It's time for the US Aerospace Force
Mike Snead
P.E. | President & Founder Spacefaring Institute LLC - Charting America's path spaceward! ™
In the early years of America's involvement in World War II, strategic land and naval airpower were the two primary means of US military force projection. US Army Air Forces B-17 strategic bombers struck the first offensive blows in both the European and Pacific theaters of operation. During that war, the US Army Air Forces became a force of several million military and civilian personnel, supported by the world's then largest industry, enabling the US to have global airpower capabilities. The success and importance of strategic airpower was the primary reason the US Air Force was created as a separate service in 1947. Ever since, strategic airpower has been at the heart of America's national security and ability to project power globally to deter aggression, to support allies and friends, and to strike against enemies.
Last month, USAF unveiled its latest strategic bomber—the B-21. Like the B-2, the B-21 will enable global air power reach against heavily defended adversaries to provide a primary means of deterring aggression—such as the now clearly growing aggression by Communist China.
The nation's need for strategic airpower was initially widely opposed when strongly advocated by Col. Billy Mitchell in the early 1920s. Generals and admirals scoffed at the notion of airpower becoming a substantial means of warfare. Fortunately, airpower champions within the Army Air Corps maintained focus and began to develop the strategic bomber—the B-17—that became the initial cornerstone of US military offensive capabilities in WW II.
During WW II, Germany's use of the V-2 tactical ballistic missile made Earth orbital space a warzone. Thousands of V-2's were launched in the final six months of the war in Europe. This was a wakeup call for the US that space was now a matter of national security. When USAF separated, its vision for the future was that airpower would expand to become aerospacepower—that manned air operations would expand upwards into space to support national defense and critical national interests.
Despite political opposition within the Air Force and the other services, the Air Force maintained this view for decades. The illustration below is of a space fighter—the S-17—from a 1976 cover illustration of the Air Force's official magazine, Airman. In this public affairs-approved illustration, the manned S-17 is operated by the US Aerospace Force—not to be confused with the "Space Force".
It is now time for the US Air Force to formally transition into the US Aerospace Force to ensure that America's strategic defense needs and strategic interests in outer space are met with technological and operational superiority over potential adversaries, such as Communist China. Neither the Space Force nor NASA are capable of delivering this now vital national security need. The same service that has now developed the B-21 to maintain American operational strategic airpower superiority needs to provide America's strategic spacepower superiority.
#USAF #space #China #spacepower #airpower
I'm #OpentoWork!
1yMike Snead Now that the Space Force has been split off, it seems to me that putting it back in the Air Force and then calling the result the Aerospace Force would be a case of putting toothpaste back into the tube. What matters now is that the Space Force obtains all the manpower and equipment it needs to carry out its mission, including defending #astroelectricity platforms in orbit. That will, sooner or later, include combat spacecraft, even if it's not the S-17 in the picture.
P.E. | President & Founder Spacefaring Institute LLC - Charting America's path spaceward! ™
1yMost people think of the military services in terms of the people in the service. However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, of the warfighting capabilities they are directly or indirectly being employed. The B-21, like the B-2, will provide an operational capability that the combatant commanders can, with good confidence, employ when and where needed to achieve US goals and intended outcomes. Outer space has become, despite Eisenhower's goal, a battlespace warranting true warfighting capabilities. In 1989, General John L. Piotrowshki, Commander in Chief of the first US Space Command, wrote: " Future military space operations must be treated with the same 'developed-for-war' approach that today is applied to operations on the land, sea, and in the air. Space systems must be developed with readiness, sustainability, modernization, and force structure in mind. The same basic principles applied to land, sea, and air operations today must be applied to tomorrow's space operations." In the ensuing 34 years, what has now become the Space Force fundamentally ignored this need for true US space warfighting capabilities as defined by the then US Space Command commander. Thus, the need for a true Aerospace Force.
Air Force Veteran / Outdoor Enthusiast
1yI can’t think of anything we need less than a manned space fighter. I was not a fan of breaking out the Space Force, because I don’t think it solved any of the root causes of what was supposedly wrong with space Acquisition/Operations/Doctrine. But I would prefer a “purple force” to just cramming air and space back together.
Co-Founder / CEO at Spacely
1yInteresting take and first I think I’ve seen someone make a case for this. At first glance, I felt like the aerospace force is where I spent the preponderance of my career. I’m not sure if it matters though if it’s called the Air Force, Aerospace Force or Space Force. We’ve been building space systems for nearly 70 years and the question is what have these investments failed to provide. If there have been underfunded areas, it simply comes back to incentive structures and not names. By focusing on names we incentivize a bureaucratic outcome. By focusing on outcomes we incentivize capability delivery. We have the frozen middle layers as a result of the wrong incentive structures
Space Infrastructure Advocate at Robots in Space LLC
1yAbsolutely not. The Air Force allowed the US to slip into strategic vulnerability in space due to its prioritization of in-atmosphere vehicles. The Space Force must be allowed to correct that malfeasance before the Air Force attempts any influence or budget raids.