I can remember that there is a treaty that forbids the carrying of weapons in space:
I know that the US is not complying with the Treaties, but it seems to me to be sanctionable behaviour.
I think it is going to serve primarily as a commercial space, to look at high altitude Mother Earth as Virgin Atlantics and SpaceX intend.And to go even deeper into this question: I think it is never the intention to leave this planet. Spiritually, the sun is the father, the moon the mother and the Earth’s womb. Which makes us by definition the children. Paulo Coelho knows how to describe it well in his book The Alchemist. I recommend you to read this. It is about the language of the universe, the language of your heart and the language of the universe. 136 pages and you read it in a breath.
I think the military value of low-nature walkways is high, because you can do things from it that otherwise cannot.It gives you unique act alternatives. Traditionally, this is worth a lot of money from defence budgets. The economic value is therefore high. So yes, Spaceforce is unfortunately realistic.
Future of space is that we extract materials from the moon and the asteroids.Mars is just too far to achieve economic gain. Only permanent autarcische habitation is viable. The best chance US terraforming of Venus. By bringing algae into the atmosphere the CO2 can be changed into oxygen. However, that will certainly take a thousand years. There is no civilization on Earth except the Egyptians and the Chinese, who can stay in control for so long…
I respond to the question:
“Do you think the Trump’s Spaceforce plan is realistic?”
Yes, this has been a fact in a different way for decades.
The plan for the creation of an American ‘ space Army‘ involves the pooling of existing military initiatives; Organisational and budgetary and not so much a new order missions.These initiatives are now (still) housed in the five existing army parts. Military-motivated missions have been going on for decades, these are bulky, potentially larger budgets than the civilian space agency NASA gets allocated. [1 [2
These projects include various issues; (nature) Observation, communication, navigation and research satellites, ancillary services, anti-satellite weapons, etc.These do not therefore include the launching of military (human) and/or military space stations on the one hand or weapons of mass destruction, such as missile shields or orbital weapons of mass destruction; That first has little utility or added value over existing and unmanned technique, the second is heavily contained by the UN Space Treaty.
Despite the secret nature of most missions, there is still a lot of info to be found from which the US military space program exists.The U.S. is incidentally only one country that undertakes military space missions. I give some examples:
- GPS is a military project (U.S. Air Force)
- An overview of well-known operational military satellites are found here: military satellites
- Mission ‘ ZUMA ‘, disguised in mists about the nature and fate despite the live-video connection of the launch, is only one of many launches every year to take place again for defense.
You can request scheduled launches from the U.S., including the military, for example here .Take note of the client and not the launcher.
Most recently; India that proclaimed the destruction of a satellite , but without preaching, radar stations will quickly pick up the space debris.