Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #493752 > unrolled thread

Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy..

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written

Contents

  Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-06-19 16:11 +0000
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Panthera Tigris Altaica <northerntiger@outlook.com> - 2018-06-19 09:31 -0700
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 10:19 -0700
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-06-19 17:26 +0000
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 17:23 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-19 11:17 -0700
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 19:22 +0000
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 06:02 -0700
              Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-06-21 09:56 -0500
                Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-06-21 16:36 +0000
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-20 00:32 -0700
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-20 16:03 +0000
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 09:57 -0700
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-19 10:37 -0700
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 17:21 +0000
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-06-19 17:57 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 19:25 +0000
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-19 15:04 -0700
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. D B Davis <g@crcomp.net> - 2018-06-19 19:54 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Panthera Tigris Altaica <northerntiger@outlook.com> - 2018-06-19 13:05 -0700
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:37 -0400
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Anthony Frost <Vulch@vulch.org> - 2018-06-20 07:49 +0100
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-06-21 09:59 -0500
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 23:57 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-19 15:06 -0700
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-19 23:55 +0000
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:55 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:19 +0300
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 08:46 -0700
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2018-06-21 21:13 +0300
              Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-21 13:13 -0700
              Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:41 -0700
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-19 12:41 -0700
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:58 +0000
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 23:37 -0400
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-19 22:12 -0700
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-06-22 11:14 -0700
              Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-22 12:21 -0700
                Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-23 08:35 -0700
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 06:02 +0000
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. David Johnston <davidjohnston29yahoocom@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 12:57 -0700
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-06-19 14:49 -0700
        Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-20 00:00 +0000
          Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-06-19 19:10 -0700
            Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-19 23:13 -0700
              Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2018-06-20 14:33 -0700
                Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-20 15:44 -0700
    Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-20 00:29 -0700
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 14:54 -0500
      Re: Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy.. David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-06-21 10:05 -0500

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#493752 — Hmm, not the Air Force & not the Navy..

A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.

Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
either older service:

	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html

Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..

All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
neat logos and patches..
-- 
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#493753

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.

Ben Bova, I think, had a lot of stories involving the United States AeroSpace Force. Chet Kinsman was the main character, I think.

> 
> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
> either older service:
> 
> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
> 
> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
> 
> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
> neat logos and patches..
> -- 
> ------
> columbiaclosings.com
> What's not in Columbia anymore..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493757

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
> 
> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
> either older service:
> 
> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
> 
> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
> 
> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
> neat logos and patches..

...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
have actual Space Cadets!

pt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493758

In article <451778e5-e3f8-465a-81dd-f1a175172711@googlegroups.com>,
Peter Trei  <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>> 
>> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>> either older service:
>> 
>> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>> 
>> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>> 
>> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>> neat logos and patches..
>
>...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
>have actual Space Cadets!
>
>pt
>

Maybe even Eager Young Space Cadets!

	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyZ42Csl4Xw
-- 
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493760

In article <451778e5-e3f8-465a-81dd-f1a175172711@googlegroups.com>,
Peter Trei  <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>> 
>> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>> either older service:
>> 
>> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>> 
>> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>> 
>> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>> neat logos and patches..
>
>...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
>have actual Space Cadets!

And never mind whether it's quasi-Navy or quasi-Air Force,
they'll still have cadets.  Back in WWII, my father was a cadet
instructor for the US Army Air Corps, as it was then.

(He didn't teach them how to fly; he had a slide projector with a
quick-timed shutter, to teach them how to recognize friendly and
unfriendly aircraft in so many tenths of a second.)

