Military applications for P2P (split from SpaceX)

[SunlitZelkova]

[snip]

My point in the case of China was that it is no longer a conscript manned junkyard air force, which is what it has been for most of its history. I made that statement to explain that achieving air superiority in a war with China or Russia will not be anywhere near as easy as it was, say, during the Gulf War (which should be obvious, but the post I replied to implied the poster was unaware).

On 6/2/2021 at 6:47 AM, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

What I wrote above, aside - the RU and CN strategic planners have had decades to watch us and analyze our critical vulnerabilities.  Their missile tech (and in the case of RU, artillery) is no joke. They have what they think are ways to disrupt our command and control.  They're trying for tech parity in the form of planes and tanks but they are actually behind.  Same with the blue water navy capability. 

 

Massive caveat - CN has probably the second most capable Maritime force, and one particularly suitable for their local seaways (and neighborhood).  If you really want to get your local congressmember worked up about something we need to spend on - it's our Navy and Marine Corps capabilities, not airforce.  Our ability to project power is greatly reduced in the South Asia Sea region 

I agree they are still behind, but not that behind. Chinese and Russian stuff is not technologically on par with American equipment, but if employed properly it can still pack a punch, whereas the likes of the North Korean air force are doomed no matter what they do as none of their aircraft appear to have been upgraded since the 90s at the latest.

Now, that is not to say the J-20 is on par with the F-22 in performance or technology. But it is "good enough" to be dangerous in the wider context of a war (of course, if used properly).

On 6/2/2021 at 7:24 AM, sevenperforce said:

Here’s a thought. Where are they intending to land Superheavy again? That’s right, on a floating platform. If they can land the boosters on a floating platform, they can readily land Starship on a floating platform. If they can land Starship on a floating platform, they could readily land Starship on an aircraft carrier.

It should be quite safe. I assume that with a negligible payload penalty, starship can perform the same off-target maneuver that the Falcon 9 boosters perform, correcting for a landing burn at the last second. A landing failure wouldn’t necessarily do much damage to a carrier. The carrier can either refuel Starship and allow it to fly back under its own power, or it can carry the empty Starship back to US soil.

Landing at sea on a carrier in the center of a battle group ensures that Starship isn’t flying into enemy territory. It’s not going to get shot down. It has a safe place to land and the ship can even be equipped with a crane to offload cargo.

I am sure that if you asked the US Navy, “hey, if you could deliver 150 tonnes of cargo from US soil to any carrier group on the world in under two hours, would you have a use for that?” they would say “Uh yep definitely.”

The issue with this is that it exposes the location of the carrier group to ballistic missile early warning satellites when the Raptors light up to do the landing burn.

On 6/2/2021 at 7:28 AM, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Yeah - but can we print 'NAVY' on the side?  It's kind of galling to have to see anything USAF on the carrier deck. 

Can Starship be painted at all? Is the stainless steel and the black of the heat shield necessary for some reason?

It would be cool to see Starship painted with a scheme meant as an homage to the Saturn V. They could do ones for the Shuttle too.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Vanamonde

[RCgothic]

I like this carrier idea better than dropping into warzones.

I imagine there'd quickly be a new class of drone support ship if there's any issue landing on a carrier. Sufficiently distant to take the risk from other vessels but still protected within the group.

[Beccab]

8 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Can Starship be painted at all? Is the stainless steel and the black of the heat shield necessary for some reason?

It would be cool to see Starship painted with a scheme meant as an homage to the Saturn V. They could do ones for the Shuttle too.

I don't remember exactly where so I could without a doubt be wrong, but I heard that painting starship was ruled out by SpaceX because starship's reentry would remove most of it and repainting the thing would slow down too much the turnaround

Edited June 2, 2021 by Beccab

[SpaceFace545]

Just now, RCgothic said:

I like this carrier idea better than dropping into warzones.

Out of anything stated in this ludicrous air force plan, landing on an aircraft carrier is fake and unrealistic for many reasons I stated earlier.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

12 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

But what are you going to do with the aircraft that the aircraft carrier was designed to move. Aircraft carriers are crowded with planes and helicopters above and below decks. So what, you just halve your plane storage by keeping them below deck and afterwards the starship will take up too much room for the flight deck to even be useful. There also isn't any equipment people would need so desperately that it needs for a rocket to bring it to the fleet. That equipment is available in redundancy across numerous ships and base

Dedicated Space Force starship carriers…. 

