Help support TMP


"US Space Force? You say no..." Topic


11 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Amazon's Fighting Snowmen

Who has armed the snowmen, and to whom does their allegiance belong?


Featured Workbench Article

The Zombie Resistance Family Project

Meet the Zombie Resistance Family!


Featured Profile Article

First Look: Battlefront's Train Tracks

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian checks out some 10/15mm railroad tracks for wargaming.


Current Poll


Featured Book Review


Featured Movie Review


556 hits since 15 Jun 2019
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian15 Jun 2019 6:24 a.m. PST

You were asked – TMP link

Do you support the creation of a separate space branch equal to the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard?

27% said "no"
24% said "yes"
13% said "I'm not American"

Tgunner15 Jun 2019 9:45 a.m. PST

I will support this in the future when we have real space assets for it to control. But right now there isn't much to control and it would eat more of the defense budget, so it seems a bit wasteful to me.

Lion in the Stars15 Jun 2019 12:01 p.m. PST

The idea is for the Space Force to unify all the various branch space programs (and absorb the National Reconnaissance Office).

The problem with that is that the different branches all need different things from their space assets.

It would be like having the USAF be the sole entity that flies. Transport planes? USAF. Heavy Bombers? USAF. Fighters? USAF. Attack helicopters? USAF. Transport helicopters? USAF. Planes flying from aircraft carriers? USAF. Anti-submarine helicopters? USAF.

Some of those missions just don't make any sense to be part of a separate service.

Thresher0115 Jun 2019 1:24 p.m. PST

I support it, since you've got to start sometime, and if it's not a separate force, the USAF won't give it the attention it needs.

Given the moves by other nations into space, and our lack of ability to launch our own astronauts into space currently, clearly things need to change, and soon.

Calico Bill15 Jun 2019 3:16 p.m. PST

Thresher01 👍😁

Personal logo Old Contemptible Supporting Member of TMP15 Jun 2019 5:26 p.m. PST

I think it is fine the way it is. The USAF is doing a good job.

Lion in the Stars15 Jun 2019 9:19 p.m. PST

No, the USAF is NOT supporting USAF-Space. HQUSAF has been stealing USAF-Space's budget and giving it to TAC.

That's literally why the Space Force was proposed in the first place.

Thresher0115 Jun 2019 11:07 p.m. PST

Yep, Lion for the win.

Even when there ARE separate forces with separate budgets, those in the other ones scheme with one another, or on their own to steal scarce defense budget dollars from one another by heavy lobbying.

That's been going on since the beginning of the Cold War, and will no doubt continue for a very long time.

jurgenation Supporting Member of TMP16 Jun 2019 6:04 a.m. PST

aargh!!!

Morning Scout16 Jun 2019 2:41 p.m. PST

A separate Space Force might not be seen necessary at this point, but the vision is something that should be pursued. The US has always been one to play catch up when it comes to these things so it will come at some point. Really not at all dissimilar to the fight for an independent Air Force or for the internal branch fights for a Carrier force, a Tank force etc.

Tachikoma17 Jun 2019 6:55 p.m. PST

It's not just a matter of budget, there are personnel issues as well. Since the USAF has a policy of retiring officers who do not achieve promotion within a specified time frame, many TAC officers are given command slots within the missile programs to keep them on career paths. This forces the retirement of missile program officers and a resultant loss of technical experience.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.