Author Topic: Space Force  (Read 10655 times)

Offline Rummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • CA
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 20
Space Force
« on: 04/05/2017 07:36 AM »
Thoughts on Congressman Rogers' call to institute a new Space Force that is a schism of the Air Force?

http://spacenews.com/rogers-calls-for-separate-space-corps-within-the-air-force/

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
  • Liked: 343
  • Likes Given: 486
Re: Space Force
« Reply #1 on: 04/05/2017 12:32 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline Mnethercutt

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Air Power.
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Space Force
« Reply #2 on: 04/05/2017 02:06 PM »
*Immediately changes desired AFSC...*
Don't worry, things can only go up from here.  Even if it explodes, the force of the explosion will probably make it go up a little.

Offline DarkenedOne

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 940
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Space Force
« Reply #3 on: 04/05/2017 08:59 PM »
This will go nowhere. But one can always hope, right?

http://spacenews.com/u-s-air-force-creating-new-three-star-position-in-charge-of-space/

Airforce has been proposing to reorganize in response.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 157
Re: Space Force
« Reply #4 on: 04/05/2017 11:24 PM »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #5 on: 04/06/2017 12:29 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.

Wrong.   Thule, Shemya, Cavalier, Texas Towers, DEW line, etc

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
  • Liked: 343
  • Likes Given: 486
Re: Space Force
« Reply #6 on: 04/06/2017 01:24 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.

Wrong.   Thule, Shemya, Cavalier, Texas Towers, DEW line, etc

Those are nothing compared to submarine operations and were always within driving distance of assistance. 
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline Mnethercutt

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Air Power.
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Space Force
« Reply #7 on: 04/06/2017 01:33 PM »
What experience does the Navy have with space?  The satellites they use are operated by the Air Force, correct?  Even though they've had experience with isolation, that's on a sub in the water.  AF has been working with space since it's inception.
Don't worry, things can only go up from here.  Even if it explodes, the force of the explosion will probably make it go up a little.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10275
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 2047
  • Likes Given: 628
Re: Space Force
« Reply #8 on: 04/06/2017 02:44 PM »
Any new Space Force would not be the offshoot of any of the existing services. It would be entirely separate, drawing appropriate personnel from all the services to fill the needed skill sets to get started. Eventually it would be staffed by new people drawn from civilian life in the same way that the existing services are staffed today.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3548
  • Likes Given: 607
Re: Space Force
« Reply #9 on: 04/06/2017 04:03 PM »
Would a "Space Force" make better, more efficient use of space for defense purposes than the current set up?  Or, would it just add to inter-service rivalry and the resulting inefficiencies that sometimes develop?

By the way, to the suggestion that the Air Force has no experience with "long-term isolated platforms":  How about generations of GPS constellations?  How about early warning sats in GEO and beyond that have lasted more than two decades?  What about the Vela nuclear detection satellites that orbited one-third of the way to the Moon?  That was pretty isolated! 

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 04/06/2017 04:07 PM by edkyle99 »

Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8609
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5365
  • Likes Given: 3550
Re: Space Force
« Reply #10 on: 04/06/2017 04:07 PM »
The interservice rivalry on display here (where we are all well behaved ladies and gentlemen who have no particular axes to grind nor dollars on the line[1]) suggests that a new space force will get hated by all existing branches. :)

1 - right???
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline DarkenedOne

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 940
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Space Force
« Reply #11 on: 04/06/2017 04:57 PM »
Any new Space Force would not be the offshoot of any of the existing services. It would be entirely separate, drawing appropriate personnel from all the services to fill the needed skill sets to get started. Eventually it would be staffed by new people drawn from civilian life in the same way that the existing services are staffed today.
Of course it would be an offshoot the Air Force currently owns all of the assets that such a force would need, and provides the services that such a force would provide.  It owns the military space ports, it owns and operates the satellites, and it has established relationships with space contractors.  It handles space surveillance.


Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8609
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5365
  • Likes Given: 3550
Re: Space Force
« Reply #12 on: 04/06/2017 05:01 PM »
By the way, to the suggestion that the Air Force has no experience with "long-term isolated platforms":  How about generations of GPS constellations?  How about early warning sats in GEO and beyond that have lasted more than two decades?  What about the Vela nuclear detection satellites that orbited one-third of the way to the Moon?  That was pretty isolated! 

