Space Force

[hobbsyoyo]

The Space Force bill has been signed, it's a real thing now. Not sure where they are going to put the headquarters. Also, the Army and Navy are retaining their space units which I find a bit disheartening. Hopefully things work out. Here's a bullet list from Space News on what happens now:

What happens effective Dec. 20, 2019:

• The Air Force re-names the Air Force Space Command the U.S. Space Force. AFSPC is disestablished.
• As many as 16,000 military and civilian personnel from Air Force Space Command will be assigned to the U.S. Space Force. Congress did not authorize the hiring of new people.
• Air Force Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, the commander of U.S. Space Command, will serve as the first Chief of Space Operations (the chief of staff of the Space Force) who will become a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff by December 2020.
• The Office of the Chief of Space Operations — aka the Space Force headquarters — will be stood up at the Pentagon over the next 60 days and initially staffed with about 40 people who currently are assigned to the Space Force Planning Task Force, led by Maj. Gen. Clinton Crosier. The goal is a staff of about 200.

Congressional deadlines loom

• The NDAA requires by February 1, 2020, a “comprehensive plan” for the organizational structure and anticipated funding requirements of the Space Force through Fiscal Year 2025.
• DoD has to submit to Congress within 180 days a personnel plan for the Space Force, including how military members and civilians will be compensated and trained. Also within 180 days a report is due on how DoD will integrate space capabilities with the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and U.S. Space Command.

Acquisition reorganization

• The NDAA creates a new Senate-confirmed position of assistant secretary of the Air Force for space acquisition and integration (a re-designation of the existing post of special assistant to the secretary of the Air Force for space policy).
• The space acquisition and integration position will serve as the service acquisition executive of the Department of the Air Force for space systems and programs.
• Congress directed the standup of a Space Force Acquisition Council. Neither the assistant secretary for space acquisition nor the acquisition council were in the original DoD proposal.
• The council will report to the secretary of the Air Force and include representatives from the Space Force, the Air Force, DoD, the National Reconnaissance Office and U.S. Space Command.
• The space acquisition executive will oversee the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), the Space Rapid Capabilities Office and the Space Development Agency which is currently under the undersecretary of defense for research and engineering. The SDA has to transfer to the Space Force by fiscal year 2022.

Things that will take time

• Raymond told reporters Dec. 20 that the establishment of a Space Force “truly launches us into a new era.” However, there are still “thousands of actions will have to take place” over the coming months and years.
• “The uniforms, the patch, the song, the culture of a service, that work will continue,” Raymond said. “We’re not going to be in a rush. That’s not something that we’re going to roll out on day one.”
• Communicating to the public the importance of the Space Force to national security will be a priority, he said. Raymond is aware that the Space Force is mocked and called a “Space Farce” and he thinks that is a problem. “This is not a ‘farce,’” he said. “This is nationally critical.”

Will there be ‘spacemen’?

• How the members of the Space Force will be designated will be debated for some time before the service settles on a name.
• For now, the new branch will be formed with airmen assigned to serve under the Space force. A new name will be given to members of the Space Force eventually. “We want to develop our own identity,” a senior official said. “We don’t want to say on day one ‘they’re going to be called x.’”
• Eventually, airmen will be asked to permanently transfer to the Space Force. The estimated 16,000 people who will be expected to transfer include 3,400 officers, 6,200 enlisted personnel and the rest civilians.
• Because of its small size, the Space Force will continue to rely on the Air Force indefinitely for support and overhead functions but will have its own recruiters and trainers. Graduates of the military academies of the other services will be allowed to commission into the Space Force.
• The actual transfer of airmen to the Space Force will be a laborious process that will require standing up a new personnel and compensation system. Each airman individually will have to volunteer to be separated from the Air Force. Officers would have to be reappointed and enlisted personnel would have to be re-enlisted to serve under the Space Force. Civilians would not be affected because they would continue to work under the Department of the Air Force regardless of whether they’re on the air or space side.

