Slashdot Mirror
Trump Directs Pentagon To Create Space Force Legislation for Congress (wsj.com)
President Donald Trump signed a directive on Tuesday that ordered the Department of Defense to create a Space Force as a sixth military branch. From a report: With a directive signed Tuesday, Mr. Trump was positioning the Space Force much as the Marine Corps fits into the Navy, officials said, with the result being lower costs and less bureaucracy. The plan would require congressional approval. Mr. Trump is to propose funding in his proposed 2020 budget, and spell out a goal of eventually establishing the Space Force as a separate military department, a senior administration official said. "Space, that's the next step and we have to be prepared," said Mr. Trump, who added that adversaries were training forces and developing technology. "I think we'll have great support from Congress."
The order Mr. Trump signed, Space Policy Directive 4, calls for a legislative proposal by the secretary of defense to establish a chief of staff of the Space Force within the Air Force. That officer would be a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to an outline. There also be a new under secretary of defense for space to be appointed by the president. The proposal calls for the Space Force to organize, train and equip personnel to defend the U.S. in space, to provide independent military options for "joint and national leadership" and "enable the lethality and effectiveness of the joint force," according to the administration's outline.
The order Mr. Trump signed, Space Policy Directive 4, calls for a legislative proposal by the secretary of defense to establish a chief of staff of the Space Force within the Air Force. That officer would be a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to an outline. There also be a new under secretary of defense for space to be appointed by the president. The proposal calls for the Space Force to organize, train and equip personnel to defend the U.S. in space, to provide independent military options for "joint and national leadership" and "enable the lethality and effectiveness of the joint force," according to the administration's outline.
But with recent readings about how China really seems to be upping their space game, and apparently looking to set up a base on the moon, this actually might not be a bad idea.
China is definitely doing military groundwork for space, and we don't want to be caught with our pants too far down.
And this actually might boost conventional space progress for us...something we've lost over the past decades.
If you have military $$ behind it, it might give the regular NASA stuff a boost too.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Can Trump declare another National Emergency?
Maybe, now that national emergencies can be handed out like candy and resources reallocated from their intended porpoises to other species.
A Space Force could help to build the new Donaldson Sphere.
A Donaldson Sphere is a mega structure that surrounds the earth. Sort of a planetary wall. To keep aliens out. And make the aliens pay for it.
But it has secondary benefits. While it would keep out all sunlight from the earth, this would result in the need to burn more clean coal for energy. All of those left wing liberal solar panels aren't going to work so well with a Donaldson Sphere protecting the planet from sunlight.
It's a great plan! What could go wrong? It's a fantastic use of resources. The best resources. The most brilliant plan, I tell you. Trust me. People call all the time saying that we should build the Donaldson Sphere. Believe me. It would be the biggest bestest project that shows how great American truly is.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
I'm sure the Pentagon can find an underused broom closet to hang the Space Force sign on.
Have gnu, will travel.
I'm not sure which color shirt I want to try for at this point. Definitely not the red one, though.
Does that mean that they are going to have to rebuild The Pentagon as a six sided building of six nested hexagons each of which is six floors high ?
Could anyone suggest a nickname for this new building ?
Trust me. You don't want to be on this rock stuck in a gravity well once the killer asteroid hits.
weaponizing space helps nobody except the Military Industrial Complex. We had treaties to prevent this sort of thing.
Defense is a moot point now. Pakisitan keeps turning a blind eye to domestic terrorists in India and nothing ever comes of it because the ruling class isn't going to let you and me have another big war and break all the stuff they own. Unless globalism breaks down completely we're done with World Wars.
You won't see much new research out of this because the point isn't get get ahead of the curve or to defend the nation or even to attack others. The point is to soak up taxpayer dollars and distract from the ever worsening economy. Works too.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"Bless his heart"
I've been to the American South.
That's how they say "Fuck Him". :)
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
This is clearly the next step in the complicated multi-year plot to send Trump's hair back home.
That's not what the Space Force is.
And you seem very overly pessimistic about the New Space Race. Bezos and Musk seem quite determined to reduce launch costs, especially for manned missions, so much that it's a change in kind. They have a good track record so far. IIRC, SpaceX had more successful launches last year (21) than all the other US launchers and Russia combined. And Bezos has personal wealth that exceed the budget of the Apollo program, if he really wants to make this happen.
