• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

US SPACE (MARINE) CORPS

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
Meh. I'm a space enthusiast, but this kind of division sounds like a great way to spend more money and accomplish the same mission to me.
 

Pags

N/A
pilot
CDR Salamander did a bit on this a few days ago and as a sci-fi fan I think he hit it: spaceships have a direct lineage to navies and as such should follow nautical traditions. Spaceships have captains like Kirk and Piett. Troops with guns that serve on these ships are Space Marines.
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
Meh. I'm a space enthusiast, but this kind of division sounds like a great way to spend more money and accomplish the same mission to me.

Short term, probably.

It's the long term possibilities for differences in perspective I'm curious about.
That and the irony of spinning a separate service out of a service that itself was born when its parent service wasn't appropriately prioritizing aviation.
 
Last edited:

HH-60H

Manager
pilot
Contributor
Short term, probably.

It's the long term possibilities for differences in perspective I'm curious about.
That and the irony of spinning a separate service out of a service that itself was born when its parent service wasn't appropriately prioritizing aviation.
My impression is that the AF has been prioritizing space just fine, but for their own needs. I think Congress doesn't feel the other Services are doing enough and/or there is enough coordination.
 

LFCFan

*Insert nerd wings here*
CDR Salamander did a bit on this a few days ago and as a sci-fi fan I think he hit it: spaceships have a direct lineage to navies and as such should follow nautical traditions. Spaceships have captains like Kirk and Piett. Troops with guns that serve on these ships are Space Marines.

But do they have that same lineage? I mean, we haven't had any real "spaceships" in the sci fi sense you're talking about yet. Airships also have similarities to surface ships in how they operate, yet even the biggest heavier than air platform is not run like a ship. The article that CDR Salamader links to doesn't seem to grasp that there are aircraft with large crews, that air traffic control is a thing, and so on (also I find it hilarious that he brings up warhammer 40k's space combat, which is pretty much age-of-sail combat in in space, right down to broadsides, crossing the T, and even ramming).

I'm not saying that it won't work out that way, I just have to wonder how much of this is us applying what we've done in the past to a thing that doesn't exist yet. And if unmanned aircraft are cheaper than manned aircraft, I expect the same is true of spacecraft as well. I envision this force being a lot of guys sitting in command centers pushing satellites around. I don't really know if it is a good idea, as it would be a military force without a real unrestricted line / combat arms officer corps...at least as long as we have treaties against weaponizing space. Also, I think that without a warfighting mission of some sorts it would eventually become the most clogged up, GMT heavy, bureaucratic service in existence as there would be no one around to say "we ain't got time for this crap."

Also...anyone else think this totally came out of the blue (pun intended) and that the cyber guys would get their own service first?
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
This seems an awfully lot like mental masturbation to me. Perhaps we can define a mission and assign desired capabilities before we start picking out Star Trek uniforms. NASA has been more or less a soft military organization - at least in how its talent is acquired. Doesn't seem like we need to militarize the exploration of the inner solar system until there's something to defend against.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Doesn't seem like we need to militarize the exploration of the inner solar system until there's something to defend against.
2b07ba8e840dd4c960437dc202ab834d60fff9cad1ff6ec414c1ae9df95f5718.jpg
 

azguy

Well-Known Member
None
NASA has been more or less a soft military organization - at least in how its talent is acquired. Doesn't seem like we need to militarize the exploration of the inner solar system until there's something to defend against.

No one's talking about exploration here, or a replacement for NASA. I think the proposed mission of such a "Space Corps" and/or USSPACECOM, at least according to the statement by Rep. Rogers, would be purely to support warfighting requirements in the space domain, notionally within the confines of the GEO belt I would imagine.

I think some future iteration of this Space Corps and SPACECOM concept will have merit. Between Army, Air Force, Navy, and OGAs, there are so many SATCOM constellations, ISR assets, and weapons, that play in that arena, with more being developed. At some point, the juice will probably be worth the squeeze required to start-up a service or COCOM in order to achieve long-term streamlining of all these programs; both on the programmatic side and operationally.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Seems like something STRATCOM could do (or continue doing) without all the overhead of creating an entirely new/highly specialized COCOM. My question is - what need is not being currently met that the creation of a new COCOM would provide unique or more resource efficient solutions to?
 

azguy

Well-Known Member
None
Seems like something STRATCOM could do (or continue doing) without all the overhead of creating an entirely new/highly specialized COCOM. My question is - what need is not being currently met that the creation of a new COCOM would provide unique or more resource efficient solutions to?

Why SPACECOM? Why can't STRATCOM do it all? For the same reasons, I imagine, that CYBERCOM was broken off as a sub-unified COCOM. Expertise, capacity, location/proximity.

I think the larger need is on the programmatic, man/train/equip side of things...even though I hate the idea of a Space Corps. Who today is looking down the line at future gaps, seams, and redundancies? My guess is: lots of people are doing that, looking to protect/advocate for their own ricebowls; when in fact national security could be better served by one honest broker.

I'm not a space nerd. I have no desire to ever work in or for a SPACECOM or Space Corps. And I concede it adds more bureaucracy to an organization that needs less, in the aggregate. That said - all that crap up in orbit serves as an absolutely vital enabler for each of us tooling around in a gray ship or aircraft and we each have a vested interest in its continued supremacy and integrity.
 
Top