FloridaMakes’ Post

As 2024 rapidly comes to a close, it's time to reflect on all our Guardians and Airmen have accomplished this year! Change of Command ceremonies are fairly commonplace for military organizations. But SpOC's first-ever change of command early this year marked a major milestone: the end of our establishment phase. “As I see it, our task from the Secretary and the CSO is pretty clear: to build on and also build out the combat space power of this nation,” said United States Space Force Lt. Gen. David N. Miller Jr., shortly after assuming command of SpOC as its second commander. To revisit this historic day in SpOC's history, click on the link below! #USSpaceForce #SemperSupra #BuildOnAndBuildOut #USSF5

"SPAFORGEN, which was first previewed by Saltzman in a C-Note late last year, will follow three phases through which Guardians will rotate. First is the “Prepare Phase” for Guardians to learn their assigned roles. Second is the “Ready Phase,” during which Guardians will “participate in advanced training to equip them for high-intensity conflict,” Saltzman wrote. Finally is the “Commit Phase,” in which Guardians will be part of a combat squadron or combat detachment. The Air Force is following a similar concept with AFFORGEN, which has four six-month cycles. That model has already been implemented, with the first Airmen deploying under it last fall." https://lnkd.in/gDbx75xP

#Space is #global, but its #strategic dimension is raising competition between new geopolitical blocs : « For decades the US has wanted to intermix US and allied space capabilities--via hosted payloads, shared satellite consortia (as is done for NATO C-17's at PAPA airbase), improve interoperability, jointly develop and buy systems. » Nevertheless, history has demonstrated that allies are much stronger together when they share targets with #interoperable but #independant and #autonomous systems. This is the policy that #Europe and US should build together.

Galbreath and Reeves provide an interesting hypothesis in a new OpED that the path to jointness is to limit joint capabilities. This comes on the heels of their first OpED, where the first Guardian to repudiate their argument in public was none other than General Stephen Whiting. Of note, General Whiting is the senior United States Space Force officer serving in a joint assignment as the current Commander of the U.S. Space Command. I would argue that he is the most credible subject matter expert on joint spacepower. When he publicly disagrees with your position, you might want to reassess your underlying assumptions. In a SpaceNews article, “Whiting noted that U.S. Space Command benefits from the expertise of all the branches of the military, and pointed out that the Army needs space expertise for maneuver warfare.” This position also happens to be the joint position shared by the Department of Defense, the United States Space Force, the Services, and the Combatant Commands. The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies United States Department of Defense Space Force Association Center for Space Policy & Strategy Space Policy Group Breaking Defense SpaceNews NewSpace Nexus The Air and Space Power Association (ASPA) Air & Space Forces Magazine

Army space takes global stage, talks enduring partnership at U.K. Defence Space Conference, London, UK (SPX) Oct 20, 2024 In an age when space is becoming more congested and dangerous as the dependence of both military operations and civil society on space is increasing, the longstanding special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is evolving to the new frontier of space as a warfighting domain. Representatives from U.K. Space Command, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command,

Sincerely scratching my head. Not my usual techno-centric post, but one I feel compelled to make. It's hard to discern much through sound bites in the "Space News" article, but did U.S. Space Command's Gen Whiting read the actual document at the center of the controversy: "Army Space Vision Supporting Multidomain Operations?" (document here: https://lnkd.in/gDxRuMu4 (army.mil URL)). Yes, the US Army will have space capabilities and space professionals, just as every other service. However, there is a doctrinal disconnect in the US Army's paper that is more fundamental and has nothing to do with the space domain: the US fights wars via apportioned forces under the authority of a combatant commander. The US Army document appears to infer otherwise. Although I'm a US Air Force veteran, I'm honestly not particularly astute in doctrinal issues. However, I squarely side with The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and Charles Galbreath's take. (Breaking Defense article here: https://lnkd.in/gPAySkPX). Space News article: https://lnkd.in/g-QPT2rr #SpaceJOA #JointOperations

In the wake of the Space Force’s creation in 2019, the Army made some key decisions, Atkinson explained in a recent Army Magazine article. In a move that might seem counterintuitive for a service looking to expand its space presence, the Army transferred its satellite operations and theater missile-warning units to the fledgling Space Force. This was less about relinquishing capability and more about streamlining operations as the Space Force has the expertise to manage these assets. Atkinson pointed out that the creation of new all-domain formations across the Army was another critical move. These units, designed to operate seamlessly across land, air, sea, space and cyberspace, represent the Army’s response to the dynamic space environment and growing adversary use of space for military purposes. A telling sign is where it’s choosing to deploy these new capabilities. Atkinson said the majority of the Army’s space forces are now being assigned to military commands in the Indo-Pacific and Europe, a move designed to better integrate with regional combatant commands and strengthen relationships with allies.

