[World Building] A Future History of Space Force

[David Johnston2]

Since Space Command was spun off into Space Force I've been thinking about the first thing that milsf gets wrong and that's pretending that space is an ocean. They use naval ranks and naval ship designations when actually if the the United States actually started to put manned vessels of war into space, it would be a spin-off of the airforce just as their air force was a spinoff of the army, which is why it has majors, colonels and generals, not commanders and admirals.

So, let's start from scratch. At some point the United States decides putting manned military vessels in space is a worthwhile endeavour. Assume this starts at a mature TL 9. That may be a bit optimistic but this is still a game and games need people. Let's assume that the United States wants force projection capability into the asteroid belt which has become increasingly economically important. While at first they start with remotely commanded drones they eventually come to the conclusion that they need people out there to reduce the decision making timelag and to make it clear that they are serious and attacking their stuff could mean war.

So the first question is, what year is it when the first manned warships start to arrive in the asteroid belt?

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

S
So the first question is, what year is it when the first manned warships start to arrive in the asteroid belt?

I know of no way to make a useful prediction on a "positive" basis. that is I don't think you can say "x years would be enough to develop a useful long range space drive probably operating on principles of which we have only the barest knowledge"..

So perhaps a "negative" prediction? That would be an attempt to say "Not before date X". So we look for an analogy in a historical technology. Let's try jet aircraft. that was a very fast-developing example and might set a minimum time required.

Do we start our clock right now? I don't think so. At least not unless you're going to assume a case of "Emergent Superscience". Spacex might (just "might") be on the verge of reaching a mature short range space tech. but no one is going to commit the sort of resources required for long range space travel until after short range fully matures.

We're looking for an analogy to the German and British military experimentation with jet engines in the late 30s. Fully developed commercial jet aircraft (probably the 747) come about 30 years after that and that was indeed very fast.

I'd put our beginning date for serious long range space propulsion research to not before 2050 and this very fast track for a fully developed commercial long range space vehicle to not before 2080.

Even after that you need for a significant economy based on along range space travel to develop to inspire force projection into deep space.

So maybe 2100 is the earliest reasonable date? Shave a few years off that number if you're really optimistic but without that Emergent Superscience it's just going to take time.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Since Space Command was spun off into Space Force I've been thinking about the first thing that milsf gets wrong and that's pretending that space is an ocean. They use naval ranks and naval ship designations when actually if the the United States actually started to put manned vessels of war into space, it would be a spin-off of the airforce just as their air force was a spinoff of the army, which is why it has majors, colonels and generals, not commanders and admirals.

The usual reason why military space forces are portrayed as having naval traditions is that space voyages last a long time. Navies have cultural traditions and social structures that handle that, both for the crews and for the families they leave at home. For an air force, a 24-hour mission is long, but for a navy, it's hardly worth mentioning.

In the Transhuman Space setting, the US space force is part of the air force, whereas most of the other space forces are naval.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by johndallman

The usual reason why military space forces are portrayed as having naval traditions is that space voyages last a long time. Navies have cultural traditions and social structures that handle that, both for the crews and for the families they leave at home. For an air force, a 24-hour mission is long, but for a navy, it's hardly worth mentioning.

Also, the navies of the world have a lot more experience maintaining nuclear reactors inside of metal tubes surrounded by an environment that will kill you instantly if said tube is ruptured.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I know of no way to make a useful prediction on a "positive" basis. that is I don't think you can say "x years would be enough to develop a useful long range space drive probably operating on principles of which we have only the barest knowledge"..

So perhaps a "negative" prediction? That would be an attempt to say "Not before date X". So we look for an analogy in a historical technology. Let's try jet aircraft. that was a very fast-developing example and might set a minimum time required.

Do we start our clock right now? I don't think so. At least not unless you're going to assume a case of "Emergent Superscience". Spacex might (just "might") be on the verge of reaching a mature short range space tech. but no one is going to commit the sort of resources required for long range space travel until after short range fully matures.

We're looking for an analogy to the German and British military experimentation with jet engines in the late 30s. Fully developed commercial jet aircraft (probably the 747) come about 30 years after that and that was indeed very fast.

I'd put our beginning date for serious long range space propulsion research to not before 2050 and this very fast track for a fully developed commercial long range space vehicle to not before 2080.

Even after that you need for a significant economy based on along range space travel to develop to inspire force projection into deep space.

So maybe 2100 is the earliest reasonable date? Shave a few years off that number if you're really optimistic but without that Emergent Superscience it's just going to take time.

Turning to Ultra-Tech, I'd say it's a choice between Medium and Slow progression. Fast and Accelerated have already been ruled out by time's crushing march. Retarded would probably require global catastrophe that isn't in the schedule for this campaign which assumes that the United States will remain intact in some form for at least a few more centuries. Medium gives a TL 9 between 2030 and 2120. Slow gives us 2040 to 2200.

Let's go with Slow. We certainly aren't on the verge of an asteroid mining boom as of this writing. So, maybe 2120 for the first warships to hit the belt. Of course that requires more than one player. So who are the United States's rivals out there?

I think we should be generous. The more sides, the more gameplay potential. So, maybe China, the European Union, a somehow revitalized Russia, and some kind of loose space coalition of Japan, South Korea, the Republic of China, Australia and New Zealand?

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by johndallman

The usual reason why military space forces are portrayed as having naval traditions is that space voyages last a long time. Navies have cultural traditions and social structures that handle that, both for the crews and for the families they leave at home. For an air force, a 24-hour mission is long, but for a navy, it's hardly worth mentioning.

In the Transhuman Space setting, the US space force is part of the air force, whereas most of the other space forces are naval.

My knee-jerk reaction to suggestions that the air forces would run space is to poo-poo it because of this. However, it occurs to me that there's gaming potential and drama to be had in this - if an air force gets to do the space thing, it's just about guaranteed that they'll not listen to advice from the navy (assuming the navy's willing to give it), and that means people having to reinvent traditions and systems to deal with long voyages with no way of avoiding their fellow crew members, and that means drama and conflict - gaming fodder.

[ehrbar]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

So, maybe China, the European Union, a somehow revitalized Russia, and some kind of loose space coalition of Japan, South Korea, the Republic of China, Australia and New Zealand?

That's pretty close to the Transhuman Space lineup. (THS's Russia isn't particularly revitalized, and its Pacific Rim Alliance is broader but doesn't include a reintegrated-into-China Taiwan.)

[thrash]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Since Space Command was spun off into Space Force ...

Apologies for being a bit pedantic, that's not what happened. If anything, USSF was spun off from the US Air Force.

US Space Command (SPACECOM) still exists as a multi-service combatant command under DOD, like EUCOM or SOUTHCOM. It has service component commands from most of the armed forces (NAVSPACECOM, ARSPACE, etc.)

US Space Force (USSF) is a separate uniformed service under the Department of the Air Force, much like US Marine Corps under the Department of the Navy.

Technically, USSF provides forces and capabilities to SPACECOM, which is responsible for executing the DOD mission in space. There are things that USSF does that SPACECOM doesn't, however, and vice versa.

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Even after that you need for a significant economy based on along range space travel to develop to inspire force projection into deep space.

There also has to be a need for force projection. So I strongly suggest keeping separate powers in conflict and no "World Gov" nonsense.

Or creating a threat of the little green men variety.

[dcarson]

Can have it act more like the Coast Guard than a navy. So rescue, disasters, smuggling, law enforcement.