Last month, Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas issued an amendment to the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, calling for the Space Force to use the same system and rank structure as is used in the Navy. This threw a monkey wrench in the nascent military branchs plans to formally announce its rank structure. Most likely, it was to be that of the Air Force, whose officer and enlisted ranks it already uses.
Then, in an op-ed published last week that engaged the broader public, William Shatner likewise called for Space Force naval ranks. There was no Colonel Kirk wrote the actor who portrayed the celebrated captain of the Enterprise. He added: not even in the mirror universe (which is what 2020 feels like at times). The piece is written with Shatnerian pizazz, and his argument rests on our shared cultural understanding of space exploration.
As I have written previously here at ClearanceJobs, the Space Force is a blank slate, and more than when the Air Force was stood up as a branch separate from the Army, every decision made now has lasting consequences for what a Space Force means as an entity. When it comes to far reaching service branches, the Space Force matters a lot. By forcing discussion of its rank structure, Crenshaw and Shatner seem to take a hundred-year view to a present-day problem.
(To learn how you can be a part of the Space Force, check out the Clearance Jobs roundup of jobs now, or soon to be, available.)
The U.S. Air Force was born of the Army Air Forces, which was essentially its own service branch within the Army. It had a distinct culture and ethos. The National Security Act of 1947 simply formalized something that was already fact. Officers like Henry Hap Arnold spent years thinking about American air power represented as its own service branch. Moreover, the urgency of organizing air power in World War II gave the AAF de facto autonomy within the War Department.
Two atomic bombs ended any argument over what an independent Air Forces job would be beyond supporting ground forces, and it took no time for the U.S. Air Force to come into its own.
The Space Force was born of Air Force Space Command for no apparent reason except the president wanted it. He wasnt the first to call for such a thing, of course: Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama proposed an independent space-branch of the armed forces, and when Donald Rumsfeld became defense secretary in 2000 , it was not because of the terrorist threat that manifested on 9/11. Rather, Rumsfeld had chaired a prominent commission that studied the ballistic missile threat to the United States.
Among the Rumsfeld Commissions key findings was that the U.S. military needed a space equivalent to its land-sea-air approach. Decades earlier, the commander of Air Force Systems Command gave a speech seeking to reframe the Space Race with the Soviet Union, essentially asserting that rather than a civilian endeavor, the DoD should lead the effort, both with robotic and crewed spacecraft.
Discussions are one thing, but turning notion into reality is another, and the Space Forcewhich is an inevitabilitywasnt quite ready to come out of the oven. Nobody is sure, exactly, why there is a Space Force. It has no unique service culture. (Individual MOSes in the Army have cultures more distinct than the entire Space Force branch has from the Air Force). It had no atomic bomb equivalent that punctuated the need for autonomy within the DoD and defined its mission going forward. It is doing exactly the same thing it was doing in 2018 as Air Force Space Command.
All the stuff that was supposed to come first didnt. So the decisions made now are the ones that will echo for decades and possibly centuries, which is what makes the Space Force so interesting. And there is one fundamental question that the Space Force needs to answer: is it going to put people up there?
Which is why ranks matter. In the military, culture is everything. If the Space Force chooses naval ranks for its servicemembers, it makes human spaceflightwhich, already, seems like an inevitability for the servicethat much more likely, and that much sooner. What would they do up there? Nobody knows! Historically, the DoD has planned everything from moon nuke bases to orbital spy stations, but computers have obviated the need for either.
Understandably, there is great trepidation at the notion of militarizing space. Space is already militarized in the most consequential way. Those intercontinental ballistic missiles, which rely on sub-orbital space flight, can wipe out all of humankind. The problem is that the U.S. government is not serious about civilian space exploration. Though its highly visible successes suggest some massive slice of the pie, NASA claims a mere one-half of one percent of the federal budget (about $22 billion total). Imagine what it could do with Air Force money (about $194 billion)?
Well, youll have to keep on imagining because its never going to happen. When Neil Armstrong pressed bootprints into the lunar surfacethe greatest triumph in human historyNASA was working with a meager 2.3% of the federal budget.
Meanwhile, as the Space Force matures, does anyone believe it will maintain a fixed budget of $15 billion? If in its first two years the Space Force commands over 60% of the NASA budget, what does the far horizon look like?
Civilian space exploration will benefit immeasurably from a robust, well-funded Space Force. The NASA administrator should pray every morning that Space Force gets a $100 billion dollarsbecause, again, that money is never going to NASA. Space Force research and development will lighten NASAs R&D burden, just as the Strategic Defense Initiative of the 1980s enabled NASAs Faster-Better-Cheaper program in the 1990s. If the Space Force, with a human spaceflight mindset, wants to spend big dollars on human-rated transports and landers, thats great! Let them develop the hardwarethe expensive part of space exploration.
