The US Space Force

[RanulfC]

A lot depends on what happens in November though.

Not really. As the MOU states this is an 'update' and something that has been required to supersede the previous MOU with Air Force Space Command since the US Space Force is a 'different' entity. Nothing's really changed but the acronyms and letter-heads. Paperwork only.

Randy

 

[Orionblamblam]

unmanned SAR would be like cannned food in a Gastronomic restaurant... What for?!

If a capsule goes down in an ocean or a jungle hell and gone from local resources, sending in a flock of drones to look for it probably makes sense. Hell, the satellites overhead that pick up and locate the capsules beacons are probably unmanned too.

 

[TomS]

SAR looks cool enough by itself, yes. But unmanned SAR would be like cannned food in a Gastronomic restaurant... What for?!

Where are you getting the idea of unmanned SAR? It's certainly not in the MoU. From what I can see, USSF didn't get the actual rescue squadron that supports Canaveral, but they probably inherited the responsibility to prepare for and coordinate SAR operations (meaning rescue helicopters and boats) for launches. That's all.

It's absolutely correct that this is largely a restatement of NASA's previous MoUs with the USAF. I think it expands the collaboration on detecting Earth-approaching asteroids, but that's about it.

 

[Flyaway]

I thought we had an existing Space Force thread but a search didn’t turn anything up.

The Federation in Star Trek use Naval ranks I believe so maybe someone on the political side is a fan.

Space Force plans big reveals on its first anniversary - SpaceNews

The Space Force plans big announcements as the service approaches its one-year anniversary, said Lt. Gen. B. Chance Saltzman.

spacenews.com

 

[TomcatViP]

Untill now we have used that one:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/opinion-why-america-needs-a-space-corps.28866/

Great to have one dedicated to the new Corp, readily available through the search function.

 

[Josh_TN]

My understanding is that the USAF still controls a lot of space operations at this point - what responsibilities/USAF wings were transfered to the Space Force?

 

[TomcatViP]

NASA astronaut Michael Hopkins, a U.S. Air Force colonel and the commander of the upcoming SpaceX Crew Dragon mission, is transferring to the U.S. Space Force and is expected to be commissioned aboard the International Space Station.

“If all goes well, we’re looking to swear him into the Space Force from the International Space Station,” said Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, chief of space operations of the U.S. Space Force.

NASA’s Crew-1 commander to be sworn into U.S. Space Force from the International Space Station - SpaceNews

Air Force Col. Michael “Hopper” Hopkins, commander of NASA’s SpaceX Crew-1 mission, will be commissioned into the U.S. Space Force.

spacenews.com

 

[TsrJoe]

“If all goes well, we’re looking to swear him into the Space Force from the International Space Station,” said Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, chief of space operations of the U.S. Space Force.

seems to be a bit of a contradiction ... the International Space Station, ie. multi-national and notionally non military, hosting the swearing in of a USSF. astronaut

 

[mkellytx]

“If all goes well, we’re looking to swear him into the Space Force from the International Space Station,” said Gen. John “Jay” Raymond, chief of space operations of the U.S. Space Force.

seems to be a bit of a contradiction ... the International Space Station, ie. multi-national and notionally non military, hosting the swearing in of a USSF. astronaut

Not really, most of the stick actuator types (Mission Commander/Pilot) are TPS grads and military officers. The few non officer stick actuators are/were NASA test pilots, but most of them went to TPS while they were military officers...

 

[fightingirish]

The organizational chart is going to change over the years, but the unit "Space Delta Nine" looks already mysterious.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320045721232547845

View: https://twitter.com/ussfspoc/status/1320045721232547845?s=20

Maybe just because it reminds me of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

 

[TomcatViP]

Gorgeous!

 

[Grey Havoc]

Someone in the Pentagon appears to be smoking some heavy duty stuff:

Pentagon expected to increase Space Force funding in coming years

While the fiscal 2022 and 2023 budget requests haven't been finalized yet, the head of the Space and Missile Systems Center says they will include increased spending on space systems.

www.c4isrnet.com

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Removed off-topic discussion on politics. Plenty of other places you can criticise random political proposals, its not relevant here unless it has a chance of actually happening.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Removed off-topic discussion on politics. Plenty of other places you can criticise random political proposals, its not relevant here unless it has a chance of actually happening.

Ummm... a bill supported by a number of relevant politicians that would abolish the actual subject of the thread seems like it's relevant.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I don't actually care. Politics, off limits. Shape up or ship out.

 

[sferrin]

Removed off-topic discussion on politics. Plenty of other places you can criticise random political proposals, its not relevant here unless it has a chance of actually happening.

Ummm... a bill supported by a number of relevant politicians that would abolish the actual subject of the thread seems like it's relevant.

What he said. This is getting ridiculous. I'd expect this on Twitter or Facebook but I'd have hoped we'd have at least enough tolerance to have a discussion here.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

 

[ReprobateJoeshmoe]

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

 

[ReprobateJoeshmoe]

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

Might I also add that a policy that would “abolish” the space force seems pretty relevant to a discussion about the space force. No hard feeling it just seems strange that it would be removed.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here. If President Biden plans to actually cut the Space Force budget in half, by all means post it here.

Otherwise its just the usual internet troll "look at what the crazy folks over there said! Lets get angry about something that probably won't ever happen!".

 

[ReprobateJoeshmoe]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here. If President Biden plans to actually cut the Space Force budget in half, by all means post it here.

Otherwise its just the usual internet troll "look at what the crazy folks over there said! Lets get angry about something that probably won't ever happen!".

You make a good point but as far as I’m aware there was no argument. Some one mentioned a bill, I replied and it ended up here.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The posts were reported using the "report" mechanism. This is as per the forum rules - if you find a post objectionable, you should report it rather than engage back in vigilante post action.

I'm not defending the BREATHE bill, as a Brit in New Zealand it's not really relevant to me but it certainly looks rather controversial, as is some legislation proposed from the extreme wing on the other side.

Regardless, Its a long way from Unbuilt Projects. Which is the forum core topic.

 

[sferrin]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here.

Or you could just tell the people constantly complaining to you (everybody knows who they are) to block the people they don't like listening to instead of allowing them to dictate what is or isn't allowed to be discussed. Win-win. Previous iterations of the forum software still showed who was replying to you, even if they were blocked, which was pretty much pointless. The stuff you're using now doesn't show anything. It's like they don't even exist and it's beautiful. People who want to listen to them can. People who don't want to don't have to.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here.

Or you could just tell the people constantly complaining to you (everybody knows who they are) to block the people they don't like listening to instead of allowing them to dictate what is or isn't allowed to be discussed. Win-win. Previous iterations of the forum software still showed who was replying to you, even if they were blocked, which was pretty much pointless. The stuff you're using now doesn't show anything. It's like they don't even exist and it's beautiful. People who want to listen to them can. People who don't want to don't have to.

I could do. But its ultimately my forum.

I don't want to listen to posts riffing on US politics, but I do want to hear from US people about topics relevant to the forum (unbuilt projects, aerospace technology). I certainly don't want to block longstanding members because of occasional political posts. So maybe try not doing it?

 

[sferrin]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here.

Or you could just tell the people constantly complaining to you (everybody knows who they are) to block the people they don't like listening to instead of allowing them to dictate what is or isn't allowed to be discussed. Win-win. Previous iterations of the forum software still showed who was replying to you, even if they were blocked, which was pretty much pointless. The stuff you're using now doesn't show anything. It's like they don't even exist and it's beautiful. People who want to listen to them can. People who don't want to don't have to.

I could do. But its ultimately my forum.

I don't want to listen to posts riffing on US politics, but I do want to hear from US people about topics relevant to the forum (unbuilt projects, aerospace technology). I certainly don't want to block longstanding members because of occasional political posts. So maybe try not doing it?

Fair enough. Sometimes it can get gray though. Just sayin'. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here.

