years Despite Leaders' Angst
I'm Chris Anstey, an economics editor in Boston. Today we're looking at China's concerns about excessive competition. Send us feedback and tips to ecodaily@ And if you aren't yet signed up to receive this newsletter, you can do so here. You know something's important in China when the People's Daily, the Communist Party's official newspaper, carries it on the front page. All the more so when Qiushi, the party's theoretical journal, chimes in.