DoD dollars funding R&D with NASA Mars applications might actually succeed in putting astronauts on the ground. (As the joke goes, we have always been 20 years from going to Mars.) And, look, the Space Force will be a part of such a high profile mission, which is not really an issue. The majority of astronauts are already members of the military. Exactly one civilian has walked on the moon, so its not like this is unprecedented. The Space Force can put one of its astronauts on the lander that carries the first Americans to Mars, the same way the Air Force would, without anyone blinking.
Is this the way we want to do things? Nope! We want to turn NASA into Starfleet. But is this the way the real world works? It sure is! On November 1, 2020, humanity will have known not a single day in twenty years without humans in space. But its long past time to up our numbers, and though circling the Earth for two decades is a great achievementthe greatest since Apolloits time to get those humans exploring the final frontier again.
DoD dollars with a Navy mindset will make that happen. Naval ranks are the easiest way to give the Space Force a culture it woefully lacks. Captains need vessels, after all, and admirals need fleets. God willing, the story of humankind is only beginning. Eventually, we might find a way to become multi-planetary. The Space Force with a Captain Kirk, rather than a Colonel Kirk, is our best chance to do it now.
See the rest here:
Why the Space Force Must Use Navy Ranks - ClearanceJobs - ClearanceJobs
- Armadillo’s Level 2 LLC attempt coming soon? - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Decisions, decisions - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Armadillo versus the weather - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Photos from Armadillo’s Saturday flights - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Armadillo Level 2 Flight 1 - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Meanwhile, elsewhere in the LLC race - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Masten gets halfway there - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Xombie photos (finally!) - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Is the media clowning around? - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Galactic Suite “on schedule”? - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Scientist Guest Column: Using Commercial Suborbital Spacecraft for Microgravity Chemistry Research - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Building Spaceport Infrastructure: An Overview of the STIM-Grants Program - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Five Years After SpaceShipOne’s Historic X PRIZE Flight, New Challenges Await - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Masten Space Systems Makes Successful Flights to Qualify for $150K NASA Lunar Lander Prize Level 1 - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Distinguished Former NASA Astronauts Endorse Commercial Spaceflight in Wall Street Journal Op-Ed - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- NASA Chief Praises Commercial Spaceflight, Suborbital Science, & Innovation Prizes in Speech - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- CSF Welcomes Strong Support for Commercial Human Spaceflight in White House Panel’s Report - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Commercial Spaceflight Federation President Bretton Alexander Appointed to the NASA Advisory Council - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- In November 5th Public Ceremony, NASA to Award $1.65 Million In Prizes for Commercial Spaceflight Successes - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- CSF Congratulates Winners of NASA’s $2 Million Lunar Lander Challenge - November 8th, 2009 [November 8th, 2009]
- Welcome to the NewSpace Journal - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Some things even Virgin can’t control - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- While you’re waiting for the rollout… - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- SpaceShipTwo rollout: initial impressions - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- A couple of pics - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- SpaceShipTwo slideshow - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- The Virgin party’s aftermath - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Investment in Commercial Spaceflight Grows to $1.46 Billion, Updated Industry Study Reveals - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Former Astronaut-Astronomer, Sam Durrance, Joins the CSF Suborbital Researchers Group - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Commercial Spaceflight Federation Announces Creation and Initial Membership of Spaceports Council - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- CSF President Bretton Alexander Testifies Before House Science Committee on Spaceflight Safety - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- CSF Vice-Chairman Jeff Greason Testifies Before House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on Commercial Spaceflight Regulation - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- Virgin Galactic Unveils SpaceShipTwo - December 13th, 2009 [December 13th, 2009]