I think this thread segued into a weird discussion based upon the belief that somehow this would involve crews of human beings operating in space, and the Navy is better for that than the Air Force. That's not what is being proposed at all.

But reality rarely slows down discussions in the policy section anyways, so I don't know why we should be surprised.

At some point in the future (far distant or never, per some, only decades, per some others) this discussion will involve personnel. Maybe... property rights (or their analogue that is still compatible with OST) are a huge open issue.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #13 on: 04/10/2017 01:31 PM »

Those are nothing compared to submarine operations and were always within driving distance of assistance. 

Wrong, they are more isolated than a mobile submarine

Online eric z

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 244
  • Liked: 117
  • Likes Given: 315
Re: Space Force
« Reply #14 on: 04/10/2017 06:05 PM »
 The United States Space Marines has a nice ring to it!
 When I was a kid my best friend was an Army guy-millions of little soldiers, etc. I touted the Navy-my reasoning being they had not just ships ranging in size from PT Boats to Battleships, but also their own Air Force on the carriers, subs that could fire off missiles and of course their own Army in the form of the Marines, which also had an Air Force itself. As a NRL-brat, the Vanguard rocket was also big in our house.
  Seriously, I may probably be in the minority here but I think the government has every right to have a non-commercially-driven ability to put and operate things in space, including manned and unmanned military assets if needed. Territorial greed will indeed follow humanity into the heavens, and sooner or later some entity is going to get greedy... Hopefully we can put that time off for quite awhile, but who knows?
  Of course, this is what reading too much Heinlein at an early age can do to you. ;)
« Last Edit: 04/10/2017 07:09 PM by eric z »

Offline Political Hack Wannabe

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 731
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Space Force
« Reply #15 on: 04/10/2017 06:36 PM »
The United States Space Marines has a nice ring to it!
 When I was a kid my best friend was an Army guy-millions of little soldiers, etc. I touted the Navy-my reasoning being they had not just ships ranging in size from PT Boats to Battleships, but also their own Air Force on the carriers, subs that could fire missiles off, and of course their own Army in the form of the Marines.
  Seriously, I may probably be in the minority here but I think the government has every right to have a non-commercially-driven ability to put and operate things in space, including manned and unmanned military assets if needed. Territorial greed will indeed follow humanity into the heavens, and sooner or later some entity is going to get greedy... Hopefully we can put that time off for quite awhile, but who knows?
  Of course, this is what reading to much Heinlein at an early age can do to you. ;)

Without turning this into a full discussion here (since this is really about the idea of some form of space force), the real question isn't does the US need a non-commercial ability to put stuff into space, but for what reason.  There could be very good reasons for it (example - probably no commercial provider really wants to be the operator of a ASAT vehicle). 

Anyway, I'm done for now.
It's not democrats vs republicans, it's reality vs innumerate space cadet fantasy.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2578
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3130
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Space Force
« Reply #16 on: 04/10/2017 06:51 PM »
 Star Wars vs Star Trek? One has admirals and one has generals.

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 157
Re: Space Force
« Reply #17 on: 04/10/2017 10:20 PM »
You guys are missing the most important points.  Who will win the first army vs. Space Force football game?  Will the term space cadet still have a slightly negative connotation?  Why isn't the proposed space force being called Star Fleet?   Will the service academy be in San Francisco?  Will the Pentagon want to outfit the Force with X-Wing fighters?  who will win the contract? Boeing? Lockheed? Northrup? Or will the Direct Team come out of retirement to design the fighter? Will the Force be with this new branch? :) ;) :D

Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8609
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5365
  • Likes Given: 3550
Re: Space Force
« Reply #18 on: 04/10/2017 10:26 PM »
This isn't a party thread.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2578
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3130
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Space Force
« Reply #19 on: 04/10/2017 10:48 PM »
 How would SAC fit in? It's pretty heavily involved in space ops, which you can't just separate it out of it's air ops. Does Rep. Rogers Intend for the NRO to be under this command? There are reasons it exists as a civilian (sort of) operation.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #20 on: 04/11/2017 12:32 AM »
How would SAC fit in? It's pretty heavily involved in space ops, which you can't just separate it out of it's air ops. Does Rep. Rogers Intend for the NRO to be under this command? There are reasons it exists as a civilian (sort of) operation.

