Author Topic: Space Force  (Read 14187 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31362
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9638
  • 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

Online Rummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • 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: 857
  • 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: 29
  • 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: 4971
  • Liked: 2966
  • Likes Given: 4196
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

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2210
  • Likes Given: 2740
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: 2186
  • 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: 31362
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9638
  • 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: 31362
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9638
  • 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: 2031
  • CA
  • Liked: 745
  • Likes Given: 225
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: 2031
  • CA
  • Liked: 745
  • Likes Given: 225
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: 1093
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 566
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: 2186
  • 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: 10285
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 640
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: 4971
  • Liked: 2966
  • Likes Given: 4196
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

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4508
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 3053
  • Likes Given: 1020
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: 4971
  • Liked: 2966
  • Likes Given: 4196
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: 414
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 895
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
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2125
  • US
  • Liked: 1478
  • Likes Given: 1052
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 »

Tags: