Pentagon working on flesh-eating robots.

[Tonitrus]

I'd say that right now, the USA is probably more the premier service.

If not, those new BDUs will drop the Navy down a step.

[Monoriu]

Instead of going to Basic Training, all future Army recruits will be fed into meat-grinders to support our new armies of flesh-eating robot warrior-dinosaurs. Also the Air Force will be entirely automated and the Navy will bombard whole continents with heavy space battleships launched from the Moon.

I have seen the future, and it is mine.

Interesting fact:  the Air Force will be reincorporated into the senior services.  An independent air force makes no sense at all.

But then you'll never get this

That's navy stuff 

[Siege]

I think you guys are wrong.

The future military will be task specific, so I see two main organizations:

1- System Defense Forces:
Each star system will have its local defense force, compoussed of
- Planetary Defense Weapon Platforms  (Surface to space weapons)
- Planetary Defense Air Force (short range orbital interceptor fighters)
- Planetary Ground Defense (Ground forces to repel enemy landing forces)
- System defense navy (small space naval forces that include gunboats, satellites, minefields, etc. Space to space weapons)


2 - Federal Defense Forces
The Human Federation's strike force, compoussed of:
- Space Navy (Spacecraft with the capability to travel to, and to strike the enemy, in their controlled space)
- Space Marines (Ground forces to invade enemy planets)
- Space air force (fighter craft to achieve orbital and air superiority on enemy planets. CAS capability as well)

[Neil]

I've thought about this, and agree except for the fact that someone still needs to maintain the large stockpiles of nuclear weapons needed for the Space Navy and Robo-Army to vanquish Western Civilization's enemies. The Air Force will be renamed 'Rocket Bombardardment Group' or some such.

But why have a massive and seperate bureaucracy to do this?  The Army already maintains many kinds of ordnance, so why not atomic weapons?  A space navy would obviously require enormous stocks of atomics to be used in space.  I can't see any justification for maintaining a seperate force just to care for earth-based atomic weapons.

A future Air Force/Rocket Bombardment Group would be entirely automated except for a select few men to ensure the machines do not turn on humanity. I don't see a massive bureaucracy developing around such a force in a system where a rivalry between the Space Navy and Robo-Army would likely overshadow anything else. The Space Navy would be the premier service anyway, in much the same way the US Navy currently is. Besides, having a nation's entire land-based atomic arsenal in the hands of flesh-eating robots or a space battleship with enough firepower to incinerate entire continents on its own is just plain silly. The Triad must be complete.

Well, it depends.  Obviously, land-based strategic nuclear weapons would disappear, since a functioning space navy makes them not only obsolete, but wasteful.  Tactical nuclear weapons, on the other hand, are by definition used in support of surface army forces, and thus should be directly under their control.  Is there some middle ground where an Air Force could serve a purpose?

The triad was a product of interservice rivalry, and has no virtue in and of itself.  Besides, the Air Force was founded in order to create a bureaucracy.  If they automated it, they'd be betraying the entire purpose of the Air Force.

[Neil]

I think you guys are wrong.

The future military will be task specific, so I see two main organizations:

1- System Defense Forces:
Each star system will have its local defense force, compoussed of
- Planetary Defense Weapon Platforms  (Surface to space weapons)
- Planetary Defense Air Force (short range orbital interceptor fighters)
- Planetary Ground Defense (Ground forces to repel enemy landing forces)
- System defense navy (small space naval forces that include gunboats, satellites, minefields, etc. Space to space weapons)


2 - Federal Defense Forces
The Human Federation's strike force, compoussed of:
- Space Navy (Spacecraft with the capability to travel to, and to strike the enemy, in their controlled space)
- Space Marines (Ground forces to invade enemy planets)
- Space air force (fighter craft to achieve orbital and air superiority on enemy planets. CAS capability as well)

Given that there's only one planet worth invading, and that there's only one system to defend, I think it makes more sense to merge these two organizations.

