Space warfare will require massive specialisation. It's an interesting concept.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
...Jesus christ the horrid accent almost makes that unwatchable. Its like Elmer Fudd talking about sci fi.
edited 14th Mar '18 2:19:00 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yeah, he's aware which is why he uses subtitles. He also has a speech impediment. And a Ph D in physics.
edited 14th Mar '18 2:25:19 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
IMHO Cyberwarfare deserves its own branch way more then Space-War right now.
One is a legitimate, and current threat, has its own set of unique enviroments and circumstances that make it nearly impossible for any current branch to take up, and is causing tangible effects on the world.....
....
Which is honestly why the current administration goes right to the other.
Oh, bother.
Anyone else feel cheated? The weapons of the future should be jetpacks and lightsabers and stuff. Instead...it's social media troll farms and bots.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Immy: We already have U.S. Cyber Command and it is directly under Strat Com as its own command structure and not beholden to any one service. You also described exactly why we need space command.
Termnius: Well I feel a little bad but god that was a slog because it drove me crazy he sounded like this one guy I knew who would talk like that on purpose for over an hour just to drive people nuts.
edited 14th Mar '18 2:34:34 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
Now I kind of feel like re-watching Space: Above and Beyond.
Tuefel: It helps that the B-21 is basically a B-2 2.0. It even uses the same shape the B-2 was originally supposed to have.
We already have Space Command, but it’s historically neglected by the AF brass.
They should have sent a poet.
... The A10 has a pretty obvious problem against modern tanks - Which is that if you are flying a no-deflection attack run at a modern tank at less than two kilometers and on the deck, the tank will just bloody well shoot you out of the sky, never mind actual anti-air. - Being an unarmored target in the engagement envelope of a computerized targeting system and main tank gun is not a good and clever idea. Dropping precision munitions (and precision rocks.) from way on high is much safer.
edited 14th Mar '18 11:34:10 AM by Izeinsummer
And the Warthogs have a wide variety of stand-off munitions for doing that very thing. Not to mention getting some much-needed upgrades to allow them to interoperate with other aircraft, such as that fast-moving F-16 or F-22 hauling ass high over the battlefield painting everything with a ground-search radar to paint targets.
Plus, a fighter jet hauling ass overhead makes for a great distraction when you want them to look high while you go low. ![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Archon: We don't really have space command given space assets are just under the air force than say under say stratcom like the Cyber Command is.
Who watches the watchmen?
Oh yea, space is such a unique field that requires its own ground up agency that the leader of space exploration in the western world was created specifically for it, and not just branched out from airplanes.... Its blatantly false that it is unique and incomparable to aviation, just ask the NACA now NASA.
On the other hand, Cyber War has reached a point where the threat from it is more imminent then bullets, and bluntly no intelligence agency has the manpower or resources to properly engage in it, they are band-aides, and point tools, saying they already exist is like saying "Well we already have the navy seals and the navy operates planes, why do we need an actual army?".
edited 14th Mar '18 12:15:38 PM by Imca
Tuefel: Space Command is a subordinate command under STRATCOM just like Cyber Command used to be. I think there was some talk of making it a unified command like with CYBERCOM but nothing ever came of it.
They should have sent a poet.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Archon: I distinctly remember it being under the Air Force specifically as part of the USAF part of STRATCOM not it's own agency.
Immy:
Even more telling is NASA was a distinct and deliberate spliIt from traditional aviation made on purpose because it was not the same. You know one of those important details to note. Also last I checked a big part of NASA has been overwhelmingly based on rocketry and putting objects into orbit. That you are deliberately ignoring the fact that interacting with, putting objects into orbit, and traversing around in space is completely different than flying craft in atmosphere is rather telling.
Immy space is about as different as you can get from traditional aviation than if you tried literally from the ground up.
edited 14th Mar '18 1:23:03 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
Tuefel: I think we’re pretty much saying the same thing. I will say Space Command is kind of a weird one in that it’s not a unified command but it has a lot of reach across different branches. Realistically it should be a unified command like CYBERCOM, but the Air Force doesn’t want to lose their monopoly on space. At the same time they don’t really seem to particularly care about it and Space Command is routinely the most ignored major command in the Air Force.
They should have sent a poet.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Archon: Sorry misunderstood you there. I think the USAF just likes the extra budget and the "prestige" of having space under their control for the time being.
Who watches the watchmen?
Tuefel: Oh absolutely, that’s the majority of their reason for fighting to keep it. They’re not willing to give it the attention or resources it needs though, especially with things like satellite surveillance. I recall a general saying a while back that satellite surveillance was for civilian agencies.
They should have sent a poet.
The Mod with the Migraine
Speaking of Space Command, the Navy released another "pilot encounters UFO" video. Full article text
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Blue: I got that covered for you. Stars and stripes online article about it including a clip of the vid.
NYT's article on the program that spawned all three videos. What is it with Rhino drivers and spot tings UFO's? Apparently the parent program was a military oriented version of "Project Blue Book".
edited 14th Mar '18 6:20:39 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
So...is it Chinese or is it ours?
I's definitely a UFO in that it's unidentified, but given the area they saw it in my money is on it being of Earthly origin.
They should have sent a poet.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Who knows. My bet is a drone or missile undergoing tests and someone wasn't notified.
Who watches the watchmen?
As far as what is central enough to include in NASA's name, don't forget that "Aeronautics" is in there too. They do plenty of research on atmospheric and aviation stuff in addition to space. A couple of years back they were dropping Cessnas from cranes For Science!
edited 14th Mar '18 8:09:28 PM by AFP
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
AFP: While they assist in aeronautics there focus is still overwhelming space based.
Who watches the watchmen?
Fortress Sweden: Inside the plan to mobilize Swedish society against Russia
Hence, the nation spent the Cold War years preparing to fend for itself against a great power invasion, drawing up plans for how to mobilize the entirety of the civilian population and infrastructure to defend its territory. And then the Soviet Union collapsed, a new era of peace dawned and those plans were left to fall fallow.
Now, Sweden is looking to change that.
TL:DR; Sweden is re-adopting the "total defence" strategy, which involves total mobilization of all aspects of society.
edited 15th Mar '18 3:03:04 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
Archon: It could be they are testing out and creating off the shelf stuff to make the transition and work on the new bomber easier than our recent organizational fiasco in aircraft procurement. If the tech has been developed and tested on somewhat similar test bed that would help out in the future.
Garcon: That is simply neither accurate nor true. First off nearly all the big space capable nations have means, plans, or capabilities to utilize armed weapons in orbit or to fire weapons at targets in orbit or fire weapons that enter orbit from Earth before descending on targets below. That is US, China, and Russia.
The Chinese are using lasers to blind satellites and increasingly various nations are looking at the possibility of laser armed satellites for not only debris clearance but could also easily be used to damage or possibly destroy targeted satellites. The US and China both possess hard kill intercept systems that are directed at nothing but space targets. To top matters off while Russia and China cried about the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) treaty which was proposed but never fully adopted. In true hypocritical fashion Russia and China are making some rather overt pursuit in contradiction to that treaty they said the US should have signed.
We have more than just spy satellites. There are also communication, mapping, and GPS satellites all of which are part of general military infrastructure. The US military also operates a space plane in orbit on a regular basis and there is nothing actually preventing them from fielding conventional weapons as well.
Finally and most importantly there are no extant treaties that prevent the use, import, stationing, manufacturing, or any other action in regards to conventional based weapons in space. The only restriction is against nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction. Which means as long as the scope and scale of the weapons is limited to the point they never breach real considerations as a WMD there is no actual limitation on the majority of weapons in space.
edited 13th Mar '18 6:45:56 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?