Earlier this month, the United States Space Force hosted military space leaders from 17 other countries in Colorado Springs at the annual Space Chiefs Forum. The event, which was organized by SAF/IA, is part of ongoing #USSF efforts to foster multinational collaboration that builds enduring operational advantages. First held in 2021, the Space Chiefs Forum is a key opportunity for global partners to collectively assess the space security environment, evaluate new cooperative concepts, and discuss steps that can be taken together to maintain the safety, stability, and long-term sustainability of the domain. "Cooperation between like-minded nations is essential to securing our collective interests in space," Chief of Space Operations Gen. Chance Saltzman said. "This forum facilitates constructive dialogues, the inclusion of diverse perspectives, and the exchange of innovative ideas to help us tackle shared challenges and deepen our mutually beneficial partnerships." News release: https://lnkd.in/eFdERazY Joint statement from the participants: https://lnkd.in/e_iFpmBE #SecurityThroughCooperation #PartnerToWin #SpaceChiefsForum

Plenty to like in this analysis. Key theme: Space should be foundationally joint, if we do it right. We ain't there yet, but good signs of progress. Throughout the time the U.S. Space Force and Space Systems Command were standing up, I posted regarding the imperative that DoD MILDEPs preserve essential equities and HQs-level capacities, expertise and engagements across the range of space warfighting capabilities, both offensive and defensive. From my perch as a naval professional, I employed a few ideas: 1. Don't give up the ship. The Naval force has longstanding and abiding critical equities in space. Depending how you read history, the Navy damned near invented the employment of space for expeditionary warfighting and maneuver. The notion that we would blindly outsource space capabilities to USSF/SSC, was (and is), in my way of thinking, a bridge too far - and not necessary. 2. We have space capabilities because we have a naval force (and air, ground and special operations forces, by extension); it'll be important in the future that we remember "supported/supporting" doctrine and concepts, as USSF/SSC competes for a larger piece of DoD budget. Memo to USSF/SSC: In almost every important context, you are supporting. Your priorities, and the details of what you build, and how you operate it (jointly) must acknowledge that. From these two ideas, other important drivers of Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel/Systems, Leadership, Personnel and Facilities derive for each MILDEP to consider. To be fair, even after five years, it's too early to chastise the Army, or any of the MILDEPs, for hedging bets and positioning for reasonable control over their own destinies in space. USSF/SSC still have a fair amount of proving and demonstrating to do, before the most seamless, robust and reliable fully-integrated joint-model-of-everything in space can be counted on. As I read the linked article, I don't so much think Army needs to rein in its own aspirations and aggressive pursuit of world class space capabilities. Likewise, the other MILDEPs need to keep their thinking caps on, and consider their own man/train/equip and concomitant resource investment strategies over years, even as all MILDEPs work collaboratively and thoughtfully with USSF/SSC to advance the worthy cause of jointness. The idea of the wickedly ruthless, persistent, engaged and demanding customer comes to mind. Another key message hiding between the lines in the article, is that USSF/SSC need to step it up at least a few notches and pick up the pace. As I've posted in other contexts, commercial space is racing ahead, in some capability areas largely without us, and the reasons we used to invoke for going slow, and taking 10 to 15 years to field "perfect" capabilities in space, no longer apply. You want jointness and "supported/supporting" to work for the entire joint force, all warfighting domains, and for the nation, you need to be world class in all that you do.

"Two things were made clear during the Space Warfighting Forum. The first is that space is a difficult domain as emphasized by panel moderator, U.S. Air Force (Ret) Lt. Gen. Dave Buck.   'Space is contested, it's degraded, it's operationally limited, it's—no kidding— a war fighting domain,' said Buck. 'We all need to acknowledge that, and we all need to get after that.' The second is that space warfighting is a joint effort that requires mutual support by all branches of military service." Read more about the National Defense Industrial Association – 5th Annual Space Warfighting Forum and panel discussion led by BRPH Mission Solutions President, David Buck. #wargames #spacedefense #nationaldefense #aerospaceanddefense #usspacecom #spaceforce