Besides, space fighters are useless anyways.

[FunkMonk]

I'd say that right now, the USA is probably more the premier service.

If not, those new BDUs will drop the Navy down a step.

You may be right, though this is only a recent development. I'd say that American security still rests mostly on the Navy's control of the seas and its ability to keep the sea lanes open for commerce.

I agree with you about the new Navy uniform. Terrible and disgraceful.

[Valmy]

That's navy stuff 

[FunkMonk]

Well, it depends.  Obviously, land-based strategic nuclear weapons would disappear, since a functioning space navy makes them not only obsolete, but wasteful.  Tactical nuclear weapons, on the other hand, are by definition used in support of surface army forces, and thus should be directly under their control.  Is there some middle ground where an Air Force could serve a purpose?

The triad was a product of interservice rivalry, and has no virtue in and of itself.  Besides, the Air Force was founded in order to create a bureaucracy.  If they automated it, they'd be betraying the entire purpose of the Air Force.

Honestly, I don't see land-based nuclear weapons disappearing as a strategic option. A Space Navy, as powerful an armada it may be, would be more vulnerable to attack than ground silos, and it would still be an advantage to be able to nuke your enemy across multiple approaches. Personally, I'd leave it as an option. The main hiccup I see, looking at it now, would be strategic defense systems that could knock the missiles from the sky, but that might pose problems to a space battleship as well.

I would say a robot army's use of tactical nukes would be limited. Presumably nuclear weapon use would still be frowned upon, so it would be easier to just send endless divisions of robots to conquer territory. No real loss to us.

The Navy's main role would be space dominance and troop insertion. And prestige. And fear.

I can still see a role for a future Air Force, stripped of its air and transportation assets but given greater control over strategic weapons. It would have very little resemblance to anything today, but still be an important option in a nation's defense policy.

[Neil]

Well, it depends.  Obviously, land-based strategic nuclear weapons would disappear, since a functioning space navy makes them not only obsolete, but wasteful.  Tactical nuclear weapons, on the other hand, are by definition used in support of surface army forces, and thus should be directly under their control.  Is there some middle ground where an Air Force could serve a purpose?

The triad was a product of interservice rivalry, and has no virtue in and of itself.  Besides, the Air Force was founded in order to create a bureaucracy.  If they automated it, they'd be betraying the entire purpose of the Air Force.

Honestly, I don't see land-based nuclear weapons disappearing as a strategic option. A Space Navy, as powerful an armada it may be, would be more vulnerable to attack than ground silos, and it would still be an advantage to be able to nuke your enemy across multiple approaches. Personally, I'd leave it as an option. The main hiccup I see, looking at it now, would be strategic defense systems that could knock the missiles from the sky, but that might pose problems to a space battleship as well.

I have my doubts as to the possible effectiveness of SDI against space-based missiles, launched from anywhere.  Has anyone managed to hit a target at any time other than on the upward leg?

Really, I don't think that space-based missiles are any more vulnerable than ground-based ones.  They'd still be vulnerable to a first strike, but at least such a first strike would wipe out and irradiate large areas of the US.

I would say a robot army's use of tactical nukes would be limited. Presumably nuclear weapon use would still be frowned upon, so it would be easier to just send endless divisions of robots to conquer territory. No real loss to us.

Robots still cost money.  You really wouldn't want to be overly wasteful.

The Navy's main role would be space dominance and troop insertion. And prestige. And fear.

I can still see a role for a future Air Force, stripped of its air and transportation assets but given greater control over strategic weapons. It would have very little resemblance to anything today, but still be an important option in a nation's defense policy.

I just don't think that narrow field justifies the existance of the Air Force.  Over time, if the situation on Earth improves, the Army will be phased out as well, but the only thing that the Air Force does that no other service could easily duplicate (and has currently or in the past) is maintain Air Force traditions.  Given that I feel that an independent air force is an abomination of the first order, that's not a convincing argument for me.