We saw almost no progress for 20-30 years in rocketry because of the Shuttle, but it's a new century now. The primary factor in launch cost is rocket re-usability, and both SpaceX and Blue Origin has already demonstrated game-changing numbers. SpaceX's "Starship", if it delivers, will be another 10x reduction in launch costs, to the point where all sorts of things start making financial sense to do in space.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Exactly. The reason we haven't colonized the galaxy yet is because of launch costs. And China had 35 launches last year, so they must be ahead of everyone.
Call it SG1 to get more vote!
You are probably one of those guys who said we shouldn't colonize the New World. Or said that humans will never fly. But look around: Musk has reduced launch costs by over 20%! The future is now.
Even if rockets are free, what kind of things make sense to do in space?
Seriously, I keep hearing this. And for someone with such a funny view of socialism, pray tell; what is it that got you your precious Moon landing in 1969?
The invisible hand? The Free Market? Pilgrims?
Answer: the same thing that got you your interstate highways and municipal drinking water.
The reason we haven't colonized the galaxy yet is because of launch costs.
Do you see anyone else around here spouting this hyperbole? You're the person you're complaining about!
And, yes, China is kicking ass. Their moon landing was awesome. And an Israeli moon lander will launch on a Falcon 9 in a few days, and ideally be the first to do a "hop" from one landing site to another. Exciting times.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Well now that we have 20% reduction in launch costs we can build that space factory you guys always wanted. We can mine iron ore with the savings!
"Bless his heart" :)
I've been to the American South.
That's how they say "Fuck Him".
Almost. "Bless his heart" means "he's dumb as shit". "Bless him" is how they say "fuck him".
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Space Nutters keep talking about mining asteroids, even though it makes zero sense. We have more than enough here on Earth.
This is partially an effort to keep the Air Force leadership from taking money away from military space issues. Mike Griffin is a proponent of a 'Space Force', and he has a lot of experience on the military side of things.
Without even looking I can bet the WSJ never referred to Obama as 'Mr. Obama'.
I do not belong to the church of the lowercase 'i'
I mean what makes sense to do in space we already do: shoot up cameras and radios that mostly point back down at us.
Sometimes we send cameras with radios further out for our amusement to get some pictures.
Space gets us information. Planet, singular, THIS one, gets us food, water, and air.
what is it that got you your precious Moon landing in 1969?
Mostly technology built by corporations. Just like interstate highways.
There was a time when going to space was so expensive, and the payback so distant, that it only made sense or the government to do it. It's a new century, and "space" is a competitive business now.
Even if rockets are free, what kind of things make sense to do in space?
Anything that's unpleasant to do on Earth. I expect the first major industry to move to space will be power generation. When a several trillion dollar industry gets cheaper to do in space, it will move, and that will be the end of our whining about fossil fuels. Very simple solar thermal plants are far more efficient, even with transmission losses, than ground0based solar. At $3000/kg to orbit, orbital power is practical, but still more expensive than fracking. At $300/kg to orbit, it will happen. Solar in LEO might not make sense for other reasons, and it may be another decade or two before we're talking about $300/kg for GEO, but that's just price.
Think about all the heavy industries that enviroweenies complain about. Most heavy industrial processes would be a lot less of a hassle in space, if we could just magically teleport millions of tons of equipment to orbit. We're a long way from asteroid mining and heavy industry moving to space, but launch costs are the sticking point, far more than robotics or redesigning a blast furnace to be a solar furnace.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
in 2020. I don't want war with Iran. Or Venezuela. And I'd love to put a stop to the 7 or 8 wars we're in now.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Between the Air Force and the Marines this could be covered, we don't need a special separate branch of our military to do this.
/
Well now that we have 20% reduction in launch costs
The cost to launch stuff on the space shuttle was around $16,000/kg to LEO IIRC (actual program cost was around 3x that). Launching on the Delta IV costs around $12,000/kg - that's progress, for a government contractor.
Falcon 9 has launch costs around $3000/kg to LEO. That's a bit better than 20%. Blue Origin is trying for commercial sub-orbital tourism this year with New Shepard (and their product demo launch makes that seem credible). The next generation (New Glenn and Starship) are promising much lower costs.
Building a rocket will never be cheap, but rocket fuel just isn't that expensive.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I'm on it. I'll be trying to get a contract to provide our loyal, space troupers with phased plasma rifles in the 20, 40 and 100 watt range. I expect the R&D to be extraordinarily expensive.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Space Nutters keep talking about mining asteroids, even though it makes zero sense. We have more than enough here on Earth.
Heavy industry isn't exactly environmentally friendly on Earth. It would be nice to do it elsewhere, if we could afford to. At the right price, the kind of people who own their own islands would no doubt love to own their own island-sized space stations, and it just makes more sense to build most of that in space (at least the heavy structure and water and such) rather than lifting it.
Shorter term, the ability to make fuel in space would be a godsend to science missions. There are hundreds more probes we could launch if we didn't have to launch their fuel. There are some nearby CHON asteroids - dragging a tiny one into orbit isn't that ridiculous.
I'd love to see us able to launch a solar probe that doesn't require 7 Venus flybys to get there (though it will be approaching 0.1% of the speed of light, which is amazing), or quickly send probes to the Pluto-like objects we've discovered. Just making interplanetary probes more than a once-a-decade affair would be a heck of a thing.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
From a conversation among the grownups. Something modeled on the Coast Guard rather than the Air Force since we have regulatory compliance, defense and force projection.
https://spacenews.com/space-fo...
... would be to develop X-Wing fighters, right?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
(pronounced "doo-see'-pa")
Department of United States Extra-Planetary Affairs
Sounds a hell of a lot less juvenile than "Space Force".
My 2c.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
So many U.S. military systems make use of space-based resources that their destruction would have an immediate and profound effect on our ability to defend our own country or win in war elsewhere.
Furthermore, we are on the verge of launching a number of missions to the Moon, Mars, and Deep Space by a number of different commercial agencies. We need infrastructure up there and defensive capabilities. ESA is working on a permanent Moon base, ULA is working on a permanently manned space station for zero-G manufacturing and refueling. China is eyeing the very limited spaces with water-ice on the Moon and the harvesting of the Moon's helium-3 for nuclear reactors (Earth's uranium supplies are running low). And of course, there is Blue Origin and SpaceX and others pushing hard toward the Moon, Mars, and deep space in general.
However, I suggest this be done a little differently.
(1) The Air Force's Space Command should be made into a separate branch of the Air Force with its own independent budget. It's primary missions should be data collection and orbital asset protection. These assets are a cornerstone of U.S. survivability, in terms of communications, navigation, and threat identification. The Air Force's Space Command already performs this mission and the Air Force is best equipped to respond to identified threats in this area.
(2) The Department of Homeland Security should be given the additional mission of missile and infiltration defense. It needs its own independent budget and focus on the now vastly growing threat of medium range and cruise missiles with tactical nuclear warheads. This is a huge vulnerability that Russia is working very aggressively to exploit. The gap simply must be filled -- quickly. We need short/medium range missile defenses all around the country -- manned 24x7. They also need for develop capabilities to knock out hypersonic weapons. Russia has hypersonic weapons (early versions) and their bombers are capable of dropping dozens of tactical nuclear cruise missiles, at a time. These could be quite crippling in a surprise attack on U.S. based military command and control plus other pivotal resources.
(3) The Navy should be given the additional mission of deep space rescue and exploration. However, it does not yet need a new sub-agency with its own budget as we are only beginning commercial deep space ventures, today. Do we really want Moon colonies, Mars colonies, and deep space asteroid mining assets left defenseless with no ability to response to attack? Those space resources are likely to become essential economic resources in the decades to come. The Navy is by far the best for this mission as their core competency is in far away, self-reliant, missions amid small spaces and limited resources. Submarines are not unlike deep space vessels. The Navy knows how to keep up morale and professionalism, in addition to survival and mission preparedness.
On a side note, I also think the Navy and particularly U.S. Army aviation should seriously reconsider dirigible airships (Zeppelins). Not only has material sciences improved by leaps and bounds to make these ships safer, faster, and more survivable but recent advances in active armor and close range laser defenses should make them almost invulnerable to attack. The blimp that flew over Baghdad for years in Iraq was never shot down, even without active armor. Army Airships could absolutely take command as they sweep over enemy held territory or insurgents in the rear... with high tech sensors, armed drone dropships, and special operation commando forces.
Even if rockets are free, what kind of things make sense to do in space?
1: Locate incoming big rocks
2: Determine where they will hit
3: If (our nation) then divert
else notify nation and ask how much money it's worth to divert that incoming rock.
It's not extortion. It's protection, and it's expensive. So, pay up, or BOOM.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Would you like to know more?
It is...if you are Russian!
Ezekiel 23:20
Ignoring the first section of that post, the main roles of the Coast Guard are to keep our waterways safe and stop smuggling, neither of which currently applies to space. It may be useful to create a United States Space Force in fifty years, but right now it's a dumb idea.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes