Space Force Says That It Plans To Send Troops To The Moon
Space Force Will Eventually Put Troops in Orbit, Ops Boss Says, Air Force Magazine
“Military troops in the Space Force will someday deploy to orbit, one of the service’s top operations officials said Sept. 29. “At some point, yes, we will be putting humans into space,” Maj. Gen. John E. Shaw, head of the Space Force’s Space Operations Command and part of U.S. Space Command leadership, said during a conference organized by the AFWERX innovation group. “They may be operating command centers somewhere in the lunar environment or someplace else.” Space Force officials, wary of being confused with NASA, usually shy away from questions about whether military personnel will go to the Final Frontier themselves. Experts have split on whether a Space Force astronaut corps is a good idea in the next couple of decades, if at all.”
Outer Space Treaty of 1967
“Article IV
States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.
The moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on celestial bodies shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration of the moon and other celestial bodies shall also not be prohibited.”
– NASA And Space Force Are Collaborating, earlier post
– Space Force Fans Want To Implement The “Green Agenda”, earlier post
– Space Force Is Obsessed With Being Space Force, earlier post
– Military Space Guys Argue Over The Whole Space Force Rank Thing, earlier post
– Space Force Really Wants To Be Star Fleet, earlier post
– Now Space Force Wants Its Own Starfleet Admirals, earlier post
– Space Force Really Wants To Take Over All Of NASA’s Stuff, earlier post
– TV’s Space Force Looks Like More Fun Than The Real One (Or Artemis), earlier post
– More Space Force postings
I expect that as the industrialization of the Moon takes place over the next few decades you will see many other government agencies beside NASA having personnel on the Moon to perform various their functions as needed, including U.S. Marshals, FCC, FAA, EPA, etc. So it’s not far fetched that some USSF personnel will be in the mix as well to protect them as the article speculates.
I’m skeptical, here on earth FCC, FAA, EPA,USPS, USFS, etc. are being dismantled. For agencies not being dismantled they are being politicized. Plans to build up all this tech while I see the education system struggling, need a lot of people (not astronauts but armies of engineers, techs, mechanics here on earth).
We all read about grand ideas the military had about MOL but they also realized that was not a good idea as recon platforms are better without people onboard. Not sure if a Coast Guard outfit is needed, maybe way into the future. Interesting that others are beginning to talk about the moon besides just Dennis Wingo and Paul Spudis.
“Plans to build up all this tech while I see the education system struggling, need a lot of people (not astronauts but armies of engineers, techs, mechanics here on earth).”
The parts of the education system struggling are exactly those trying to spin words into reality they can accept, instead of putting reality’s numbers foremost. Whether universities produce them or not, engineers, tech, and mechanics will be there, from other paths to knowledge.
“… as recon platforms are better without people onboard.”
Better? They’re certainly more easily assured of not imaging things that will embarrass higher authority.
“Interesting that others are beginning to talk about the moon besides just Dennis Wingo and Paul Spudis.”
Paul and Dennis were certainly never alone. They were simply the most prominent when political tides shifted away from the Moon, through sheer persistence.
“… here on earth FCC, FAA, EPA,USPS, USFS, etc. are being dismantled.”
I do not mourn it. The idea, that free men and women cannot live without huge government agencies in charge is a 20th century affliction born of the pleasant experiences bureaucrats had in WW1, running far greater portions of society than they had done in peacetime for a century or so. They found they liked power, and found many excuses to generate the power that came with their future positions in government.
Unless things have changed since I last heard about it, the US Marshals’s service doesn’t have much of a presence in Antarctica. I believe it amounts to two NSF managers with very part-time appointments as Marshal’s deputies. I think the Moon will be similarly thin on personnel from the agencies you mention, until the number of people living there (permanently or as transients) is in the hundreds or thousands.
Mostly likely, especially when it’s just a science outpost, but there eventually should also be more commercial activity on the Moon and a need for a greater presence for law enforcement. But the key is that a precedence has already been set. The basic ratio of law enforcement per 1000 individuals is 3.4 in the USA, but the filters involved for going to the Moon (employment, income, education, age) will likely allow a lower ratio.
You are correct about the NSF and deputized personnel.
Did you even bother to read the treaty?
Yes, along with the Senate Hearings on it’s ratification as well as taking a legal course on it. Have you taken any courses on space law? Or read the ratification hearings on it? Or the NASA summary of the negotiations? Or are you just taking the words out of their legal context as so many do…
Article IV of the OST would allow USSF personnel to be based on the Moon for purposes of observation as well as for Search and Rescue. Last I looked both observation along with search and rescue were considered “peaceful purposes”.And if you don’t believe me why not just give the State Dept. a call and ask instead of speculating.
Also the OST does not replace or supersede Article 51 of the UN Charter in regard to protection of U.S. assets in space.
Also if you are interested here is a well researched article written on military forces in space by Leonard David in 2018.
https://www.space.com/41943…
100% a great idea. Let DoD build and supply the infrastructure NASA no longer can. The same capability that can supports a Space Force crewed presence in space and the moon will support a NASA lead exploration effort.
Anyone denying the inevitability of exporting humankind’s war madness is simply not paying attention.
Or USSF may like the US Coast Guard evolve into more of a protection service doing search and rescue along with protecting spacecraft. In fact that was the basic speculation in the article as to why they may eventually have a human presence on the Moon as commercial human activities take place there.
Remember NASA is basically a science agency that is little equipped to do search and rescue on a regular basis.
The U.S. Navy and the Coast Guard exist to insure Freedom of the Seas and the safety of those who sail them. I would foresee a similar role for the U.S. Space Force in Freedom of Space.
