January 25, 2020

Oh.

Wait.
I dropped a bit.
This is not a parody. It's actually the U.S. Space Force logo.
Cool!


Posted by: The Brickmuppet at 07:07 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

1

Posted by: Pixy Misa at Sat Jan 25 10:24:33 2020 (PiXy!)

2 I'm still one of those guys who think this should have been organized in a naval format and not by the USAF.

Posted by: Clayton Barnett at Sat Jan 25 10:25:41 2020 (2o1P9)

3 @ Clayton. I think you are right. The Navy or Coast Guard are , institutionally, much more in sync culturally with what the USSF will be doing in any but the nearest term.

Rescues, inspections law enforcement and "presence" missions, in addition to the current intel and communications. Bombardment is something that the Airforce can do but not any better than the Navy.

Posted by: The Brickmuppet at Sat Jan 25 18:41:06 2020 (5iiQK)

4 Agreed.

Of course, thanks to the US Navy actually having Naval Aviation, having them take over the job from the Air Force sometime in the future is not an unexpected possibility.  We can even call it being a space equivalent of 'jointness' in action.

Posted by: cxt217 at Sat Jan 25 23:26:03 2020 (LMsTt)

5 Apparently the Air Force's space command dates to at least 1964 with the Delta iconography. It's Pre-Star Trek.

Posted by: Mauser at Sun Jan 26 01:13:35 2020 (Ix1l6)

6 I don't know. We're a long, long way away from space vessels of enough size where the institutional advantage of the Navy comes into play.
The AF has one major advantage - they're much more used to systems which need to be 100% working or you lose the craft. Think about our own Navy's tendency to not notice little things like approaching super-tankers; that represents more than one system issue. Bluntly, the Navy's fairly comfortable with a certain amount of jank, with systems that aren't always working, etc. I don't want ship uptime on my life support systems, I want aircraft uptime.
There might come a time when the ability to run an isolated organization of a few dozen or a few hundred men and women in a distant hull is relevant to a space force - but likely not within our lifetimes.

Posted by: Avatar at Wed Jan 29 05:38:48 2020 (v29Tn)

7 The AF has one major advantage - they're much more used to systems which need to be 100% working or you lose the craft. Think about our own Navy's tendency to not notice little things like approaching super-tankers; that represents more than one system issue. Bluntly, the Navy's fairly comfortable with a certain amount of jank, with systems that aren't always working, etc.

In theory, this point appears to be a major advantage to the Air Force, but the cynic would point out:
1. The naval model to use for a space force organization and operations are the submarine force, rather than the fast-movers that the Air Force are used to operating.  Submarines are closer to the "100% or nothing model" here, especially considering the expense and scarcity of the operating platforms.

2. Given the track record of the US Air Force with tendency to overlook little things like the operational readiness of the unit operating ICBMs, the organization does not have any institutional advantage in efficiency over any other branch of service.

Posted by: cxt217 at Wed Jan 29 17:41:57 2020 (LMsTt)

Hide Comments | Add Comment




What colour is a green orange?




34kb generated in CPU 0.0473, elapsed 0.1653 seconds.
71 queries taking 0.1368 seconds, 321 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.