- So that’s why Aabar invested in Virgin? - December 15th, 2009 [December 15th, 2009]
- More about the Virgin rollout aftermath - December 17th, 2009 [December 17th, 2009]
- Space tourism as “the final undiscovered frontier”? - December 17th, 2009 [December 17th, 2009]
- Orion Propulsion acquired - December 17th, 2009 [December 17th, 2009]
- Spaceport America developments - December 18th, 2009 [December 18th, 2009]
- XCOR wins a major customer - December 19th, 2009 [December 19th, 2009]
- Centennial Challenges, Spaceport Infrastructure Grants, and Suborbital Science to Receive Funds from NASA and FAA - December 22nd, 2009 [December 22nd, 2009]
- Video tour of Spaceport America - December 24th, 2009 [December 24th, 2009]
- Virgin’s web traffic planning - December 24th, 2009 [December 24th, 2009]
- List of Speakers Announced for the Next-Generation Suborbital Researchers Conference in February - December 31st, 2009 [December 31st, 2009]
- Popular Science Features Commercial Spaceflight on January Cover, Discusses NASA Partnerships - January 4th, 2010 [January 4th, 2010]
- Aviation Week honors the “Space Entrepreneur” - January 5th, 2010 [January 5th, 2010]
- “The Space Entrepreneur” Named by Aviation Week Magazine As Its 2009 Person of the Year - January 5th, 2010 [January 5th, 2010]
- Additional notes about Olsen’s book - January 6th, 2010 [January 6th, 2010]
- Registration deadline approaching for suborbital science conference - January 8th, 2010 [January 8th, 2010]
- NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver to Keynote the Next-Generation Suborbital Researchers Conference in February - January 11th, 2010 [January 11th, 2010]
- Cecil Field gets spaceport license – but will anyone use it? - January 12th, 2010 [January 12th, 2010]
- Training begins for suborbital scientist-astronauts - January 12th, 2010 [January 12th, 2010]
- First Class of Suborbital Scientist-Astronauts Successfully Complete NASTAR Training Program - January 14th, 2010 [January 14th, 2010]
- Is “space tour guide” in your professional future? - January 17th, 2010 [January 17th, 2010]
- What can Florida, Indiana, and others learn from Oklahoma? - January 17th, 2010 [January 17th, 2010]
- Virginia wants money, New Mexico wants laws - January 21st, 2010 [January 21st, 2010]
- Commercial Spaceflight Federation Responds to the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel’s 2009 Annual Report - January 21st, 2010 [January 21st, 2010]
- CSF Statement on NASA’s Anticipated Announcement of a $6 Billion Commercial Crew Program and NASA Budget Increase - January 29th, 2010 [January 29th, 2010]
- CSF Welcomes New NASA Human Spaceflight Plan, Congratulates Commercial Crew Development Winners - February 1st, 2010 [February 1st, 2010]
- NASA Unveils Commercial Human Spaceflight Development Agreements and Announces $50 Million in Seed Funding for Commercial Crew - February 3rd, 2010 [February 3rd, 2010]
- James Cameron Endorses Commercial Spaceflight, New NASA Plan - February 4th, 2010 [February 4th, 2010]
- Newt Gingrich and Bob Walker Endorse Obama’s New NASA Plan, Urge Bipartisan Support - February 13th, 2010 [February 13th, 2010]
- Blue Origin proposes orbital vehicle - February 18th, 2010 [February 18th, 2010]
- CSF Announces New Research and Education Affiliates Program, Initial Participating Universities - February 18th, 2010 [February 18th, 2010]
- CSF Welcomes Historic NASA Commitment of $75 Million for Commercial Suborbital Flights, Payloads - February 18th, 2010 [February 18th, 2010]
- Suborbital vehicle development updates - February 19th, 2010 [February 19th, 2010]
- Other conference announcements - February 21st, 2010 [February 21st, 2010]
- Bigger prizes to come? - February 23rd, 2010 [February 23rd, 2010]
- Gov. Bill Richardson Endorses Commercial Spaceflight, Obama’s New NASA Plan - February 23rd, 2010 [February 23rd, 2010]
- Over 250 People Attend Next-Gen Suborbital Researchers Conference, 2011 Meeting Planned for Florida - February 24th, 2010 [February 24th, 2010]
- Boston Globe, Nature, New York Times Editorial Boards Among Others Welcoming New NASA Plan - February 25th, 2010 [February 25th, 2010]
- Commercial Spaceflight Federation Commends New Mexico for Passage of Key Liability Legislation - March 2nd, 2010 [March 2nd, 2010]
- Burt Rutan’s BigThink - March 3rd, 2010 [March 3rd, 2010]
- Brief notes: Soyuz, Virgin, and… iCarly? - March 5th, 2010 [March 5th, 2010]
- Commercial Spaceflight Federation 2009 Annual Report Highlights Industry Progress - March 8th, 2010 [March 8th, 2010]
- SpaceShipTwo flies, on schedule - March 23rd, 2010 [March 23rd, 2010]
- SpaceShipTwo captive carry flight video - March 23rd, 2010 [March 23rd, 2010]
- Over the Mojave Desert, Suborbital Vehicles Take Flight - March 28th, 2010 [March 28th, 2010]
- See WK2 and SS2 fly in New Mexico this October - March 29th, 2010 [March 29th, 2010]
- SA10: Commercial RLV Technology Roadmap update - April 9th, 2010 [April 9th, 2010]
- An evolving Armadillo - April 11th, 2010 [April 11th, 2010]