[SpaceFace545]

Just now, Spaceman.Spiff said:

Dedicated Space Force starship carriers…. 

Yeah, hum, air force doesn't do boats. 

[SOXBLOX]

55 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Yeah - but can we print 'NAVY' on the side?  It's kind of galling to have to see anything USAF on the carrier deck. 

LOL. My dad (Air Force) got a guided tour of the carrier USS America, I think it was, when he was there for some reason or other. He found a really sweet chair up in the island, with a sheepskin lining, and then he sat in it. He said the Navy guy with him almost had a heart attack, 'cause that was the flag bridge. Guess whose chair it was...

And I hope Starship can be painted... Maybe just the letters or something? If not, maybe bolt on some heat shield material as letters?

IMO, they'd probably reinforce the flight deck of an LHD or LPD, rather than take up premium carrier deck space. I think it would still work, and operations wouldn't be affected so much. Helicopters can ferry stuff around the battle group.

Edited June 2, 2021 by SOXBLOX

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

in the case of China was that it is no longer a conscript manned junkyard

This is certainly a good thing for all to recognize.  I remember being alarmed when I learned that CN had discovered how to make DU penetrators and since then I've been watching the development of their amphibious ability with interest. 

The old caution vis CN is that they have both more military aged men and more English speakers than the US has people. They are no joke - and with the modernization, cannot be ignored. 

[SunlitZelkova]

1 hour ago, SpaceFace545 said:

They only are able to keep up with other militaries through their huge size and clone armies. Other than that they are both stuck in the 80s, 90s at best.

They are kind of in a mixed position. They have modern Su-27s operating just a short ways away from air bases with J-7Es (the Chinese modified version of the MiG-21).

I don't think they are stuck though, as each year passes, more and more of the outdated 20th century equipment is retired, and modern stuff (although still technologically inferior to the latest Western equipment, still capable of challenging it) enters service in greater numbers. And they are in the process of downsizing (especially the ground forces) and changing their force structure away from the brute force tactics that came about during the Mao era.

Again, I'm not trying to say the J-20 is equal to the F-22 in performance or technology, but the J-20 is advanced enough to pose a threat in the wider context of war.

In comparison, North Korea truly is "stuck" and the MiG-29s they bought in the 80s will probably be useless if war were to break out (and they have no hope of acquiring replacements or building a new fighter to compete with Western aircraft).

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

On 6/2/2021 at 8:01 AM, RCgothic said:

I like this carrier idea better than dropping into warzones.

I imagine there'd quickly be a new class of drone support ship if there's any issue landing on a carrier. Sufficiently distant to take the risk from other vessels but still protected within the group.

There is a certain appeal to this.  However a single ship measures cargo in the 10s of thousands of tons - not the hundreds. 

Where a dedicated SS retriever launcher ship would be beneficial is in keeping the fleet supplied in very out of the way places with less traffic /satellite coverage - presuming you could bring in 1-2 a week. This would add a little strategic depth to the logistics game. 

I think the thing to recognize, however, is that much of what we are discussing revolves around the current force structure, where the US does not /has not engaged directly with peer combatants and enjoys virtually untouchable control over the sea. 

Should the US and China both be stupider than the US and USSR were - by allowing competition to become kinetic - the non-nuclear, non-diplomatic resolution will resemble a modern version of 41-45 and the world won't recover for a while afterwards. 

Thus I both presume and hope that wiser heads will prevail. 

[snip]

[kerbiloid]

15 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

a way to show up in an unexpected place

On top of Kilimanjaro.

To not wake up all villages in ten-mile radius by roar and flame of rocket nozzles.

[SpaceFace545]

10 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

On top of Kilimanjaro.

To not wake up all villages in ten-mile radius by roar and flame of rocket nozzles.

Yeah, the whole "stealthy" or "tactical" drop of supplies anywhere in the world (I am writing this in Comic Book Guy's voice) would be completely ruined by the kilometers long reentry trail, and the sound and flame of a rocket. God forbid it blows up, you'd wake up the entire country.

