Title: How the Current View of the Air and Space Environment Influences Development of Military Space Forces
Subject: Military Space Policy and Vision
Author(s): Lyndon S. Anderson; Stephen M. Rothstein; Theresa R. Clark (Faculty Advisor)
DTIC Keywords: AEROSPACE ENVIRONMENTS, AEROSPACE SYSTEMS, AIR FORCE, AIR FORCE PLANNING, AIR FORCE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE RESEARCH, AIR SPACE, AIR TO SPACE, DEFENSE PLANNING, DOCTRINE, ENVELOPE(SPACE), MANNED SPACECRAFT, MILITARY DOCTRINE, MILITARY FORCES(UNITED STATES), MILITARY ORGANIZATIONS, MILITARY PLANNING, MILITARY REQUIREMENTS, OUTER SPACE, PLANNING PROGRAMMING BUDGETING, REQUIREMENTS, SPACE BASED, SPACE DEFENSE, SPACE ENVIRONMENTS, SPACE EXPLORATION, SPACE FLIGHT, SPACE MISSIONS, SPACE PERCEPTION, SPACE SYSTEMS, SPACE TECHNOLOGY, SPACE WARFARE, SPACECRAFT DEFENSE SYSTEMS, THEORY, VISION
Abstract: Perceptions determine actions. The military's perception of the air and space environment influences the type of space forces it will develop in the future. This paper addresses this perception by answering the following question: How does the current view of the air and space environment influence the development of military space forces? The research method centered on surveying literature and interviewing DOD policy makers to develop the idea that the military's current organizational paradigm is a paradox that sees space as a medium, separate from air, while at the same time, bound to it physically, theoretically, and historically. This paradox creates a dilemma that influences the military's ability to advocate and justify requirements, and ultimately garner resources to develop a viable space force. The paper develops measures of merit to show organizational evidence of how these linking and separating positions of the paradigm express themselves within the military. This has both positive and negative aspects for space force development. It promotes a healthy climate for debate, but at the same time, frustrates DOD's ability to generate a healthy concept-pull environment. The paper concludes by opening the door to ideas for resolving the dilemma the current paradigm presents.