Or you could just tell the people constantly complaining to you (everybody knows who they are) to block the people they don't like listening to instead of allowing them to dictate what is or isn't allowed to be discussed. Win-win. Previous iterations of the forum software still showed who was replying to you, even if they were blocked, which was pretty much pointless. The stuff you're using now doesn't show anything. It's like they don't even exist and it's beautiful. People who want to listen to them can. People who don't want to don't have to.

I could do. But its ultimately my forum.

I don't want to listen to posts riffing on US politics, but I do want to hear from US people about topics relevant to the forum (unbuilt projects, aerospace technology). I certainly don't want to block longstanding members because of occasional political posts. So maybe try not doing it?

Fair enough. Sometimes it can get gray though. Just sayin'. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yep absolutely.

 

[ReprobateJoeshmoe]

If you believe for one moment that this bill will ever be passed by President Biden, then you

I have no interest is discussing the policies of the Movement for Black Lives here. The minute it was mentioned all that happened was a pile-on of proactive right-wing offence at things in the bill unrelated to the Space Force topic.

A right wing offense? In my book if you want to cut the budget In half right wing or left wing or not your a moron. I don’t know how you can remotely classify the removed the posts as remotely right wing. There wasn’t any discussion about right wing agenda. Political ideology wasn’t mentioned. We were only discussing a bill that would destroy the budget and the military.

The people making the posts were the usual right leaning people and the people reporting their posts as objectionable were the usual left leaning people. I have no interest in moderating the argument here.

Or you could just tell the people constantly complaining to you (everybody knows who they are) to block the people they don't like listening to instead of allowing them to dictate what is or isn't allowed to be discussed. Win-win. Previous iterations of the forum software still showed who was replying to you, even if they were blocked, which was pretty much pointless. The stuff you're using now doesn't show anything. It's like they don't even exist and it's beautiful. People who want to listen to them can. People who don't want to don't have to.

I could do. But its ultimately my forum.

I don't want to listen to posts riffing on US politics, but I do want to hear from US people about topics relevant to the forum (unbuilt projects, aerospace technology). I certainly don't want to block longstanding members because of occasional political posts. So maybe try not doing it?

Fair enough. Sometimes it can get gray though. Just sayin'. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yep absolutely.

You guys still talking about the posts being removed? Dang I wasn’t happy but there’s nothing you can do about forum watchdogs removing it except for complaining.

 

[Orionblamblam]

I don't want to listen to posts riffing on US politics, but I do want to hear from US people about topics relevant to the forum (unbuilt projects, aerospace technology). I certainly don't want to block longstanding members because of occasional political posts. So maybe try not doing it?

When you threaten to boot someone for mentioning a proposed bill ("politics") in a thread specifically about a contentious new arm of the government ("politics"), you incentivize that person to comment less. Which, of course, is the goal of the forum members who are so quick to stab the "report" button.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I have reservations about the entire thread, its really off topic. But I take your point.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Traditional launch services may not suit the needs of the future Space Force - SpaceNews

How the Pentagon buys launch services in the future could change as the military considers using emerging technologies and services known as “space mobility and logistics.”

spacenews.com

 

[sferrin]

I have reservations about the entire thread, its really off topic. But I take your point.

The creation of US Space Force is off topic in an Aviation and Space section? If it's off-topic because it isn't specifically hardware related how about just move it to The Bar?

 

[bobbymike]

I have reservations about the entire thread, its really off topic. But I take your point.

The creation of US Space Force is off topic in an Aviation and Space section? If it's off-topic because it isn't specifically hardware related how about just move it to The Bar?

But there has been posts talking about the potential hardware the Space Force would use. So as you stated above grey area.

As for reporting posts to a moderator. I’ve been a member of this forum closing in on 12 years and don’t recall ever reporting the content of a post based on its “politics”. I have reported posts that contain personal attacks on members here.

Frankly I don’t care if someone posts an article or opinion that says eliminate the military and spend the money on welfare programs. Despite my complete opposition to such a policy I am not offended that someone, in good faith, thinks and believes that, as is their right.

 

[TomcatViP]

Training command:

“What we are really bringing to the fight is focus. Focus on space,” Col. Peter Flores, director of the Space Training and Readiness (STAR) Delta Provisional at Space Operations Command, said in an interview today. (STAR Delta is the predecessor to a brand new training and readiness field command, that will be called STARCOM. It will be led by a two-star and is expected to be up and running sometime next year.)[...]