What about the Army and the Navy?

• The NDAA does not allow DoD to assign any of the Army’s or Navy’s space-focused units to the Space Force. The Army is of special importance because it has a large cadre of space operators and experts estimated at more than 2,000 people.
• Barrett said the plan is to eventually bring them on. “Naturally the Amy and Navy will be partners,” she said. “Over time they will be fully engaged.” She said Army and Navy officials have been involved in the planning and rollout of the Space Force. Barrett also wants to figure out a plan for National Guard and Reserve units to serve on the Space Force.

How much money will the Space Force have?

• Congress approved $40 million for Space Force operations and maintenance in the fiscal year 2020 appropriations. That is less than the $72.4 million requested by the Trump administration, although Barrett said Dec. 20 that the funding would be enough to get started.
• Most of the money for the Space Force will be transferred internally from the Air Force’s budget. In a Dec. 2 memo, a copy of which was obtained by SpaceNews, Barrett requested the following transfers to the Space Force for fiscal year 2020: $9.3 billion from Air Force space related weapons systems and operations, $1.4 billion from weapons system sustainment, $275 million from major command support, $26.3 million from education and training, $95 million from headquarters spending. Barrett said the personnel costs associated all these programs also will transfer to the Space Force.

 

[r16]

The US military is very interested in fast, point-to-point suborbital launches to get troops into a situation very rapidly. I don't see this becoming a realistic technology for another 20 years or so. Even SpaceX's Starship would not be very good for this as it too large and would need to be landed too far from the action to be that useful IMO.

a Star Wars movie naturally moves things out of the plate . Also there was this thread in some aviation site , 2008 actually , as ı looked up for it , where ı had noticed this guy who didn't appear he would ever like me . So from that ı know the US indeed has studied such transport stuff for long . ı barely remember a CVAN-65 class , because obviously the Enterprise is a name that will be some "no longer belongs to water" matter , carrying two rockets or fat objects to be launched as rockets . Such things naturally are either limited nuclear demonstration that will escalate into nuclear holocaust or pre-emptive nuclear strike that will escalate into nuclear holocaust . In the weird case it gets shot down , US , like by mentality of those who run it will try to escalate into nuclear holocaust , so they would not be in use against near-peers , a term ı personally find most funny .

so , this particular thread was a USMC thing SUSTAIN/HOT EAGLE , get 13 men , launch them and they will be in action anywhere in the world in two hours . A Microcosm Scorpius Exodus vehicle (and whatever the hell that's ?) , can use its escape rocket to climb up so that a cargo plane will capture it to fly the team back . People had a two day conference on it , in two years it was down to a 4 man thing , Special Forces . Read Delta Force , instead of Marines . A Bin Ladin scenario would make sense , get human intel like a phone call , launch , capture him , provide Pakistan with fait accompli and move in with your helicopters to beat Taliban human waves with suicide vests if you can't extract the 14 or so in time . (Because anytime an amphibious ship came within helicopter range Pakistan would tell Taliban to be careful .) ı don't know why they didn't ever use a Rockwell Shuttle as an assault glider or something . As for the 4 man thing , Americans of course have never watched movies so they do not know any James Bond story is chock-a-block with crazy btches ...


the sacked American general in question might be part of the American effort of smoke and mirrors . Or now that he claims to have known the people who would do stuff in person , he is telling Corporate America that he has to be made the CEO of something like Lockmart so that he can make billions of bucks for them , because , yeah , why not ?

well ? Republic Gunship , licensed as LAAT to Lucasarts , which duly notes Mach 0.5 or 620 kilometers per hour and it's not SSTO in basic factory model anyhow ! Still don't leave home without one ... Will it ever wear the Stars and Bars ? Yeah , right , in dreams .

 

[hobbsyoyo]

ı don't know why they didn't ever use a Rockwell Shuttle as an assault glider or something

Because it could only land at a handful of special prepared airstrips in the whole world.

 

[r16]

you don't get the "idea" that without any offense that might be imagined . If any guy deserved a Delta assassination squad coming down from space , he would also deserve a Rockwell shuttle written off on some beach , or they might even parachute out of it as it crashed 500 kilometers away ...

plus there would be like 30 of them , too . Why keep the fun isolated to mere 4 ?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It's not that landing on an unprepared strip would just be a write off for the vehicle, it's that everyone would die in such a landing. They did end up adding a special pole to the orbiter to allow people to ditch it with parachutes by jumping out of the hatch and sliding down the pole to clear the wing. Unfortunately this was a dangerous maneuver and we would have expected some (if not all) of the astronauts to have died while jumping out. On top of all that it cost $500 million to 2 billion per launch so it would have been an extravagantly expensive way to take out a single high-level target and also lose some of your best commandos just getting to the target. The shuttle flew a very slow re-entry profile that could take over half and hour or longer to put it on the ground, all while making lots of noise with a huge, highly visible spaceship. Shock might keep some adversaries from reacting the first time it would be used but after that, enemies would know what is coming and prepare to counter it.

I think maybe a point-to-point commando system could be made to work in some situations but never with Rockwell's space shuttle as the delivery vehicle. SpaceX's Starship is pretty close in design and operating mode to what a true drop ship type of system would look like.

 

[GamezRule]

I'm gonna join the Space National Guard!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

As I understand it, they haven't set up independent reserve and/or national guard units yet though likely will absorb a few in the next couple of years. I have a friend who just joined the USAF reserves for a space job and for now he's technically still in the Air Force but his unit is attached to the Space Force. At some point he thinks his unit will become Space Force but it's not clear at the moment.

 

[r16]

It's not that landing on an unprepared strip would just be a write off for the vehicle, it's that everyone would die in such a landing.

...

... but never with Rockwell's space shuttle as the delivery vehicle. SpaceX's Starship is pretty close in design and operating mode to what a true drop ship type of system would look like.

ı think the thread ı mentioned was not very favourable to SpaceX . And of course those who could design a 20th Century orbital insertion stuff , could also design ejection capsules or more or other ways to get down in one piece / for the Rockwell's vulnerability when the 2003 crash or something happened they like glibly announced it was not a terrorist attack , as if it could have been , 60 kilometers up ...

 

[hobbsyoyo]

ı think the thread ı mentioned was not very favourable to SpaceX . And of course those who could design a 20th Century orbital insertion stuff , could also design ejection capsules or more or other ways to get down in one piece / for the Rockwell's vulnerability when the 2003 crash or something happened they like glibly announced it was not a terrorist attack , as if it could have been , 60 kilometers up ...

Yeah I don't think the Starship would be good for this either as it is too large and landing entirely on retrorockets means they would be extremely limited in landing locations. But in a pinch it would be 10x better than a shuttle for that particular mission.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

NASA has been tasked with creating a satellite to track near Earth objects for planetary defense. I wonder if this sort of thing should be handed off to the Space Force?
https://spacenews.com/nasa-mission-to-track-near-earth-objects-takes-shape/

 

[GamezRule]

As I understand it, they haven't set up independent reserve and/or national guard units yet though likely will absorb a few in the next couple of years. I have a friend who just joined the USAF reserves for a space job and for now he's technically still in the Air Force but his unit is attached to the Space Force. At some point he thinks his unit will become Space Force but it's not clear at the moment.

My understanding of the bill was that it authorized an eventual creation of the Space National Guard. There was also an NG wide email sent out from the NGB Chief strongly hinting at it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

My understanding of the bill was that it authorized an eventual creation of the Space National Guard. There was also an NG wide email sent out from the NGB Chief strongly hinting at it.

