Space Force officials have characterized their responsibilities for the GMTI satellites — and, eventually, other moving target indicator satellites (MTI) designed to track airborne targets — as simply an extension to the heavens of the Air Force’s US Code Title 10 role in JSTARS. Title 10 governs military roles and missions, whereas Title 50 governs those of intelligence agencies. That said, there long has been a gray zone between the two.

“JSTARS was the air model, providing situational awareness to the combatant commanders from the air. What we’re doing is taking that air vision and elevating it into space, so it is no different,” Gen. Michael Guetlein, Space Force vice chief, told the annual McAleese Defense Conference on March 7. “From a Title 10 perspective, we have the exact same responsibilities to provide situational awareness to the battle commander on tactically relevant timelines.”
 

 
Last edited:


1725633580415.png

 
Last edited:

 


 
Last edited:


 
Last edited:


 
Last edited:

 
Last edited:



 
Last edited:

 
Last edited:



 
Last edited:
Cold War Space Art

Oct 15, 2024
More rare recovered slides from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Museum collection. These were used in executive strategic briefings during the Cold War!


Administered by the U.S. Space Force Historical Foundation, Inc., in support of the Cape Canaveral Space Force Museum. Please visit the website at www.ccspacemuseum.org for more details!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US25Ew1EHSw
 


WASHINGTON — The Space Force’s primary acquisition command has established a new effort to build integrated command and control (C2) networks — that is, machine-to-machine capabilities to seamlessly feed data from multiple sensors through battle management systems that process data to “shooters” — focused on four high priority, classified weapon systems, according to senior officials.
1729795499667.png


 
Last edited:
Any guesses as to what the four systems are? The phrasing is so vague it is not even clear what the target set would be.
 
Any guesses as to what the four systems are? The phrasing is so vague it is not even clear what the target set would be.
Obviously not but they wouldn't be classified if I did, I've created a thread for further speculation here:

It's an 'unknown known' as Rummy would say. For now I'm going with Phase 40MW Direct Impact Fusion Particle Beam Constellation though. Hope that helps.
 
Last edited:



 
Last edited:


 
Last edited:
To do this requires the development of space-to-ground weapons (SGWs), whose focus would be to make Chinese concentrations of terrestrial and space counter-intervention forces in the Western Pacific irrelevant by holding them at risk. Once deployed, SGWs would provide enhanced space deterrence during peacetime and crisis, and if necessary, destroy threats to US terrestrial forces by rolling back barriers to entry for our smaller air, land, and maritime forces.
The current technology at our disposal, coupled with less expensive lift, heavy lift, and soon to be super heavy lift rockets, means there are ways to get small constellations of SGWs deployed around Earth, capable of achieving five-minute target revisit rates with little defense to stop them. The Chinese have already demonstrated they are pursuing similar capability through their Fractional/Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) system. Therefore, we should position our space forces into the front of the line to ensure decisiveness in such a conflict.

 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom