Speaking of uniforms

[Utah Bob #35998]

I just saw Gen Raymond on tv in the ridiculous Space Force uniform! 
Eat your heart out Cpt Kirk!
Patton would love it.

[Subdeacon Joe]

1 hour ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

I 

 

 

 

Red piping....

Space artillery?

[Pat Riot]

I dunno…I can’t fathom wearing something like that. I am sure the General hangs out in air conditioning nearly constantly. 
 

Now this I could get behind 100%
 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

Looks a little Nazi-ish to me.

[Phantom Falcon, SASS # 46139]

That uniform looks a little frumpy to me. It does not convey a real masculine image.

 

UB, who is the feller with the red piping?

 

PF

[Sedalia Dave]

2 minutes ago, Phantom Falcon, SASS # 46139 said:

That uniform looks a little frumpy to me. It does not convey a real masculine image.

 

UB, who is the feller with the red piping?

 

PF

 

Commander William Adama from the reboot of the TV series Battle Star Gallitica (aired from 2004 to 2009) He was played by Edward James Olmos.  

It is a very will written series and well worth watching.

[Redleg Reilly, SASS #46372]

The space force uniforms are truly a bad joke.

[Smuteye John SASS#24774]

What?  No cape?  I thought that the dress Space Cadet uniform came with a cape.

 

 

[Utah Bob #35998]

14 minutes ago, Smuteye John SASS#24774 said:

What?  No cape?  I thought that the dress Space Cadet uniform came with a cape.

 

 

Maybe if they get an academy going. 

[Utah Bob #35998]

I honestly do not understand why they decided to create an entirely new branch. It seems to me it could have simply continued as a branch of the Air Force, just like the Marine Corps in the Navy.

Must have been some very interesting discussions, fights, arm twisting, influence peddling, and lobbying going on behind the scenes. 

[Utah Bob #35998]

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

1 hour ago, Phantom Falcon, SASS # 46139 said:

That uniform looks a little frumpy to me. It does not convey a real masculine image.

 

PF

 

That is probably the point with this administration.

[Rip Snorter]

30 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

I honestly do not understand why they decided to create an entirely new branch. It seems to me it could have simply continued as a branch of the Air Force, just like the Marine Corps in the Navy.

Must have been some very interesting discussions, fights, arm twisting, influence peddling, and lobbying going on behind the scenes. 

IMO. the purpose was to focus on a new strategic threat and hopefully attract some of the best and brightest and at the same time sever the inevitable "fighting the last war yet again" connection.  Obviously the current White House Occupant has his own agenda. As predictable as a dog and a hydrant.

[Cheyenne Ranger, 48747L]

In his book "The Art of War", Sun Tzu says: 'When two armies collide, the one with the simpler uniform wins'

[Pat Riot]

Trump authorized the US Space Force because China has a “Space Force”. 
 

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/09/china-has-space-force-what-are-its-lessons-pentagon/151665/

 

Which is why the media never explains the Space Force. 
1. If Trump did it, it’s wrong. 
2. They won’t bang on China. One should never badmouth one’s mentors. 
3. They like to spread disinformation to get public opinion turned against the Space Force. 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

On 7/10/2022 at 3:40 PM, Redleg Reilly, SASS #46372 said:

The space force uniforms are truly a bad joke.

I think the Space Force is truly a bad joke.

 

Does that mean that NASA is now a military branch?

[Subdeacon Joe]

The United States Space Force has several things going against it.

First is the public perception, which may be partially due to how it was initially presented.  The initial public reaction is to think Space Navy with starships doing battle against alien invaders or humans from other colonized star systems.

Second is that the logo is lifted straight from Star Fleet of Star Trek fame.

 

Third is lack of officialdom clearly stating to the public the mission of USSF.  This is less than informative:

Quote

The USSF is responsible for organizing, training, and equipping Guardians to conduct global space operations that enhance the way our joint and coalition forces fight, while also offering decision makers military options to achieve national objectives.

 

Fourth is the name for those in this new branch - "Guardians."  COME ON!  "Guardians?"  Really?  Sounds like out of Heinlein's boys novel, Space Cadet. 

Fifth, of course, the uniforms which come straight from science fiction shows.  They could at least have borrowed the basic concept from the Royal Manticoran Navy in Weber's Honor Harrington series.

[Smuteye John SASS#24774]

29 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

The United States Space Force has several things going against it.

