Space Industry Cheat Sheet: Golden Dome Architecture Takes Shape as Industry Awaits Details
FY2026 Budget Priorities Signal Major Shifts
The fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act reveals how our military services are realigning to support Golden Dome. Space Force, Air Force, and the Missile Defense Agency are restructuring budgets and accelerating programs to meet Guetlein’s aggressive timeline.
Space Force is prioritizing the rapid deployment of satellite constellations and enhanced space domain awareness. They’re requesting major funding increases for proliferated LEO satellites and space-based sensors. These assets will form Golden Dome’s detection backbone. The investments directly support Guetlein’s mandate to connect space assets with ground-based defense systems in his 60-day blueprint.
Air Force budget priorities center on advanced command-and-control networks. They need systems capable of processing massive data flows from multiple sensors simultaneously. This focus on data fusion and rapid decision-making addresses Golden Dome’s core requirement: tracking and engaging threats across all domains. Air Force leaders have already identified existing programs they can accelerate and integrate into the architecture.
MDA shows the clearest shift. The agency is pivoting toward developing space-based interceptors and boost-phase defense capabilities. They’re restructuring programs to align with Golden Dome requirements, including enhanced discrimination capabilities and improved battle management. This realignment shows how we’re redirecting existing missile defense investments into Guetlein’s unified architecture.
SpaceX Dominance Creates Political Tensions
Here’s where things get interesting. Administration officials are reaching out to Amazon, Rocket Lab, and Stoke Space regarding participation in Golden Dome. Why? They want to reduce reliance on SpaceX following the reported falling-out between Trump and Musk. Yet SpaceX remains the forecasted predominant solution provider for MilSTAR, given its unmatched launch and satellite capabilities.
Musk fired back on social media, reminding everyone that federal acquisition regulations require selecting the best companies at the best prices. “Anything else would be breaking the law,” he stated. This exchange exposes the tension between political preferences and procurement requirements.
The reality is stark. While the administration wants to diversify Golden Dome’s industrial base, SpaceX’s dominance in launch services and satellite manufacturing creates practical limits. You can’t simply wish away their capabilities when national security is at stake.
Data Integration Emerges as Primary Challenge
Industry experts keep hammering this point: data integration, not hardware, represents Golden Dome’s biggest technical hurdle. Dan Knight from Arcfield put it perfectly: “We have the information, or we have the data that we need. It’s just not in the right places.”
Consider the scale. The Golden Dome must process information from ground radars, space sensors, maritime systems, and allied networks in real time. We’re not just collecting data. We need to process it fast enough to enable split-second defensive actions against hypersonic threats.
Companies are scrambling to position their data processing capabilities. The open architecture approach creates opportunities for specialized firms alongside traditional defense contractors. But here’s the catch: success requires unprecedented cooperation between companies that normally compete for contracts.
Congressional Support Remains Divided
Golden Dome faced its first major congressional test this week. The House Armed Services Committee’s strategic forces subcommittee revealed a sharp divide. Chairman Scott DesJarlais (R‑Tenn.) called the Golden Dome program “essential for defending against missile attacks” during a House Armed Services Committee’s strategic forces subcommittee debate this past week.
This statement came during what the references describe as “the program’s first significant congressional examination,” where there was a clear partisan divide. While DesJarlais supported the program as essential, ranking member Rep. Seth Moulton (D‑Mass.) took the opposite view, labeling the Golden Dome a “fantasy” that could trigger an arms race.
National Security Adviser Mike Waltz defended the initiative at The Hill & Valley Forum on Wednesday. He drew parallels to Trump’s creation of the Space Force during his first term. That effort, initially ridiculed, now looks prescient given current space threats.
This political divide matters. Golden Dome received $24.4 billion through budget reconciliation, but future funding needs broader support. The 60-day architecture deadline could help build consensus by providing concrete details about scope and approach.
Commercial Space Sector Momentum Builds
The commercial sector showed strong momentum beyond the Golden Dome. True Anomaly raised $260 million in Series C funding and plans to launch four missions over 18 months. They’re expanding from 170 to 250 employees while developing spacecraft for proximity operations.
Hubble Network became Muon Space’s anchor customer for their new MuSat XL platform. They ordered two 500-kilogram satellites for a 2027 launch. This represents Muon’s expansion into larger platforms to accommodate more powerful payloads.
AST SpaceMobile filed with the FCC for approval to provide direct-to-smartphone connectivity for first responders. They’ll use Band 14 frequencies through AT&T’s FirstNet program, showing the convergence of commercial satellite communications and public safety needs.
International Dynamics Shift
NASA’s approach at this week’s International Astronautical Congress raised eyebrows. Acting administrator Sean Duffy promoted “American dominance in space” while emphasizing partnerships with like-minded nations.
Other agencies are asserting independence. Australia announced both a U.S. cooperation framework and plans to negotiate with ESA. Nations are diversifying space partnerships rather than relying solely on NASA.
Australian company HEO plans expansion from LEO imaging to GEO observation and near-Earth asteroid imaging. These capabilities could support space domain awareness for programs like Golden Dome.
Cost Projections Spark Debate
Todd Harrison from AEI detailed his projection that the Golden Dome could cost $3.6 trillion over two decades. His “Defense Future Simulator” generated this estimate based on space-based interceptor requirements.
The staggering figure assumes the deployment of up to 250,000 interceptors for continuous global coverage against hypersonic threats. This far exceeds government estimates and highlights potential budget implications.
Industry observers note these projections might not account for technological advances or alternative architectures that achieve similar capabilities with fewer assets.
The Road Ahead
As Guetlein’s 60-day countdown begins, the industry faces an opportunity amid uncertainty. Companies must position for contracts without detailed requirements. The architecture announcement will trigger intense competition as firms align capabilities with program needs.
Critical questions remain. What’s the balance between space and ground elements? Will we use directed energy or kinetic interceptors? How will Golden Dome integrate with existing missile defense assets? These answers will shape industry investment for years to come.
The coming weeks will test whether the administration can build broader congressional support. Critics call it unrealistic. Supporters see it as essential for national security. Political sustainability may depend on demonstrating achievable near-term milestones while pursuing long-term goals.
For our industry, Golden Dome represents the largest opportunity in decades. It’s also a test of whether we can deliver on ambitious timelines and technical requirements. Success demands unprecedented cooperation, rapid scale-up of manufacturing, and complex data integration solutions. As Gen. Guetlein prepares the architecture reveal, the industry stands ready to transform vision into reality.
Pax ab Space
Clinton Austin is a Senior Business Development Director for GDIT who covers the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Space Force, and the Missile Defense Agency.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of General Dynamics Information Technology.
December 15, 2025