So one weekend a month and two weeks a year we are gonna shoot you into space?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yeah I don't think the Starship would be good for this either as it is too large and landing entirely on retrorockets means they would be extremely limited in landing locations. But in a pinch it would be 10x better than a shuttle for that particular mission.

The most likely approach here would be an orbital barracks/command center launching individual reentry pods. Stuff a guy in a tube with minimal air recycling, ablative shielding on a reasonably small cross section on one end, some steering fins to be operated by a remote pilot. No propulsion, no significant electronics; the whole thing is disposable. Well, except the guy, maybe. Fire 'em off by the squad, like darts.

 

[Imaus]

Russia and China appear to leaving the US behind in the Hypersonic Missile race, even if their Missiles are 'fire from a booster and it glides for half the planet'.

My knee-jerk reactionary answer is the same as it's been for ICBMs and other missiles and space junk/debris: lasers. The latter most thing can be the cover. The US wants to clear it's 'space-space' of rocket debris and old satellites. It makes lasers, efficient lasers, to slightly heat them up and then they burn up. And of course, laser begets laser. More efficient ones, then more powerful ones. We can't produce enough missiles to counter a missile barrage, particle accelerators are years behind lasers, and conventional guns are too slow. The idea of MAD is basically dead, and I don't care who killed it (good riddance in a way).

It is now a matter of national defense and/or national security, whatever buzzword, to have a strong laser defense grid/net inside the US, on ships, on buildings, on islands, on barges, on tanks. Yes, the Russians and Chinese will probably never fire their missiles at the US in anger, (Central Asia and MENA will probably see their use however as a sort of 'big stick' thing) but one focuses on capability, not intent.

The end goal, of course, is to have a defense so potent, all intercontinental and intermediate missiles have little to no chance of getting through, killing that dragon once and for all. It'll also clean up space - the green environmental friendly cover, always good for funding.

Until they manage to teleport the damn things, I guess. For the alleged 'Kanyon' torpedoes - well, internal realtors will love that.

 

[Ajidica]

The thing with nuclear weapons is only a handful need to get through. The possibility of ten warheads getting through the ABMs and lasers on the eastern seaboard of the US (the amount carried by the standard Russian ICMB) airbursting over New York, DC, and a couple other major cities is more than sufficient to serve as a deterrent in this day and age.

 

[red_elk]

The idea of MAD is basically dead, and I don't care who killed it

Well, the purpose of Avangard is to ensure that MAD is alive no matter what. Russia started the hypersonic missiles program after US withdrew from ABM treaty. It's much cheaper to defend itself by ensuring that you can destroy any attacker in response, rather than trying to intercept all incoming missiles. In my opinion we all should better get back to agreements restricting WMDs and other strategic weapons, including space weapons, lasers and ABM defense, and find better ways to spend money instead of funding new arms race.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The most likely approach here would be an orbital barracks/command center launching individual reentry pods. Stuff a guy in a tube with minimal air recycling, ablative shielding on a reasonably small cross section on one end, some steering fins to be operated by a remote pilot. No propulsion, no significant electronics; the whole thing is disposable. Well, except the guy, maybe. Fire 'em off by the squad, like darts.

I don't see anyone (including the US) building what would effectively be a military ISS to the tune of $100B+ on top of individual drop pods to go with it. Plus that whole system would be mostly new R&D when they could instead base their plans off existing or soon to exist rockets.

Russia and China appear to leaving the US behind in the Hypersonic Missile race, even if their Missiles are 'fire from a booster and it glides for half the planet'.

My knee-jerk reactionary answer is the same as it's been for ICBMs and other missiles and space junk/debris: lasers. The latter most thing can be the cover. The US wants to clear it's 'space-space' of rocket debris and old satellites. It makes lasers, efficient lasers, to slightly heat them up and then they burn up. And of course, laser begets laser. More efficient ones, then more powerful ones. We can't produce enough missiles to counter a missile barrage, particle accelerators are years behind lasers, and conventional guns are too slow. The idea of MAD is basically dead, and I don't care who killed it (good riddance in a way).

It is now a matter of national defense and/or national security, whatever buzzword, to have a strong laser defense grid/net inside the US, on ships, on buildings, on islands, on barges, on tanks. Yes, the Russians and Chinese will probably never fire their missiles at the US in anger, (Central Asia and MENA will probably see their use however as a sort of 'big stick' thing) but one focuses on capability, not intent.

The end goal, of course, is to have a defense so potent, all intercontinental and intermediate missiles have little to no chance of getting through, killing that dragon once and for all. It'll also clean up space - the green environmental friendly cover, always good for funding.

Until they manage to teleport the damn things, I guess. For the alleged 'Kanyon' torpedoes - well, internal realtors will love that.

Lasers have been a let down across the board. The atmosphere causes too much interference with them and reflective coatings reduces their effectiveness. Maybe one day it'll be a viable anti-missile defense but that day is a ways off in the future. Remember that Reagan's Star Wars laser system depending on exploding nuclear weapons to pump a single-use x-ray laser and even that was a miserable failure. Conventional lasers at that scale are even harder.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't see anyone (including the US) building what would effectively be a military ISS to the tune of $100B+ on top of individual drop pods to go with it. Plus that whole system would be mostly new R&D when they could instead base their plans off existing or soon to exist rockets.

I don't see any practical way to deliver a rapid response squad by rockets. Launching a landing vehicle of any substance requires too big a launch vehicle to be applicable to rapid response. No matter what the methodology, militarizing space is a non-starter if you can't significantly push capability beyond what is available from insertion by conventional aircraft, which is currently a pretty high bar.

But if you have a method that does significantly improve on current capability, there is little question that the US would consider a few hundred billion a necessary cost of doing their usual bloody business. Intermediate step on the way to drop pods is satellite launched kinetic energy weapons, and even as old as I am I would be surprised not to see those in my lifetime. Some sort of tungsten alloy telephone pole dropped from orbit with enough guidance capability for a remote pilot to put it through the roof of any selected national capitol building is a powerful negotiating tool, and doesn't seem really far beyond the reach of current technology.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Launching a landing vehicle of any substance requires too big a launch vehicle to be applicable to rapid response. No matter what the methodology, militarizing space is a non-starter if you can't significantly push capability beyond what is available from insertion by conventional aircraft, which is currently a pretty high bar.

You ever seen the launcher set up for the original Mercury Redstone? That's about the size of a vehicle you'd need for this sort of mission, if you want to launch one soldier at a time.

You can do that with a road-mobile launcher, so it's concievable you could launch a full platoon of special forces with this method though it's trickier to pull off than using one bigger launcher. It's only when you hit about the 5 ton to LEO payload mark where the rockets (and their attending infrastructure) gets fully beefcake. For suborbital hops, the amount of DV you need is significantly less than orbital flights (can close to a full order of magnitude) so your rockets can be smaller. Development costs for such a system would be quite high but I think the actual per-flight costs wouldn't actually be that extreme, even compared to aircraft.

The USAF did explore the rod from god concept this decade but found it unworkable. I can't remember the reasons though, sorry. In your second sentence, by 'militarizing space', do you mean putting soldiers in space? Because it's already fully militarized by every major power on Earth. Spacecraft don't have to carry offensive or defensive weapons to be a military platform. And given the grumblings from classified committees in Congress, it's likely that weapons of various sorts are being tested or fielded by the US's adversaries right now.

Edit:
Oh and China just completed their GPS constellation which has massive military uses. It's not just the US that can use GPS-guided munitions anymore.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I read an article talking about an electronic system the Navy & Marines used to take down an Iranian drone when it approached the USS Boxer. That's exactly the sort of weapon I would expect to see be deployed into space over the next decade, on top of a slew of new spying and communications kit.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/21/...iran-drone-shoot-down-energy-weapon-uss-boxer