Military Space Ops

Far from "unexpected". Very much expected. So expected that it was silly to even bother pursuing the idea.
Space Command it is. Announced yesterday.
Trump Signs Order To Create U.S. Space Command | HuffPost

Announced by the Vice President in Florida yesterday the resurrected US Spce Command integrates the space capabilities from all branches of the military and will develop the long term strategy for the defence of the nation.
 
Last edited:
Space Command it is. Announced yesterday.
Trump Signs Order To Create U.S. Space Command | HuffPost

Announced by the Vice President in Florida yesterday the resurrected US Spce Command integrates the space capabilities from all branches of the military and will develop the long term strategy for the defence of the nation.
Separating Space Command from Strategic Command just undoes the Bush junior Admin's amalgamation of the 2. Re-establishing a unified command is nowhere near the same thing as creating a new service. My point was that the latter wasn't going to get approval from anyone still tethered to reality, & it still won't.
 
Far from "unexpected". Very much expected. So expected that it was silly to even bother pursuing the idea.
So despite your ‘expected’ opposition, it seems there is now an integrated Space Force.

Bit like your Japanes carriers which weren’t likely to happen?
 
So despite your ‘expected’ opposition, it seems there is now an integrated Space Force.

Bit like your Japanes carriers which weren’t likely to happen?
I don't think you'll beat Baggers in this year's SPOTY competition, but this is a remarkable effort nonetheless. WTF are you talking about? Did you actually read what I said above, or anything else I've said on this subject? Are you drunk, delusional or just trolling?

SPACECOM is not a service & it's not new. It was created in 1985 & has (with some changes to name & breadth of role) been part of STRATCOM since SPACECOM's merger with STRATCOM in 2002.

As a matter of fact I had considered the possibility that the US DoD would de-merge SPACECOM & STRATCOM to mollify Trump, but it wasn't relevant to the point I was making, which was about the proposal to create a new service - i.e., an equivalent of the Navy, Army, Air Force & Marine Corps - not a proposal to revive an old unified combatant command - i.e., an equivalent of AFRICOM, CENTCOM, EUCOM, INDOPACOM, NORTHCOM, SOUTHCOM, CYBERCOM, SOCOM, STRATCOM & TRANSCOM.

As far as I can recall I've made no predictions about Jap carriers. You must be confusing me with someone else. And given that Japan's had helicopter carriers for years, you must be thinking of something someone said from a fair while back.
 
Not trolling, not drunk. This was your post in Booties in Japan thread re the re-configuring of the carriers to take F-35’s in which you appeared to doubt that they would be allowed to do that. They seem to be doing just that.

Japanese military capabilities are a sensitive issue within Japan, though they may not be elsewhere. Article 9 of the Jap constitution prohibits both aggression & the possession of military forces. The JSDF is clearly in breach of the spirit if not the letter. Circumventing A9 by calling it a Self-Defence Force & legally defining it & its membership as civilian is pretty dubious. There are a few Japanese who want A9 enforced, there are those who want to remove the prohibition on military forces, there are those who want to maintain the status quo, & the whole issue is overshadowed by the knowledge of past Japanese militarism & how that turned out in 1945. My view is that every democracy has the right to defend itself, the status quo is unsatisfactory & the prohibition on military forces should never have existed & should be removed as soon as possible (keeping the we-won't-shoot-first bit should be enough to mollify A9's supporters).

I had never disputed, or proposed that this ne branch would be a separate service, merely repeated the options that were being considered and that there would be some form or branch dealing exclusively with a new ‘high ground’.

Unknot twist in knickers and chill.
 
Last edited:
Not trolling, not drunk. This was your post in Booties in Japan thread re the re-configuring of the carriers to take F-35’s in which you appeared to doubt that they would be allowed to do that. They seem to be doing just that.
The post you are quoting clearly says no such thing. You're responding to what you imagine I think instead of what I actually wrote. I was merely describing the situation in Japan regarding Article 9 of the Japanese constitution & what I think the Japanese should do about A9. If the Japs can get away with having carriers & putting helicopters in them, I don't think there'll be an insurmountable obstacle to putting F-35s in them.

How is this not obvious to you?

I had never disputed, or proposed that this ne branch would be a separate service, merely repeated the options that were being considered and that there would be some form or branch dealing exclusively with a new ‘high ground’.
You were disputing the fact that my comments regarding a proposal to create a new military service did not apply to a proposal to de-merge 2 UCCs.