SAC hasn't existed 1992.  Its space ops were transferred to AF Space Command in the 80's. 
NRO would be still separate as it is now but would be supported by the new service vs the Air Force

Offline Rummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • CA
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Space Force
« Reply #21 on: 04/12/2017 07:04 AM »
I think Congressman Rogers' remarks are spot on... the Air Force still places its prestige positions with pilots and space is less glamorous. From a clarity of mission perspective, separating out space would be beneficial. They should do the same with Cyber.

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 855
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space Force
« Reply #22 on: 04/12/2017 01:28 PM »
Thoughts on Congressman Rogers' call to institute a new Space Force that is a schism of the Air Force?

http://spacenews.com/rogers-calls-for-separate-space-corps-within-the-air-force/
Quote from: Rogers
Rogers continued. “How can we have the world’s best national security space program if we don’t grow and retain the best men and women to lead it, and give them the budget and authority they need?”  "The Air Force is not structured to educate and elevate a future generation of space leadership"

Rogers said the Armed Services committee needs to begin debating the issue, but he does not expect radical change immediately.  “That said, I believe reform is needed. We must start now…This is a system that moves too slowly, and we don’t have the time to wait..”
At first glance, the reorganization will not create new leaders of the future.

Issues:
1) talent and how they gain real experience to lead current and new capabilities
2) from the just say no party, using the Constitution (law today is based on 'precedence') when if fits their convenience, the system moves too slow.

The Space Force does not solve talent and experience.  *If talent and experience* is given an objective and funding, they often find solutions seeking a variety of sources regardless of their organization.  WWI, WWII, Apollo are examples on the grand scale.  either is not sufficient, it requires a will to cooperate--difficult to do in these days of 'competition' and 'isolationalism'

Any new Space Force would not be the offshoot of any of the existing services. It would be entirely separate, drawing appropriate personnel from all the services to fill the needed skill sets to get started. Eventually it would be staffed by new people drawn from civilian life in the same way that the existing services are staffed today.
This describes the process, but no rationale why it would work, especially if funding for the skill set disappeared or shifted a decade or so ago.  Do they pick up talent that was let go, for example.

The Allies of World War II cooperated extensively in the development and manufacture of new and existing technologies to support military operations and intelligence gathering during the Second World War--no separate departments. 

Folks are starting to understand that Citizen's United and gerrymandered districts have created artificial walls to the ways of conducting real business of the past regardless of how the USG is organized.  Outsourcing has played a role too in talent and experience.

Offline Suzy

  • Reality disappoints me
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 594
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Portal
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 29

Offline Mnethercutt

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Air Power.
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 13
Don't worry, things can only go up from here.  Even if it explodes, the force of the explosion will probably make it go up a little.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #25 on: 07/02/2017 05:45 PM »
How would SAC fit in? It's pretty heavily involved in space ops, which you can't just separate it out of it's air ops. Does Rep. Rogers Intend for the NRO to be under this command? There are reasons it exists as a civilian (sort of) operation.

The CCAFB and Vandenberg would be logical assets, as would be all orbital tracking systems, unless these go to FAA as some have proposed.  All launch procurement should be in bailiwick, too. 

Basically everything USG-wise we discuss in these forums that is not NASA/civilian side...
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2168
  • Likes Given: 2675
Re: Space Force
« Reply #26 on: 07/02/2017 05:54 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.

Wrong.   Thule, Shemya, Cavalier, Texas Towers, DEW line, etc

I don't think you want to use the Texas Towers as an example of how the Air Force does successfully runs isolated platforms. 2 out of 3 lost to weather conditions, and the program only lasted 5 years.

An Ohio-class submarine can have a service life up to 40 years, and just about everything the Navy does relates to operating and supporting isolated platforms.

The USAF could learn a lot from the USN if they are assigned responsibilities for human activity in space, that's for sure. But the USAF has a lot of relevant experience operating satellites and remote sensors in space, so if humans are not involved then the USAF clearly has the experience required.

