Space Force Revisited

IIRC we have had at least one previous post about SF (not San Fran). Here’s an interview with retired Air Force Gen Kwast by Candace Owens.

Interesting concepts raised are the competitive aspects of space, the exploitation of new sources of energy and raw material. Not necessarily how I’ve looked at this, but perhaps I just haven’t been paying attention to the changes in technology.

?How have you guys been thinking of space.

5+
avataravataravataravataravatar

11 thoughts on “Space Force Revisited”

  1. I have been arguing for a US Space Force for years. Glad to see it becoming a reality. However, relying on rocket technology is a dead end, the Tic Tac observations, assuming they are real, prove that jets, rockets et-al are impotent and obsolete.  I have an alternative.

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  2. Jack Sarfatti:
    I have been arguing for a US Space Force for years. Glad to see it becoming a reality. However, relying on rocket technology is a dead end, the Tic Tac observations, assuming they are real, prove that jets, rockets et-al are impotent and obsolete.  I have an alternative.

    ?And that is ….

    1+
    avatar
  3. I’m encouraged, as I don’t expect the non-militarization of space to hold long-term.  That convention is only as durable as its most-agressive adherent permits.  I’m a firm believer in peace through strength, including in space.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  4. Devereaux:
    How have you guys been thinking of space.

    Look at it this way (which is the way I’ve thought of it since reading Gerard K. O’Neill’s The High Frontier in the 1970s).  Around 99.9% of the material resources in the solar system are not on the Earth, and a large fraction of them are in a form which are much easier to extract than on Earth, since many (such as the asteroids) have not been subject to geological processing which makes some materials difficult to access.  Once you get out of Earth’s gravity well, transportation becomes almost free as long as you aren’t in a hurry about getting there, which bulk cargo is not.  Access to cheap energy has been a key component of the development of technological civilisation since the discovery of fire, and once you get beyond low Earth orbit, you have 1.3 kilowatts of free energy available 24 hours a day for every square metre of solar panel or collector you stick out (at Earth’s orbital radius: more if you’re closer to the Sun, less if farther out).  Pollution is zero problem in space: if there’s stuff you want to get rid of, just eject it as a gas and the solar wind will flush it out into interstellar space.

    For what it’s worth, Jeff Bezos gets it, and his Blue Origin venture is explicitly working toward this goal.

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  5. Okay, is Bezos making contingency plans for dealing with CPLA space frigates zipping into position across his proposed trajectory toward some mineral-laden lunar crater or asteroid?

    Is he planning on fending off the hostiles himself?  Or paying them tribute? Or what?

    Kwast in this Owens video interview made the analogy to American pioneers in Conestoga wagons crossing the Great Plains.  They – often enough at least to make a difference – had the protection of the US Cavalry.  In this new frontier, this new space, which some nations would readily convert into a battlespace with themselves as the  aggressors, it would be better for Americans to establish, by means of their armed forces, superior maneuverability, communications, and firepower. (The further analogy that leapt to mind at that point in the Owens presentation is that of the green Jeep with a big white star on it, crossing Germany in 1945.)

    Hence the urging to think about space-based strategic assets as more than support of the USAF: as guarantors of freedom of travel in space beyond the Earth orbit.

    Kwast gave a reminder of the lethal results of short-sighted bureaucratic thinking,  in his November 2019 talk at Hillsdale’s DC Kirby Center:

    . . . in the 1920s, the airplane and the tank were developed by the Army.  Even the most respected military leaders at the time, Gernerals John J. Pershing and Douglas MacArthur, opposed independent development of the airplane and the tank because they saw them as subservient to the infantry . . . This . . .resulted in needless loss of life during World War II . . . countless soldiers died in America’s Sherman tanks, whose shells would bounce off  Germany’s Panzer ad Tiger Tanks.  Frontal infantry attacks were launched in order to get Sherman tanks behaind the German tanks to fire at close range – the only range at which they could be effective.  Many more of our fighting men would have come home and the war would hav been shorter if American generals had taken a revolutionary approach to tanks and planes from the beginning.

    Kwast is evidently a man on a mission.  Granted. But politics and budgets are superficial concerns in comparison with, potentially, national survival.  Should we not have serious consideration of the underlying arguments?

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  6. I had a chance to view the entire interview. There’s a lot of truth in what Retired General Kwast says, but from my gut feelings, a damn lot of paranoia. Does he actually know what 5-G is and stands for?

    I would LOVE to know how buying a China made drone is gonna link back and phone home with data.

    I think we have more internal problems with politics and the politicians selling us out than China right now. Here’s something we can hope for

    2+
    avataravatar
  7. China has its own problems. Taking on Norko would not help anything. They would actually be better off if S>Kor took over the north. They would have a larger trading partner, and a neighbor they could bot count on and know the outlines of what they might do.

    2+
    avataravatar
  8. Unfortunately, Kwast, Musk et-al all good guys, but sadly clueless to what is really happening – rockets are now in horse and buggy category. I have been having a private correspondence with Chris Mellon – yes, those Mellons, former Asst Under Secty Defense for Intelligence and I hit a glass ceiling. Nice guy, but completely unequipped to understand Tic Tac, which is his prime interest now. He cannot tell the difference between nonsense physics like Pais patents and the real thing. However, I am working on him and there maybe some light at the end of the tunnel.

    2+
    avataravatar

Leave a Reply