That is a very good summary of what the mission of the USSF will be in space, and why the USN and USCG might be better models than the USAF.
Which is probably why, in part, Congress has put a big foot down in front of General Raymond.
I was thinking for ships, the navy management style applies better than the air force or army management style. So for long duration missions that is not on land a navy style more suited (Gene Roddenberry got that right?). For moon bases would USSF use the army style of management? Now you guys got me thinking about studying how navies and armies are organized the way they are. USCG uses same management style as Navy but for a different purpose. However, I don’t see lots of people in space for some time. Virtually everyone will be on the ground so maybe an air force management style is fine. Probably the biggest battles will be funding, even if lots of $$$ provided there are many in USSF that will claim they are the most deserving.
Maybe be 10% less kneejerk anti-military?
Ok, fair enough. If you will allow, here’s a re-write, perhaps more clearly specifying what I meant:
American lunar interests will require protection from the naturally belligerent tendency that humans show when in groups.
have we found another budget to cover ISS ? Of course, without the Russians !
I really don’t think anyone, not even the USSF, would want the ISS. And given how the air leak has been traced to the 20 year old Zvezda Service Module you really have to wonder how long it will actually last.
https://www.space.com/inter…
Small air leak on space station traced to Russian service module
By Mike Wall
Sept 29 2020
“Investigators have traced the source of the leak to the “main work area” of the Zvezda Service Module, the heart of the Russian part of the station, NASA officials announced today (Sept. 29).”
But Space Force say they want an orbital outpost (as a penalty box ?) and NASA says they don’t want to pay for ISS. Even if you boot the Russians off and seal up they module (or fix the problem).
Zvezda, or a Progress spacecraft docked to it, contain the rockets used the maintain the station’s attitude (as well as their propellent tanks.) Zvezda also provides a attitude control for ISS. Well, partial attitude control can come from one of the US elements, but Zvezda. It also used to provide most of the life support for the station, but I’m not sure if that’s still true. So, overall, ISS isn’t a viable space station without Zvezda.
It sounds like a solution looking for a problem for the foreseeable future.
does that make this “forward planning” ?
which is a “good” thing ?
Start dropping Starships on every water hole and stuff em full of jar heads.
Warmongers and paranoid humans will inevitably bring the worst of human nature with our expansion off Earth; assuming they don’t make us all go extinct before even reaching that point. WE do, as sentient, and fairly intelligent creatures, have the wherewithal to stop this from happening, but do enough really care to try or not.
Otherwise, this posts assertion is just another example of a $10,000 military toilet or screwdriver and just as useless to the future of humanity. The Moon should have the same operations treaties as Antarctica does.
The ISS Conventions make a better model since they don’t prohibit mining or commercial settlement as the Antarctic Treaties do. Hopefully the Artemis Accords will lead to a similar set of agreements.
Also don’t forget that military assets, not just the U.S. but also from Argentina, Chile, China, UK, etc. are often used in Antarctica to support research and provide rescue for tourist operations in the region.
A $10,000 toilet would be a bargain compared to the $23 million dollar toilet being sent to the ISS.?
And have you ever actually designed space hardware?
No, which is one reason I am not rich. ?
BTW you do know a smiley face indicates a joke…
Hold on. I have designed flight hardware (well, obviously as part of a team) and I’m not rich. Was I doing something wrong?
Probably because you just designed scientific instruments and nothing as useful as an Universal Waste Management System UWMS, (NASA speak for toilet…) as Collins Aerospace did. ?
That’s a problem for the Outer Space Treaty. Everything a country puts into orbit remains their property (and responsibility) forever. There’s no such thing as abandoned property to salvage, and you can’t go out to collect their property for them.
Wherever civilization has gone the military has gone, either to provide protection or to assist in the conquest. I can imagine e if operation s get going on the moon, if there is competition, the military will become part of the infrastructure. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Its almost odd that NASA has provided the sole representation for the US in space since 61. Its not that the military hasnt thought about it with MOL, Dyna Soar, Blue Gemini and even the Shuttle.
Key phrase: “Someday.”
As commercial efforts work their way out of low Earth orbit, I expect that the USSF will follow.
But, it won’t be tomorrow.
I seriously doubt it will be in my life time.
Within 20 years.
Like I said not in my life time.
It depends on the war and the treaty. The Geneva conventions have usually been observed even during wars (repeat, usually…) But I thought we were talking about the Space Force could do prior to a war. After all, your earlier comment did mention recovering a Soviet sub, which clearly didn’t happen during a war.
In that context, under the OST the Space Force could train to capture a foreign spacecraft, including exercises in orbit. They couldn’t actually do it to “acquire enemy technology” until a war started and the US government decided the OST no longer applied. They could not even train to do so on the Moon or a planetary surface. A quirk of the OST is that it has stricter limits on activities on “celestial bodies” than activities in orbit (which are basically a ban on nuclear weapons and on “interfering” with other activities in space.)
Look, it’s not a shocking that nations violate treaties they have signed. Nor is it that they get away with it. But nations do get into political trouble when they get caught doing so. So the traditional practice is to _not_ get caught. Most violations tend to be minor and involve things which can be done quietly and without obvious evidence of a violation. By that standard, the Space Force can’t do anything which would be an clear, obvious and public violation of the Outer Space Treaty.
Your earlier comments imply the Space Force could, in peace time, go up into orbit, capture a foreign spacecraft, and acquire information on the foreign nation’s technology. That would be a clear, obvious and public violation of the OST. That’s just not going to happen.
Some much for what some people were saying last year about space force not taking over the entire USAF role in space. Must have been part of the compromise placing the USSF within the Dept of the AIr Force.