Overall I hope we aren't planning on sending military personnel into space...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2185
  • Florida
  • Liked: 386
  • Likes Given: 911
Re: Space Force
« Reply #27 on: 07/02/2017 06:02 PM »
Attended space missions: STS-114, STS-124, STS-128, STS-135, Atlas V "Curiosity", Delta IV Heavy NROL-15, Atlas V MUOS-2, Delta IV Heavy NROL-37, SpaceX CRS-9, SpaceX JCSAT-16, Atlas V GOES-R, SpaceX SES-11.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #28 on: 07/02/2017 10:10 PM »
How would SAC fit in? It's pretty heavily involved in space ops, which you can't just separate it out of it's air ops. Does Rep. Rogers Intend for the NRO to be under this command? There are reasons it exists as a civilian (sort of) operation.

The CCAFB and Vandenberg would be logical assets, as would be all orbital tracking systems, unless these go to FAA as some have proposed.  All launch procurement should be in bailiwick, too. 

Basically everything USG-wise we discuss in these forums that is not NASA/civilian side...

it is not just that, It is more than just those two bases.  It is all of Air Force Space Command.  There are other bases like Schiever, Buckley, Thule, etc.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #29 on: 07/02/2017 10:12 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.

Wrong.   Thule, Shemya, Cavalier, Texas Towers, DEW line, etc

I don't think you want to use the Texas Towers as an example of how the Air Force does successfully runs isolated platforms. 2 out of 3 lost to weather conditions, and the program only lasted 5 years.

An Ohio-class submarine can have a service life up to 40 years, and just about everything the Navy does relates to operating and supporting isolated platforms.


texas towers are just a minor point in my list, the others are more relevant.  And the service life of an Ohio-class submarine is meaningless, some of those bases are older and more isolated.

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • CA
  • Liked: 738
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Space Force
« Reply #30 on: 07/06/2017 08:27 PM »
Pence says US, under Trump, will dominate the heavens, just as it does the earth.

http://www.newsweek.com/america-dominate-heavens-donald-trump-mike-pence-633012

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2026
  • CA
  • Liked: 738
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Space Force
« Reply #31 on: 07/07/2017 11:50 PM »
« Last Edit: 07/07/2017 11:50 PM by TomH »

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 555
Re: Space Force
« Reply #32 on: 07/08/2017 09:28 AM »
I find this all a bit unnerving, I really hope that the new "Space Force" doesn't have a goal of staffing space expressly for military purposes.

Nevertheless, if there is to be a US Space Force, what will its Special Operations Forces be called?
Paul

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2185
  • Florida
  • Liked: 386
  • Likes Given: 911
Re: Space Force
« Reply #33 on: 07/08/2017 01:26 PM »
Attended space missions: STS-114, STS-124, STS-128, STS-135, Atlas V "Curiosity", Delta IV Heavy NROL-15, Atlas V MUOS-2, Delta IV Heavy NROL-37, SpaceX CRS-9, SpaceX JCSAT-16, Atlas V GOES-R, SpaceX SES-11.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10275
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 2047
  • Likes Given: 628
Re: Space Force
« Reply #34 on: 07/10/2017 07:49 PM »
Nevertheless, if there is to be a US Space Force, what will its Special Operations Forces be called?

Space Cadets? :)
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #35 on: 07/12/2017 09:48 AM »
Found article -- long but interesting:

Quote
Space Wars: Why the Air Force and Navy Will Fight For Control of the Space Corps

Quote
Matt Hipple should be commended for making a very astute observation about the future of military space operations. Visions of future sustained operations in space do indeed resemble classic naval operations at sea. Virtually every single work of science fiction in film or print describe their space military as a space navy. NASA and commercial plans for lunar industrial parks or Martian colonies cannot help but draw comparisons to Europe’s maritime expansion—and the navies that allowed those expansions to take place.

I agree with Hipple’s suggestion that mature space operations are “clearly naval operations.” I also sympathize with his view that only a naval culture is compatible with the United States’ long-term space needs.

