Trump directs creation of 'space force' as sixth branch of military

[Remius]

They could just add this to the PRES mission tasks.

Direct fire
Mortars
Light Urban Search and rescue
IA
Space Force DRC (See IA for more details)

 

[tomahawk6]

https://www.stripes.com/news/p-t-in-space-online-jokes-target-space-force-1.534183

 

[daftandbarmy]

They could just add this to the PRES mission tasks.

Direct fire
Mortars
Light Urban Search and rescue
IA
Space Force DRC (See IA for more details)

And we'd have about as much success achieving the Space Task as the rest of them, unless Space needs a few good parades

 

[tomahawk6]

Congress is starting to push back against the idea.Last year they killed the idea of USAF Space Corps.

 

[FJAG]

https://www.stripes.com/news/p-t-in-space-online-jokes-target-space-force-1.534183

Loved the Space Force Theme Song.  :rofl:

:cheers:

 

[Journeyman]

Congress is starting to push back against the idea.Last year they killed the idea of USAF Space Corps.

Based solely upon open source news ("fake news" to some), there was absolutely no credible advisor (Defence, WH COS, USAF, DHS....) saying "good idea."  No wonder all the normally Trump-supportive sources are flooding the market with memes, pre-empting the late-night show hosts in mocking this.

Probably the most likely justification heard is that, when the First Lady was in limbo for a while recently, the President caught the Starship Troopers' co-ed shower scene -- one frame at a time, of course -- and thought, "as Comd-in-Chief, I could visit  the troops!"

 

[a_majoor]

While there is a lot of American military activity in space, it is scattered over all the Armed Services. Space is also a true "domain", with vastly different characteristics than land, sea, air, cyber etc., so the idea of actually grouping all these disparate capabilities under one roof to operate in one domain actually does make a certain amount of sense.

We might also consider that this idea has actually been floating around in various forms for decades (as well as single service attempts to gain a foothold in space; the US Army made studies of establishing a military base on the Moon as far back as the late 1950's [Project Horizon], or the US Navy attempting to create a space fighter that could be launched from an SLBM missile tube in the early 70's. The USAF's secretive X-37 tests indicate they are still looking at the technical aspects of how to operate in space, using more modern concepts and equipment.

So the idea of a single organization to deal with all aspects of Space warfare isn't, in of itself, a bad thing.

 

[Journeyman]

...there was absolutely no credible advisor (Defence, WH COS, USAF, DHS....) saying "good idea."

So the idea of a single organization to deal with all aspects of Space warfare isn't, in of itself, a bad thing.

Ok, one person now agrees, "credible" notwithstanding.  Please understand if I go back to being underwhelmed.   

 

[a_majoor]

Since we have no idea who said what behind the scenes, and I am not keeping track of inter service rivalries, I'm not clear why President Trump is broaching the idea now, nor what agenda this is meant to support/frustrate.

This may just be another "s**t or get off the pot" prod by the Chief Executive to stir the Armed Forces out of their comfort zones to start dealing with the various unconventional threats that we are being presented (Chinese stealth aircraft, Russian/Chinese hypersonic weapons, new generations of tactical nuclear weapons, cyber penetration of the US infrastructure etc.). Having to think outside the box might provide some new insights (although such a huge bureaucratic organization might simply swallow any such insights without ever noticing.....).

 

[FJAG]

While there is a lot of American military activity in space, it is scattered over all the Armed Services. Space is also a true "domain", with vastly different characteristics than land, sea, air, cyber etc., so the idea of actually grouping all these disparate capabilities under one roof to operate in one domain actually does make a certain amount of sense.

We might also consider that this idea has actually been floating around in various forms for decades (as well as single service attempts to gain a foothold in space; the US Army made studies of establishing a military base on the Moon as far back as the late 1950's [Project Horizon], or the US Navy attempting to create a space fighter that could be launched from an SLBM missile tube in the early 70's. The USAF's secretive X-37 tests indicate they are still looking at the technical aspects of how to operate in space, using more modern concepts and equipment.

So the idea of a single organization to deal with all aspects of Space warfare isn't, in of itself, a bad thing.

Isn't this why the US forces have both geographic and functional Unified Combatant Commands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_combatant_command#History

Title 10 US Code Chapter 6  respecting Combatant Commands is here:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title10/pdf/USCODE-2010-title10-subtitleA-partI-chap6.pdf

See especially s 161 where the President with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff through the Secretary of Defence shall (1) establish Unified Combatant Commands.

That sounds a lot simpler than establishing a sixth branch.

:cheers:

 

[a_majoor]

Isn't this why the US forces have both geographic and functional Unified Combatant Commands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_combatant_command#History

Title 10 US Code Chapter 6  respecting Combatant Commands is here:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title10/pdf/USCODE-2010-title10-subtitleA-partI-chap6.pdf

See especially s 161 where the President with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff through the Secretary of Defence shall (1) establish Unified Combatant Commands.

That sounds a lot simpler than establishing a sixth branch.

:cheers:

Perhaps, although this might be more suitable for establishing "joint" commands, and also seems to be better suited to combining various capabilities over various domains (PACCOM, needs to control land, sea, air and space, and the cyber domain throughout for example).

At any rate, without really knowing what the particular end goal is, speculation is just that. Maybe President Trump is looking to distract everyone while the real goal is elsewhere.....

As a bit of historical trivia, the United States had some very ambitious plans for space warfare in the early 1960's which make for astounding reading. The people who developed the "Orion" nuclear pulse drive had serious plans to reach Mars by 1975, and send an expedition to Saturn soon after. Some of the military versions of their spacecraft would mass up to 4000 tons (similar to a modern naval frigate), rather than the spidery vehicles which reached the Moon in 1969:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2714/1

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/space/AD0385959.pdf

 

[tomahawk6]

I am afraid like Canada we have a lot of headquarters and of course general officers.For example do we really need AFRICOM ?

 

[FJAG]

Perhaps, although this might be more suitable for establishing "joint" commands, and also seems to be better suited to combining various capabilities over various domains (PACCOM, needs to control land, sea, air and space, and the cyber domain throughout for example).

At any rate, without really knowing what the particular end goal is, speculation is just that. Maybe President Trump is looking to distract everyone while the real goal is elsewhere.....

As a bit of historical trivia, the United States had some very ambitious plans for space warfare in the early 1960's which make for astounding reading. The people who developed the "Orion" nuclear pulse drive had serious plans to reach Mars by 1975, and send an expedition to Saturn soon after. Some of the military versions of their spacecraft would mass up to 4000 tons (similar to a modern naval frigate), rather than the spidery vehicles which reached the Moon in 1969:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2714/1

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/space/AD0385959.pdf

Unified Combatant Commands are "joint commands" such as the geographical US Central Command and the functional US Special Operations Command each with various Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines etc service component commands and even subordinate unified combatant command elements such as USSOCCENT. The only question would be whether or not US Space Command is geographical or functional.  ;D

:cheers:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Mind you I bet a lot of people making fun of the direction, also have no idea how their GPS works or just how reliant we are on space based navigation systems.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I am afraid like Canada we have a lot of headquarters and of course general officers.For example do we really need AFRICOM ?

Good point. Based on their casualty rates due to enemy action? I'd say they should probably all be fired.... 

 

[Jarnhamar]

 

[Loachman]

His War Time Epaulettes are yuge...

 

[Journeyman]

    op:

 

[a_majoor]

The Pentagon is already moving in that direction:

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/07/pentagon-create-space-force/150157/

EXCLUSIVE: Pentagon To Start Creating Space Force — Even Before Congress Approves It

Within months, DoD will start standing up a new combatant command, a new space-procurement agency, and a new Space Operations Force.

The U.S. Defense Department this week will take the first steps to create the Space Force, a new branch of the military ordered up by President Trump but not yet fully backed by Congress.

In coming months, Defense Department leaders plan to stand up three of the four components of the new Space Force: a new combatant command for space, a new joint agency to buy satellites for the military, and a new warfighting community that draws space operators from all service branches. These sweeping changes — on par with the past decade’s establishment of cyber forces — are the part the Pentagon can do without lawmakers’ approval.

Creating the fourth component — an entirely new branch of the military with services and support functions such as financial management and facilities construction — will require congressional action. Defense officials plan to spend the rest of 2018 building a “legislative proposal for the authorities necessary to fully establish the Space Force.” That would go to Congress early next year as part of the Trump administration’s 2020 budget proposal.

This plan, developed for execution by Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, the Pentagon’s No. 2 civilian, is laid out in a 14-page draft report slated to go to lawmakers on Wednesday. Defense One reviewed a draft of the report dated July 30.

Related: What Trump’s Space Force Announcement Means

Related: The US Air Force Is Reorganizing to Fight in Space

“The Department of Defense is establishing a Space Force to protect our economy through deterrence of malicious activities, ensure our space systems meet national security requirements and provide vital capabilities to joint and coalition forces across the spectrum of conflict,” says the draft report. “DoD will usher in a new age of space technology and field new systems in order to deter, and if necessary degrade, deny, disrupt, destroy and manipulate adversary capabilities to protect U.S. interests, assets and way of life…This new age will unlock growth in the U.S. industrial base, expand the commercial space economy and strengthen partnerships with our allies.”

The Pentagon declined to comment on the report in advance of its formal release later this week.

New Forces

The draft report says the Pentagon will, by year’s end, establish an eleventh unified combatant command: U.S. Space Command. Like U.S. Special Operations Command, which oversees special forces composed of servicemembers and organizations drawn from various service branches, the four-star Space Command will oversee space forces from across the military. The proposal goes even further than lawmakers demanded in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, which orders the Pentagon to create a space command under U.S. Strategic Command.

“The Department will recommend that the President revise the Unified Campaign Plan to create the new U.S. Space Command by the end of 2018 and evaluate the need for any additional personnel, responsibilities and authorities,” the draft report says. Initially, the Pentagon will recommend that the head of Air Force Space Command also serve as the commander of U.S. Space Command. Space liaisons will be installed in the geographic combatant commands, starting with U.S. European Command.

The draft report says the Pentagon will also stand up a Space Operations Force, made up of uniformed and civilian space personnel from the four military services and the National Guard and Reserve.

“Similar to Special Forces personnel provided by all military services, the Space Operations Force will be composed of the space personnel from all Military Services, but developed and managed as one community,” it says.

This force would come together quickly: the goal is to deploy “teams of space experts” to U.S. European Command and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command by next summer.

New Ways to Procure Satellites

The draft report heralds seismic changes in how the Pentagon buys, launches, and develops new technology for its satellites, including organizational and cultural shifts to emphasize speed and experimentation. It also plans a bigger role for private-sector space companies “as commercial and government entities ‘move toward the center’ on requirements, regulation and compliance.”

The centerpiece of this effort is a new joint office, dubbed the Space Development Agency, to oversee new satellite-development and space-launch contracts.

“Major existing space acquisition programs will remain in current service organizations, and aggressively pursue improved performance, while the Space Development Agency develops and fields the capabilities outlined in the DoD Space Vision,” the draft report says. “Over time, as current programs complete, resources will shift from service space acquisition organizations to the Space Development Agency.”

The biggest impact will be on the Air Force. The move clouds the future of the service’s Space and Missile Systems Center, the 6,000-person organization in Los Angeles that currently oversees about 85 percent of DoD’s space procurement budget — and which was recently restructured to speed the purchase and launch of satellites. The report calls this overhaul “the start.”

Like the Missile Defense Agency, the Space Development Agency would oversee acquisition projects across the various military services. Its size will be determined by a “DoD governance committee in partnership with the intelligence community,” the report said. Its location will be determined through “an accelerated process that considers locations that best enable the Agency to attract talent, leverage commercial expertise and develop new capabilities at speed and scale.”

Currently, the Air Force has hubs for space in Colorado, California, and Florida. The Army and Missile Defense Agency have a large presence in Huntsville, Alabama, an area nicknamed “Rocket City” for its large role in NASA and military space projects. The city is also known as “Pentagon South” due to the high concentration of Defense Department civilians there.

The report, which responds to a congressional mandate in the 2018 Defense Authorization Act, was largely written by Shanahan’s office and by Stephen Kitay, deputy assistant defense secretary for space policy, according to a senior defense official. Air Force officials were largely cut out of the review process several weeks ago, the official — and another source with knowledge of the decision — said on the condition of anonymity to speak about the yet-to-be-released report.

From Idea to Plan

The idea of creating a new service-level organization to handle the military’s space operations has been contentious since lawmakers last year proposed to attach a space corps to the Air Force, along the lines of the Marine Corps and the Navy. Pentagon leaders, including Trump’s own Air Force Secretary, largely opposed that move. But in recent months, the president has mulled, and then stated his desire for, a Space Force. If it becomes reality, it would be the first new branch of the military since the Air Force was born out of the Army Air Corps in 1947.

“Both the chief of staff and I are actually very glad that … people are becoming more aware and having a debate about what we do about this as a nation. That just wasn’t really there before,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said during a Washington Post event on July 25.

“I think the most important thing is to say focused on the warfighter and maintaining the lethality of the service, no matter how the org-chart boxes go,” Wilson said. “It’s all about the ability to fight. If we keep focused on that and not on which boxes move around which place in the Pentagon, then we’ll do the right thing for the nation.”

Wilson’s predecessor, Deborah Lee James — who served as Air Force secretary during the Obama administration — said Monday that she opposes a Space Force, but supports the creation of a combatant command, like the one discussed in Shanahan’s report. She made her  comments at a Brookings Institution event in Washington.

In recent years, the Air Force made numerous changes within its space arm to defend against Russian and Chinese interference. This week, the Pentagon is poised to announce a shift from “few independent” satellite constellations to a “a proliferated low-Earth orbit architecture enabled by lower-cost commercial pace technology and access.” Air Force officials hinted at these changes earlier this year when Shanahan visited Air Force Space Command in Colorado.

The Air Force operates 77 satellites in orbit while the Navy has 12 communications satellites, Wilson said.

“Satellites are really pretty fragile things and so we have to think now about how do we defend a constellation. It not always just direct defense,” she said. “It may be that we distribute a network. If you have multiple nodes it’s inherently more resilient than if you’re relying on one thing. Some it may be maneuverability. Some of it may be deception. There’s a lot of ways to make sure the United States can take a punch and keep on operating.”

 

[tomahawk6]

You MUST have Space Marines for Space Force.