Critical Lessons For The Space Force

After years of hesitation, the national security space community is finally boarding the commercial space train, one that many of us have been pushing for since the early 2000’s. The momentum is exciting, but long overdue. In the past decade, the United States has seen a transformation in space capabilities, driven not by government labs or legacy contractors, but by private capital and market-driven innovation. And the results speak for themselves: faster timelines, lower costs, and more resilient architectures—all achieved without compromising mission success.

As the members of the SmallSat Alliance celebrate its eighth anniversary, we are proud of the role the commercial space community has played in leading and advocating for this shift. By representing the companies and investors who helped pioneer this new era, we’ve seen firsthand what works, and what doesn’t. As the U.S. Space Force finalizes key strategic decisions, these are the top three hard-earned lessons from the last decade.

Needs Must Lead, Not Science Fiction nor Political Vanity

Mission requirements must always lead the resource planning process, whether they are drafted in response to today’s concerns regarding China’s clear and present threats to on orbit assets or tomorrow’s concerns about hypersonic weapons targeting America’s capital cities. Traditional defense firms were purpose built to align with national priorities; with some even created by the government itself. Today, however, some successful commercial space companies have goals other than defense interests, which could compete with limited resources within the company and must be taken into account when considering long term partnerships.

The purpose of the Department of Defense is to deter conflict until it arises and then to win the war quickly once Congress declares it. Dreams of millions of people someday terraforming and mining the Moon or other planets is inspiring and will one day take humanity into exciting new directions but will not help the Navy lead and win a protracted war in the Pacific. The most successful national security space programs of the future must be built around rapidly generated, clearly defined requirements that align with what the commercial sector can already deliver as a service or can quickly assemble, test and deliver from off the shelf components. If we allow outdated processes or let over-classification drive acquisitions, we’ll miss the rapid advantage that the commercial sector brings.

Acquisitions Must Also Promote Future Competition

“Best value” has been the singular focus of space acquisitions for 60 years. Today, ensuring future competition while rewarding best value is equally critical because the long-term health of the commercial space industrial base depends on competition. Some of today’s dominant players seek “stickiness,” proprietary systems that lock out competitors and ensure continued business. While investors may welcome this, national security leaders must resist this trend. Ensuring at least two, but ideally three or more suppliers exist to deliver and support mission-critical systems and subsystems is vital to encourage profit reinvestment, innovation, and industrial resilience.

Most sensitive missions can also be handled by commercial vendors. In fact, some of them already are, just not through fully competitive channels. By adopting a commercial-dominant acquisitions model and minimizing unnecessary classification that limits open competition, the Space Force can safeguard truly sensitive capabilities without sacrificing speed, agility, or cost-effectiveness in both the near and long term.

Financial Health Is Now a Matter of National Security

In previous eras, where defense contractors were often operated like extensions of the civil service with little risk and guaranteed returns, financial stability was rarely a concern. Today, it must be a core consideration. A company’s balance sheet and income statements are strong indicators of its ability to deliver. Factors such as profitability, solvency, and asset quality should be considered as formal parts of acquisition evaluations. Financial health assessments have never been a real consideration for awarding government contracts, they must become moving forward. Just as a creditor assesses risk by reviewing an applicant’s credit score, U.S. space dominance cannot rely on companies operating on the financial edge.

As the Space Force sets the direction for the decade ahead, we urge its leaders to take these lessons to heart. They come from nearly 10 years of advocacy in Washington, decades of business and operational experience, and the real-world deployment of nearly every segment of space capability on orbit today. Future Guardians will depend on the decisions made now, not just to defend American space assets, but to win future wars that will depend on them.

Let’s make sure we get this right.