The doctrine explains that Space Force personnel will be trained in a set of five core competencies that define how “spacepower” is employed, as well as one or more narrower “spacepower disciplines.”

The core competencies are: Space Security; Combat Power Projection; Space Mobility & Logistics; Information Mobility; and Space Domain Awareness.

The seven specialized “disciplines” are:

• Orbital Warfare
• Space Electromagnetic Warfare
• Space Battle Management
• Space Access & Sustainment
• Military Intelligence
• Cyber Operations
• Engineering / Acquisition

The follow-on CSO Planning Guidance released early this month specifies that STARCOM “will develop the unique curricula required by the first four disciplines of Orbital Warfare, Space Electromagnetic Warfare, Space Battle Management, and Space Access and Sustainment. In addition, STARCOM will facilitate inclusion of space-unique content for Military Intelligence, Cyber Operations, and Engineering and Acquisition career fields for individuals intending to join or support Space Force units.”

STARCOM: Training Troops To Fight Space Wars, Boldly

"We've decided that the topic is important enough and unique enough that we need a group of people who understand it down to its most fundamental levels."

breakingdefense.com

 

[bobbymike]

Stone, Christopher M., Deterrence in Space: Requirements for Credibility | National Institute for Public Policy

www.nipp.org

 

[TomcatViP]

Lockheed Martin completes production of new SBIRS GEO-5 missile warning satellite

The top-grossing defense firm in the world Lockheed Martin has announced that the new SBIRS GEO-5 missile warning satellite being completed. As noted by the company, the Space Based Infrared System Geosynchronous Earth Orbit satellite (SBIRS GEO-5) – the first military space satellite built on...

defence-blog.com

 

[TomcatViP]

First selected tainee for Space School:

out of 165 applicants, only 45 students were selected to fill out the three course offerings in 2021, with 15 students chosen per course.

“This course is critical to the development of USSF test professionals and will enable them to lead and conduct full spectrum test and evaluation of systems operating across the space domain,” said Col. Sebrina Pabon, TPS commandant.

This three-month program leverages world-class USAF TPS expertise, designed to provide hands-on training in flight test fundamentals, systems test, space science application, advanced space system test and evaluation, and broad exposure to the foremost centers of space operations and testing.

“The STF course will help enhance a professional test workforce in the space domain through common education and a basic toolset. In addition to the classroom and hands-on learning, we hope to impress upon the students the importance of a test and engineering mindset,” said Dr. Andrew Freeborn, a USAF TPS flight test instructor pilot.

The course culminates in a two-week realistic capstone exercise to evaluate student’s knowledge.

U.S. Air Force says first space test fundamentals course begins in January

According to a press release issued last week by U.S. Air Force Test Cente, the Test Pilot School convenes the first-ever Space Test Fundamentals course Jan. 4, 2021. The selection board results were announced Dec. 10, the release states. “This important milestone would not have been possible...

defence-blog.com

 

[TomcatViP]

SF pins & badges:

Space Force troops get lapel pin and badge to wear on their Air Force uniforms for now

Space Force service members will soon get lapel pins and service badges to wear on their Air Force dress uniforms to better distinguish the branches.

www.stripes.com

 

[TomcatViP]

What happens to the Space Force after the Trump administration?

President Trump championed the creation of the Space Force, but he has done little to ensure it has the funding, staffing and authority to succeed.

www.latimes.com

 

[Moose]

LA Times rundown of the current state of the Force and what's ahead. Pretty decent job laying it out.

What happens to the Space Force after the Trump administration?

President Trump championed the creation of the Space Force, but he has done little to ensure it has the funding, staffing and authority to succeed.

www.latimes.com

 

[bobbymike]

White House Paves Policy For Nuke-Powered Rockets & Reactors On Moon

Administration officials were quick to stress that US pursuit of space-based nuclear power sources has absolutely nothing to do with building nuclear weapons in space.

breakingdefense.com