[southernplain]

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

Yeah, the whole "stealthy" or "tactical" drop of supplies anywhere in the world (I am writing this in Comic Book Guy's voice) would be completely ruined by the kilometers long reentry trail, and the sound and flame of a rocket

I don't think anyone in the DoD would consider SS for stealth applications. They aren't stupid.

What obviously interests them is the extremely rapid deployment possibilities of P2P SS anywhere in the world in roughly two hours.

[SpaceFace545]

1 minute ago, southernplain said:

I don't think anyone in the DoD would consider SS for stealth applications. They aren't stupid.

I know that, its a joke 

1 minute ago, southernplain said:

What obviously interests them is the extremely rapid deployment possibilities of P2P SS anywhere in the world in roughly two hours.

I've already been over this and its actually pointless. The way that military logistics works would still get you what you want because it is sitting at one of the 800 bases across the world.

[kerbiloid]

Excessive against the less-developed countries (unless it's just a starship of bucks), suicidal but ineffective  for top league.

Strange even to assault a standalone (island fortresss? fortress island? ) of a Dr, Evil, cuz his paranoia will be ready long before.

Read Heinlein, Starship Troopers for proper Starship troopers,.

[southernplain]

5 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

I've already been over this and its actually pointless. The way that military logistics works would still get you what you want because it is sitting at one of the 800 bases across the world.

The USAF certainly has a large network of airlift squadrons, but there are limits to how quickly they can react.

Edit: Not all US bases have strategic airlift stationed at them either.

This SS study isn't looking to replace strategic airlift, they are brainstorming the niches that P2P SS may occupy. It certainly seems likely there could be a military application for SS. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by southernplain

[Spaceman.Spiff]

1 minute ago, SpaceFace545 said:

The way that military logistics works would still get you what you want because it is sitting at one of the 800 bases across the world.

What if the rapid deployment was necessary and could not be accomplished through typical logistics chains?

what if starship had to drop a M1A2C into battle

lol it's within the mass capabilities

[kerbiloid]

2 minutes ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

What if the rapid deployment was necessary and could not be accomplished through typical logistics chains?

Then just drop a lead starship from above.

Otherwise it will be "He was just a Starship trooper...", and so on, according to the text.
Cuz one shell - and no starship.

Edited June 2, 2021 by kerbiloid

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

26 minutes ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

What if the rapid deployment was necessary and could not be accomplished through typical logistics chains?

what if starship had to drop a M1A2C into battle

lol it's within the mass capabilities

Dropping one tank does not equate to 'mass' in the military sense. 

Until and unless Musk and crew are launching 3 per day, SS will not be a tactical asset - or much of a strategic one. 

Currently it takes approximately 1 month to ship a fleet from San Diego to the Middle East.  It's one of the reasons the US maintains the forward bases @SpaceFace545described.

That fleet arrives with thousands of troops and a tonnage of cargo likely in the 100s of thousands. 

Even at 3 per day - SX as a milcontractor can't match one ships worth of cargo - what they can offer is speed. 

Again - not a replacement for capabilities, but perhaps an enhancer

[StrandedonEarth]

While the enemy is focused on all these Starships coming in hot, the SEAL team will sneaking in through the sewers and the Rangers are preparing to breach the back door...

One Starship makes it through the hail of ack-ack and SAMs to land, and then out pops a flag that says “BOOM!” (Which is when the back door gets breached). 

More seriously, at the rate they will be able to crank out Starships, especially if they license out production, they’ll eventually be selling these things like airliners 

[kerbiloid]

Just now, StrandedonEarth said:

team will sneaking in through the sewers

In beaver suits.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

In beaver suits.

The horror!

[kerbiloid]

1 minute ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

The horror!

More horrible than forest  camouflage on regolith?

Spoiler

 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

11 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

More horrible than forest  camouflage on regolith?

  Hide contents

 

Well - if that's all they're wearing to run around on regolith, they'll look a bit more like Chad.

 

 

Far better to go with this - if you want to achieve surprise

 

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[kerbiloid]

Well, they should ask SpaceX for stylish lunar biker uniform.

Spoiler

 

(With the swamp boots for regolith)

Edited June 2, 2021 by kerbiloid