Unknot twist in knickers and chill.
There is no twist in my knickers. AGAIN, stop responding to what you imagine other people think & stick to what they actually post.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
Far from "unexpected". Very much expected. So expected that it was silly to even bother pursuing the idea.
I disagree, with advances in space this could be a very effective way for the US to cohere all of its efforts. The analysis of alternatives that Resai alludes to will be quite open and staffers will see the analysis behind options. There is much merit in this approach and the military are well aware of the political games to be played out.
 
I disagree, with advances in space this could be a very effective way for the US to cohere all of its efforts. The analysis of alternatives that Resai alludes to will be quite open and staffers will see the analysis behind options. There is much merit in this approach and the military are well aware of the political games to be played out.
My point was that there is (at present & in the foreseeable future) no chance of persuading either Congress or the DoD to create a purely space-oriented equivalent of the Navy, Army, Air Force & Marine Corps. If they want to have just one service handle military space matters the most sensible thing to do would be to assign it all to the USAF. As I mentioned previously, the secretary of the Air Force likened the idea of creating a US Space Force to creating a new service just for submarines. The defence secretary also poured scorn on it. I agree with them. De-merging STRATCOM & SPACECOM, on the other hand, is a completely different kettle of fish.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
My point was that there is (at present & in the foreseeable future) no chance of persuading either Congress or the DoD to create a purely space-oriented equivalent of the Navy, Army, Air Force & Marine Corps. If they want to have just one service handle military space matters the most sensible thing to do would be to assign it all to the USAF. As I mentioned previously, the secretary of the Air Force likened the idea of creating a US Space Force to creating a new service just for submarines. The defence secretary also poured scorn on it. I agree with them. De-merging STRATCOM & SPACECOM, on the other hand, is a completely different kettle of fish.
I would argue it was never about creating a dedicated space service. That, to me, is a Trumpism.

Now that it's public and space coherence fall under AF from FY20, they will work out what that means for wider DoD space assets and the relationships between ARSTRAT/Navy/AF/STRATCOM, to ensure a unified space entity operates under AF in a similar manner to the USMC under the Sec of the Navy.

Ergo they will recreate a corps 'equivalent in to the USMC.
 
The post you are quoting clearly says no such thing. You're responding to what you imagine I think instead of what I actually wrote. I was merely describing the situation in Japan regarding Article 9 of the Japanese constitution & what I think the Japanese should do about A9. If the Japs can get away with having carriers & putting helicopters in them, I don't think there'll be an insurmountable obstacle to putting F-35s in them.

How is this not obvious to you?
Just as my post on the space issue merely gave the various options that might result from The Trump administration‘s wish to create a single entity to deal with a dimension presently being dealt with piecemeal by various services.

How was that not obvious to you?

You are guilty of precisely what you are accusing me of.
 
I would argue it was never about creating a dedicated space service. That, to me, is a Trumpism.
That Trumpism is exactly what the White House ordered a reluctant DoD to plan for. A US Space Force, Space Force Department, Space Force Reserve, Space Force National Guard, a Space Force Staff, a secretary, a chief of staff, a seat on the JCS, a bunch of new uniforms, flags & all the other trappings, & a grand total of... 13 000 members. That's not a misprint: just 13 000. Miniscule relative to the other services (including the USCG). Past space service proposals were much more lean & sensible than Trump's & still failed to get the necessary legislative support so I wasn't expecting this proposal to do any better on Capitol Hill.

Discussion of that was what initiated my recent attempts to clarify some of my posts for the benefit of an addled Resasi.

Now that it's public and space coherence fall under AF from FY20, they will work out what that means for wider DoD space assets and the relationships between ARSTRAT/Navy/AF/STRATCOM, to ensure a unified space entity operates under AF in a similar manner to the USMC under the Sec of the Navy.
Ergo they will recreate a corps 'equivalent in to the USMC.
You're going to have to clarify that. You said "it was never about creating a dedicated space service" & yet a space-oriented equivalent of the USMC would be exactly that. It's a long time since the USMC ceased to be a subordinate organisation of the USN & became a full-fledged service in its own right (the cmdt of the USMC is responsible directly to the SotN).

USAF's Space Command has existed since 1982. The joint US Space Command was established in 1985, merged with Strategic Command in 2002 & is going to return to being a separate UCC. The basic structure needed in order to get all their sh*t into one sock has been there for decades.
 
Last edited:
Just as my post on the space issue merely gave the various options that might result from The Trump administration‘s wish to create a single entity to deal with a dimension presently being dealt with piecemeal by various services.

How was that not obvious to you?

You are guilty of precisely what you are accusing me of.
You said that a space operational command was going to resume being separate from another operational command in reply to my comment about legislators' predictable dislike of the space service proposal. Do you see how that implies that you are conflating 2 different things?

resasi1.jpg


I patiently explained the difference between a service & an operational command & then you doubled down on that conflation:
I said something wouldn't happen & it didn't. Something else happened instead & you continued to treat them as if they were the same.

And you made a spurious claim that I'd said something about Japanese carriers that I never so much as thought.

resasi2.jpg


Baffled by this bizarre reply, I explained the difference between services & operational commands again, with more detail (but less patience).

Then you came up with an irrelevant post I made about the Japanese constitution & conflated that post with thoughts about Japanese aircraft carriers that I never had.

Referring to SPACECOM you said "I had never disputed, or proposed that this ne branch would be a separate service" except that you effectively did - by your persistent conflation of

Oh I give up. This is too much like trying to drive nail through a blob of mercury.

resasi3.jpg
 
You are getting far to worked up about very little, and pursuing it to the n'th degree.

As I said, relax, chill, and stop trying to nail mecury...as you have correctly inferred it simply isn’t worth pursuing.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
W P said:
USAF's Space Command has existed since 1982. The joint US Space Command was established in 1985, merged with Strategic Command in 2002 & is going to return to being a separate UCC. The basic structure needed in order to get all their sh*t into one sock has been there for decades.
I know, I've been to Peterson, Vandenberg and Schriever a few times and will be there again this year.

W P said:
That Trumpism is exactly what the White House ordered a reluctant DoD to plan for.
And that was my point, in all of the AOA, DoD knew it wasn't going to create what Trump, or an advisor, thought he wanted

W P said:
You're going to have to clarify that. You said "it was never about creating a dedicated space service" & yet a space-oriented equivalent of the USMC would be exactly that. It's a long time since the USMC ceased to be a subordinate organisation of the USN & became a full-fledged service in its own right (the cmdt of the USMC is responsible directly to the SotN).
The USMC may be a branch but it can't exist without the USN, they share way too much. Not much fun driving LAVs across the Pacific.

In the same way the reality is a "space force" would never be allowed to hoover up all the resources across STRATCOM/ARSTRAT/NAVY etc. Way too much politic for that to happen (I believe), so in the same way as the USMC needs the Navy, whatever is created will rely on wider AF and other elements.
 
Last edited:
You are getting far to worked up about very little, and pursuing it to the n'th degree.
Not getting worked up or pursuing it excessively. I reply, you reply, I reply, you reply. This is called a discussion. It's what we're here for.

As I said, relax, chill,
And as I said before, I am not unrelaxed or unchilled. You'd have to be far, far more irritating for that to change.

and stop trying to nail mecury...as you have correctly inferred it simply isn’t worth pursuing.
Now you're telling me to do something I've already done. I don't think it's even possible to clarify what I said on that subject to a greater extent anyway. It's nice that you've accepted the application of my 'mercury' analogy to the experience of dealing with your dodging & weaving. If you dislike people's attempts to overcome that, stop doing it.
 
Another role for Typhoon?

Italian Typhoons could bring satellites into orbit soon - Blog Before Flight - Air Forces News

The Italian Air Force could use its F-2000 Typhoon fighter jets as launch pads for nanosatellites to be placed in low orbits around the Earth (about 250 km altitude) to perform Earth observation and telecommunications tasks. This solution represents an effective, economic and rapid way to send small satellites into orbit to conduct short-term missions. In addition, the opportunity to employ men and aircraft of the Italian Air Force to conduct this activity shows how they are able to cover many other tasks besides the military ones.

Space technology is today increasingly oriented towards the miniaturization of electronic components and the development of many applications related to small satellites. The researchers believe that nanosatellites could soon become effective resources for several key space applications.
 
US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) awards contracts for 'Blackjack' Low Earth Orbit (LEO) small satellite constellation.

Small satellites are of increasing interest to Western nations as they seek more responsive, versatile and survivable methods to maintain capability in increasingly contested Space environment. The Russians and Chinese both have established methods of denying traditional LEO assets which have historically been larger, more expensive and designed for lengthy lives.

'Smallsats' can be launched more flexibly - if necessary by some aircraft - and offer lower costs to us and reduced predictability to the opposition. The UK are even starting to get into this realm of Space and I sense that Small-sat LEO asets will become increasingly prevalent in US, National and NATO thinking.

Regards,
MM
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top