3
3
0
First U.S. Space Force Boot Camp Training | 2020 Space Force Basic Training
First U.S. Space Force Boot Camp Training | 2020 Space Force Basic TrainingThis is the first U.S. Space Force Boot Camp Training (Basic Military Training) an...
So we now have another branch of service. There isn't much info out there on what they do exactly. From my understanding they will be in charge of satellites and maybe satellite warfare??? So if this is something the Air force has been doing already, why invent another service branch? Why not just have a separate division in the Air Force?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDiCgu8_jXA&t=825s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDiCgu8_jXA&t=825s
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 10
To play devil's advocate, are the Marine Corps and Coast Guard needed? We could fold them both into the Army, Navy, and Air Force based on MOS.
Is the Air Force even needed? Army Air Corps and Navy Aviation, now we're down to two branches.
Is the Air Force even needed? Army Air Corps and Navy Aviation, now we're down to two branches.
(7)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
SMSgt Bob W. - I don't disagree, but the point I feel needs to be made. This same conversation happened in 1947 when the Air Force was created, people asked why? The Space Force is new and shiny and people are going to ask why for a long time before they come into their own.
(2)
(0)
SSgt Dan Montague
SPC (Join to see) - Well Space Force needs to sit at the little kids table for a while.
(2)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
SSgt Dan Montague - Oh they're definitely the little brother, and that's not going away anytime soon.
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see) the Space mission was performed by the Air Force with some support from Navy and Army in the past. SFC Casey O'Mally has it about right. Space Force looks to the future. Future conflicts will have significant involvement in the electromagnetic environment with jamming and blocking of electronic communication, surveillance, and navigation. Satellite warfare is a very real thing and destruction of major portions of the military satellite system would definitely impact military operations. The new military Service allows emphasis on future capabilities the DoD needs. Read 2034 by Elliot Ackerman and ADM James Stavridis for an interesting look at the next world war.
(6)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
I don't disagree, just felt like the point needed to be made. People asked the same questions about the Air Force in 1947 that they're asking about the Space Force now. I think it will be a necessary branch that will come into its own in time.
(4)
(0)
Space Force is one of those things that is built for growth.
They currently have a defined mission, which is admittedly limited. However that mission will grow and continue to grow for the foreseeable future.
The problem with leaving Space Force (SF) in the Air Force (AF) is two-fold.
First, the majority of what SF does WAS being done by AF. However some was being done by Navy, and some by Army. Consolidating it all under one branch allows for a more unified command and control and for less competition of ideology. We don't need to worry about whether to launch a Army satellite or an AF satellite, or who has priority on satellite paths. It is all SF now.
Second, Air Force was being required to split focus and priorities. They had to decide whether a new satellite - to support the Navy - was more important than a new F35. They were being tasked with not only global air dominance and military air support, but also space dominance and space security. There was competition for resources that should not have been. Branching out SF *still* has a competition for resources, however now that is being done by separate branches with equal seats at the table, and the decisions are being made by third parties (DoD/Pentagon and Congress) who should (at least theoretically) be more objective about resource allocation.
It is the exact same reason why the AF split from the Army.
They currently have a defined mission, which is admittedly limited. However that mission will grow and continue to grow for the foreseeable future.
The problem with leaving Space Force (SF) in the Air Force (AF) is two-fold.
First, the majority of what SF does WAS being done by AF. However some was being done by Navy, and some by Army. Consolidating it all under one branch allows for a more unified command and control and for less competition of ideology. We don't need to worry about whether to launch a Army satellite or an AF satellite, or who has priority on satellite paths. It is all SF now.
Second, Air Force was being required to split focus and priorities. They had to decide whether a new satellite - to support the Navy - was more important than a new F35. They were being tasked with not only global air dominance and military air support, but also space dominance and space security. There was competition for resources that should not have been. Branching out SF *still* has a competition for resources, however now that is being done by separate branches with equal seats at the table, and the decisions are being made by third parties (DoD/Pentagon and Congress) who should (at least theoretically) be more objective about resource allocation.
It is the exact same reason why the AF split from the Army.
(5)
(0)
Is the Space Force needed now? NO. Will it be needed in the future? YES. You are correct--Satellite tracking will be part of the Forces monitoring. However, they allow instantaneous communication across battle-zones, identify enemy positions and movements, track weather patterns, guide navigational systems, and allow for precision strikes. The satellites will interface with AWACS aircraft to provide the ground forces with up-to-the-minute information. The Space Force will provide satellite intelligence and satellite reconnaissance. Satellites are extremely vulnerable to attacks, so a system of defense against anti-satellite missiles and technologies, including cyber-attacks, need to be developed. The Space Force needs to integrate the needs of all Branches into its forces and be ready at a moments notice to assist as needed. Now will this happen? I doubt it because the Texaco men and women who wear the stars have BIG EGOS.
(4)
(0)
Yes it is necessary, especially with our reliance on GPS. A whole service consolidates everything from 3 into one allowing for better C2 and division of assets. Space is also a full blown domain, each domain has a service, and one that handles the "in-betweens".
There's no air in space either, so the Air Force can't work there.
There's no air in space either, so the Air Force can't work there.
(4)
(0)
The primary mission of the U.S. Space Force as directed by Congress is to maintain, protect, and expand the U.S. fleet of advanced military satellites that form the backbone of U.S. global military operations.
(4)
(0)
Why did the U.S. 'invent' the U.S. Air Force when the U.S. Army Air Corps was doing just fine?
(1)
(0)
SMSgt Bob W.
Internal bickering was the main problem. WWI &II provided a need for a serious study and implementation of "Air Power". Most of the Army upper brass was against it, with the exception of the "Air Corp". In "arm chair quarter backing" it proved to be a valuable later--Korea, Viet Nam, the Desert, etc. They also the US saw how effective the Luftwaffe was.
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
I don’t understand their mission, the intelligence agencies about run the satellite information. Do you even need boot camp or are you recruiting computer nerds and gamers?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next