Quote
...almost all advanced space thinking—overwhelmingly the product of airmen—have drawn heavily from naval history, theory and tradition.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/space-wars-why-the-air-force-navy-will-fight-control-the-21504

But culture does not equal ownership.  Anyway, Naval and Marine aviators made up a significant portion of the original test-pilot astronaut corps, so selection from all of the services isn't unprecedented.  Will be interesting to see who will be the first CSO (Chief of Space Operations).
« Last Edit: 07/12/2017 09:55 AM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4242
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2840
  • Likes Given: 948
Re: Space Force
« Reply #36 on: 07/14/2017 04:41 PM »
Quote
Opinion: America Needs a Space Corps
by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) and Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) — July 14, 2017

http://spacenews.com/america-needs-a-space-corps

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #37 on: 09/13/2017 06:58 PM »
Quote
Space Corps proposal will fizzle, Wilson says
Quote
The current Congressional proposal to create a special Space Corps to lead U.S security programs for that realm likely will amount to nothing, suggested Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson.

http://spacenews.com/space-corps-proposal-will-fizzle-wilson-says/?utm_content=buffer7e1ef&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Note: First comment below article seems more informed (rational) than people quoted in article.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2017 07:01 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline gosnold

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 867
Re: Space Force
« Reply #38 on: 09/13/2017 08:57 PM »

Note: First comment below article seems more informed (rational) than people quoted in article.

I'm not sure I would consider a 50 000-personnel Space Corps a small and nimble organization. Especially since a lot of the NSS work is done by contractors, I don't see where that number is coming from.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1970
  • US
  • Liked: 1379
  • Likes Given: 987
Re: Space Force
« Reply #39 on: 11/08/2017 07:35 PM »
The conference committee did not require the establishment of the Space Corps.  (The summaries from the House and Senate committees are very vague on the EELV development funding, hopefully we'll get to see text from the actual bill eventually.)

« Last Edit: 11/08/2017 07:36 PM by gongora »


Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10937
  • Liked: 2423
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space Force
« Reply #41 on: 11/09/2017 01:15 PM »
The conference committee did not require the establishment of the Space Corps.

This really wasn't going to happen. If you're going to make a major change to the military's organization, you need to have a lot of discussions of that. I think they held one or two hearings. It certainly did not go into things like the horrible details of such a change like personnel and promotion policy, etc. This always struck me as a pet project of a congressman rather than something with widespread support in Congress. I was surprised that it got as far as it did, but sometimes that is deceptive and the leadership always knows that they're going to kill it in the conference committee.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10937
  • Liked: 2423
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space Force
« Reply #42 on: 11/09/2017 01:22 PM »
That said...

http://spacenews.com/space-reforms-coming-2018-ndaa-drops-legislative-bombshells-on-u-s-air-force/?utm_content=buffer4f3a3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

SNIP

The report specifically calls for “streamlining Air Force acquisition authorities, eliminating burdensome red tape, empowering a single accountable organization for space forces within the Air Force, placing renewed emphasis on the organization and management of space in the DoD, and holding the deputy secretary of defense responsible for the full and faithful execution of these improvements.”
« Last Edit: 11/09/2017 01:56 PM by Chris Bergin »

Offline tdperk

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 225
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Space Force
« Reply #43 on: 11/10/2017 02:05 PM »
If anything a Space Force should be an offshoot of the Navy.  The Air Force has no experience running long term isolated platforms.

Wrong.   Thule, Shemya, Cavalier, Texas Towers, DEW line, etc

Those are nothing compared to submarine operations and were always within driving distance of assistance.

No, they weren't always within driving distance of assistance.  They had to in many cases plan to be out of physical access for weeks.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #44 on: 11/10/2017 03:19 PM »
That said...

http://spacenews.com/space-reforms-coming-2018-ndaa-drops-legislative-bombshells-on-u-s-air-force/?utm_content=buffer4f3a3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

SNIP

The report specifically calls for “streamlining Air Force acquisition authorities, eliminating burdensome red tape, empowering a single accountable organization for space forces within the Air Force, placing renewed emphasis on the organization and management of space in the DoD, and holding the deputy secretary of defense responsible for the full and faithful execution of these improvements.”

The fact that space was abruptly taken out of Secretary of Air Force hands is not insignificant (possibly as large of step as possible this year).

Quote
Senior leaders had fought back the House space corps provision that would have effectively taken away from the Air Force its ownership of military space.

It’s a hollow victory, however. The 2018 NDAA is big on Pentagon reforms, across the board, but it hammered the Air Force especially hard.

Quote
The Air Force Space Command would be modeled after the Office of Naval Reactors, stressing deep technical expertise. The bill gives the commander of Air Force Space Command a six-year term.

The NDAA delivers a direct blow to Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson by stripping her of the role of top space adviser to the secretary of defense and diminishing her power to set budget priorities.
« Last Edit: 11/10/2017 03:19 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #45 on: 11/10/2017 04:46 PM »
It is insignificant because it never was significant

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #46 on: 11/10/2017 08:28 PM »
It is insignificant because it never was significant

You are entitled to an opinion.  Article completely disagrees.

Quote
He called the NDAA a “clear rebuke of the current space organization within DoD and a lack of confidence in the Air Force leadership.”

On the removal of space oversight and budget functions from the secretary of the Air Force, Harrison tweeted: “Ouch.”
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #47 on: 11/15/2017 06:57 PM »
It is insignificant because it never was significant

You are entitled to an opinion.  Article completely disagrees.

Quote
He called the NDAA a “clear rebuke of the current space organization within DoD and a lack of confidence in the Air Force leadership.”

On the removal of space oversight and budget functions from the secretary of the Air Force, Harrison tweeted: “Ouch.”

Not an opinion.  Again, you are misinformed and don't understand the realities of the business.
The secretary of the Air Force was never really in charge. 
« Last Edit: 11/15/2017 06:58 PM by Jim »

Offline Rummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • CA
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Space Force
« Reply #48 on: 11/16/2017 08:43 PM »
It is insignificant because it never was significant

You are entitled to an opinion.  Article completely disagrees.

Quote
He called the NDAA a “clear rebuke of the current space organization within DoD and a lack of confidence in the Air Force leadership.”

On the removal of space oversight and budget functions from the secretary of the Air Force, Harrison tweeted: “Ouch.”

Not an opinion.  Again, you are misinformed and don't understand the realities of the business.
The secretary of the Air Force was never really in charge.

Jim is both right and wrong. SecAF wasn’t in charge, but it was a clear rebuke nonetheless.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Liked: 2876
  • Likes Given: 4037
Re: Space Force
« Reply #49 on: 11/17/2017 05:44 PM »
It is insignificant because it never was significant

You are entitled to an opinion.  Article completely disagrees.

Quote
He called the NDAA a “clear rebuke of the current space organization within DoD and a lack of confidence in the Air Force leadership.”

On the removal of space oversight and budget functions from the secretary of the Air Force, Harrison tweeted: “Ouch.”

Not an opinion.  Again, you are misinformed and don't understand the realities of the business.
The secretary of the Air Force was never really in charge.

I think you don't really understand the US Constitution.  He/she is in charge -- only a militaristic world view makes you believe otherwise.  In your view, are the President (commander-in-chief) and Secretary of Defense also not really in charge?

When 'the realities of the business' forget who you work for, it can be called insubordination (or treason).
« Last Edit: 11/17/2017 05:45 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31278
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9562
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Space Force
« Reply #50 on: 11/17/2017 06:26 PM »

I think you don't really understand the US Constitution.  He/she is in charge -- only a militaristic world view makes you believe otherwise.  In your view, are the President (commander-in-chief) and Secretary of Defense also not really in charge?

When 'the realities of the business' forget who you work for, it can be called insubordination (or treason).

Again, another case where I know you don't really understand the US space program.    The topic was milspace and the fact that secretary of the Air Force was never really in charge of it.  It simply has to with assignments of tasks within the DOD and the fact the seat of power in Milspace was not with the SACAF.  And also, I never said that uniformed officer was in charge of Milspace, so your rant about the the US Constitution or a militaristic world view has no place in this conversation.

Step back and look at the world without a Spacex or anti Old Space filter and you will see how things work.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2017 06:34 PM by Jim »

Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8609
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5365
  • Likes Given: 3550
Re: Space Force
« Reply #51 on: Today at 01:42 AM »
This seems confusing. Does the person who is in charge report up to the secretary of the Air Force? or to some other department? What is the line of control that leads to the presidency, or to Congress ?  Else I really am confused at what you mean.

I get that "in charge" might not apply in terms of knowledge of day to day operational details... but where does the buck stop?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Tags: