What about all the non-people that might be joining the Space Force? "Space Person" isn't very inclusive.
US Space Force Ranks? [Speculation]
- Thread starter Chaos Descending
- Start date
Ha! Alas, they've anticipated that and have said "no".
Although I am certain people will call them that anyway.
Wonder if the Air Force Academy will produce USAF and USSF officers the same way Annapolis produces officers for both the USN and the USMC, eliminating any need for a separate officer academy?
Never thought of that. Probably.
I find that extremely likely.
Same.
Exactly. Very few enlisted flight crew in the USAF today.
Yeah, to brainstorm ideas. The folks who make the final decision will be the ones with the Pentagon all-access passes.
Quite right, I'm just saying the Marine corps didn't have to distance itself from navy organization and ranks because that distance was built in from the start.
Right, which is why I don't think the Space Force will, either. The British situation was different, as they were under wartime political pressure to defend the homeland from the air and took the unprecedented step of creating a whole new service to do it. The RAF took over both the RFC and RNAS flying organizations, so as one way to make it clear that neither the Army nor the Navy "owned" the RAF, the new service invented its own officer rank titles. In the US, OTOH, the Army and Navy both kept their own air forces through WW2, by which time the USAAF had gotten so big and the strategic mission so prominent that a new service could be spun off. But by that time the new USAF was being run by generals who had been in the army 20-30 years and they were comfortable with sergeants, majors, colonels and especially generals.
By the USSF or by NASA? With the expense of putting people in space, unless there is some kind of major return on investment for putting personnel beyond earth orbit, DoD money will be going to un-crewed systems.
True, and the submarine service is probably the closest current analogue. Even so, I just don't see things evolving that way. If it this manned-military space thing happens, it will start with a couple of senior officer-level astronauts with a much larger ground support operation, more like USAF missions. It could scale up after that, but the original USAF-type organization would be baked in. And with AI and automation I really doubt there will ever be massive naval-vessel-like spaceships with large numbers of enlisted crew.
Oh well then! "The Navy owns the Marines," I remember saying it to get a rise!
Chaos Descending was a real deckplates sailor and I have a lot of respect for him. My rate, well, a lot of people wouldn't call me a sailor. A paper-pushing spook puke or something like that, more likely.
Thank you both for your service and for the discussion!
Space Nuggets...or just Nuggets.
I will preface this by saying I have never been involved in the military, nor am I even American. I do not mean any disrespect with this question; I am just genuinely curious.
As an outsider, most of the coverage I've seen/read regarding Space Force has painted it, to put it charitably, as a Trump vanity project that does not really have a reason to exist as a separate branch. Do you (the general you, not just specifically the poster I quoted) think it will still be around two centuries from now? Is it something that the next Democrat to end up in the White House will end up moving back to a command within the Air Force, rather than a separate service branch, for efficiencies or whatever? Or once it is actually in place, will inertia just carry it forward, and no one will attempt to roll it back in to the original structure?
I think the mission of the US Space Force is necessary, and unique enough that it deserves its own infrastructure and support system / oversight separate from the US Air Force. I think this will only become more true, not less, as we move forward into the future. I'd be very surprised if it didn't exist in two hundred years.
Regarding the media coverage, it's been incredibly unfair and uninformed.
Also, for what it's worth, Russia and China have each already beaten the USA to the punch at creating a separate "Space Force", and they were right to do so. We're actually behind the ball on this.
Regarding the media coverage, it's been incredibly unfair and uninformed.
Also, for what it's worth, Russia and China have each already beaten the USA to the punch at creating a separate "Space Force", and they were right to do so. We're actually behind the ball on this.
I think with the constant expansion of space level tech (i.e. more assets, more civilian involvement) that Space Force is absolutely a necessity. One thing that I appreciate is that Space Force has its own specified mission parameters. It lets Air Force assets be dedicated to their mission, rather than having the mission creep that has occurred over time.
I don't think the media has been fair to the President in regards to this project. So, I do think it is reasonable to see Space Force continuing forward.
I suggest: Starman (waiting in the sky)
Why would it not?
I'm assuming you mean they will be so technically skilled that the lower grades won't really apply? There's something to that, and it's happening in all the forces. But it takes a year or so just to learn how to fit in, function and be part of a military organization, so the lower grades will probably always be useful for basic training.
Just an idea for enlisted stripes, in gold-on-black and silver-on-black:
Well the Army has 4 grades of Warrant officers for skilled positions. That might be a good fit.
I figured I'd try and make the stripes look like rocket exhaust coming from the arrowhead:
The USAF is the only US armed force that does not use warrant officers. Since the USSF is essentially a spun-off part of the USAF, I would be surprised if they reintroduced WOs.
Marines have a Gunnery Sergeant, why not a Rocketry Sergeant?!
If Gunnery Sergeants are called "Gunny," would Rocketry Sergeants be call "Rocky?"
Similar threads