First is the public perception, which may be partially due to how it was initially presented.  The initial public reaction is to think Space Navy with starships doing battle against alien invaders or humans from other colonized star systems.

Second is that the logo is lifted straight from Star Fleet of Star Trek fame.

 

Third is lack of officialdom clearly stating to the public the mission of USSF.  This is less than informative:

 

Fourth is the name for those in this new branch - "Guardians."  COME ON!  "Guardians?"  Really?  Sounds like out of Heinlein's boys novel, Space Cadet. 

Fifth, of course, the uniforms which come straight from science fiction shows.  They could at least have borrowed the basic concept from the Royal Manticoran Navy in Weber's Honor Harrington series.

They can't use the RMN as a basis for their Space Cadet uniform- the Army is already wearing black berets.

 

Maybe the GSN instead?  They use garrison caps for the enlisted.

[Utah Bob #35998]

44 minutes ago, Smuteye John SASS#24774 said:

They can't use the RMN as a basis for their Space Cadet uniform- the Army is already wearing black berets.

 

 

Maybe not for long from what I hear.

[Alpo]

4 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

Fourth is the name for those in this new branch - "Guardians."  COME ON!  "Guardians?"  Really?  Sounds like out of Heinlein's boys novel, Space Cadet. 

Is Guardians better or worse than Warfighters?

[Smuteye John SASS#24774]

4 hours ago, Alpo said:

Is Guardians better or worse than Warfighters?

Better- according to the bed-wetter politicians and swamp creatures in charge. 

 

Guardians doesn't have all of those icky violent connotations.

[Cyrus Cassidy #45437]

On 7/10/2022 at 5:09 PM, Utah Bob #35998 said:

I honestly do not understand why they decided to create an entirely new branch. It seems to me it could have simply continued as a branch of the Air Force, just like the Marine Corps in the Navy.

Must have been some very interesting discussions, fights, arm twisting, influence peddling, and lobbying going on behind the scenes. 

 

The decision was driven by recommendations that have been on every President's desk since 1992.  It was largely centered on the inevitable budget battle within the Air Force.  Being responsible for two domains of warfare (air and space), but controlled by pilots, they inevitably made budgeting decisions that inevitably helped the "bomber mafia" and caused space to suffer. 

 

Additionally, the organizational culture within the space branch of the Air Force became timid and absolutely terrified to make a decision.  I'm not joking when I say I have seen decisions at the 3-star level that we would power down to a captain in the Army.  Nothing could get done, and they stood by and watched for 20 years while China surpassed us in space capability and Russia made gains to negate our space capabilities.  They kept saying "someone should do something about that," but never stopped to think that "someone" was them.  In their minds, they were satellite pilots who provided space-based services to warfighters, but were not warfighters.  

 

Now, space is a contested domain and fighting has and will occur with satellites.  Military space professionals must not only provide space-based services to the air, sea, and ground warfighters, but they must think and act like warfighters themselves.  The only problem is, they don't know how.  That's literally why I have a job.

 

So the entire organizational culture is undergoing a rebuild from the ground up, and they have their own Congressionally mandated budget because they are a separate service.

[Subdeacon Joe]

4 minutes ago, Cyrus Cassidy #45437 said:

 

The decision was driven by recommendations that have been on every President's desk since 1992.  It was largely centered on the inevitable budget battle within the Air Force.  Being responsible for two domains of warfare (air and space), but controlled by pilots, they inevitably made budgeting decisions that inevitably helped the "bomber mafia" and caused space to suffer. 

 

Additionally, the organizational culture within the space branch of the Air Force became timid and absolutely terrified to make a decision.  I'm not joking when I say I have seen decisions at the 3-star level that we would power down to a captain in the Army.  Nothing could get done, and they stood by and watched for 20 years while China surpassed us in space capability and Russia made gains to negate our space capabilities.  They kept saying "someone should do something about that," but never stopped to think that "someone" was them.  In their minds, they were satellite pilots who provided space-based services to warfighters, but were not warfighters.  

 

Now, space is a contested domain and fighting has and will occur with satellites.  Military space professionals must not only provide space-based services to the air, sea, and ground warfighters, but they must think and act like warfighters themselves.  The only problem is, they don't know how.  That's literally why I have a job.

 

So the entire organizational culture is undergoing a rebuild from the ground up, and they have their own Congressionally mandated budget because they are a separate service.

 

 

Well and concisely put, thank you.