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493764

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 1:45:07 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <451778e5-e3f8-465a-81dd-f1a175172711@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Trei  <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> >> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
> >> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
> >> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
> >> 
> >> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
> >> either older service:
> >> 
> >> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
> >> 
> >> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
> >> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
> >> 
> >> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
> >> neat logos and patches..
> >
> >...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
> >have actual Space Cadets!
> 
> And never mind whether it's quasi-Navy or quasi-Air Force,
> they'll still have cadets.  Back in WWII, my father was a cadet
> instructor for the US Army Air Corps, as it was then.
> 
> (He didn't teach them how to fly; he had a slide projector with a
> quick-timed shutter, to teach them how to recognize friendly and
> unfriendly aircraft in so many tenths of a second.)
> 
> -

Please, a Space quasi-Navy would have Space Midshipmen. 
If there are Space Middies, would there not eventually be
Space Marines?  We were toying with the idea IRL:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSTAIN_(military)

Merging Naval and Air Force traditions might be the thing
to do, creating a tertium quid.

Kevin  R

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493766

In article <1982e8b1-6340-4981-8765-a84128f99af6@googlegroups.com>,
Kevrob  <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 1:45:07 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>Please, a Space quasi-Navy would have Space Midshipmen. 
>If there are Space Middies, would there not eventually be
>Space Marines?  We were toying with the idea IRL:

Well, Heinlein put Space Marines in his _Space Cadet._  They wore
flashy uniforms and didn't have to study higher mathematics,
which is why the protagonist was tempted to transfer.
>
>Merging Naval and Air Force traditions might be the thing
>to do, creating a tertium quid.

If we have to have a military presence in space at all, which
(alas) we probably do.  One of the major things Heinlein's Space
Patrol did was to inspect the howevermany nuclear missiles in
orbit around Earth, ready to be sent down if somebody got too
ornery.  Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493841

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 3:45:06 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <1982e8b1-6340-4981-8765-a84128f99af6@googlegroups.com>,
> Kevrob  <kevrob@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >Merging Naval and Air Force traditions might be the thing
> >to do, creating a tertium quid.
> 
> If we have to have a military presence in space at all, which
> (alas) we probably do.  One of the major things Heinlein's Space
> Patrol did was to inspect the howevermany nuclear missiles in
> orbit around Earth, ready to be sent down if somebody got too
> ornery.  Let's hope it doesn't come to that.


A Space Force's abilities would be limited not only by what the other branches are unwilling to give up, but also by space activities forbidden by treaties.  E.g, that nuclear missile count should be zero.  Of course, when you need your armed forces is when treaties are out the window.

No one has mentioned the problem of reshaping the Pentagon.  Are the Navy and Air Force on adjacent sides such that the Space Force can be installed between them?  In an example of "them that has shall get," those with corner offices will see them expand as we widen the angles.

-- 
-Jack

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493943

On 2018-06-20, Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
> No one has mentioned the problem of reshaping the Pentagon.  Are the Navy and
> Air Force on adjacent sides such that the Space Force can be installed
> between them?  In an example of "them that has shall get," those with corner
> offices will see them expand as we widen the angles.

"widen the angles"? Nah - either we'll use Spaaaace Tech to just add a 6th side
by twisting the local geometry to be hyperbolic, with 432 degrees around each
local point (obSF: Mary Gentle, I think it's The Architecture of Desire, with
5 directions all at right angles nstead of 4, and the much more recent
Dichronauts by Greg Egan, who explores life on a world that has a hyperbolic
2+1 -spatial- geometry (plus time) which works analogously to how relativistic
3+1 spacetime geometry does) ... or suspend the 6th side in orbit above the
others, with stepping discs to connect them in (obSF - Shendering, the
Scrambled City in Sucharitkul's Inquestor series, which had bits of itself on
the local moon).

Dave, think big or stay home
-- 
\/David	DeLaney	posting	thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that	grows the flower
It's not the clock that	slows the hour 	The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is	all it takes to	make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE	HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible	:( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493950

David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On 2018-06-20, Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No one has mentioned the problem of reshaping the Pentagon.  Are the Navy and
>> Air Force on adjacent sides such that the Space Force can be installed
>> between them?  In an example of "them that has shall get," those with corner
>> offices will see them expand as we widen the angles.
>
> "widen the angles"? Nah - either we'll use Spaaaace Tech to just add a 6th side
> by twisting the local geometry to be hyperbolic, with 432 degrees around each
> local point (obSF: Mary Gentle, I think it's The Architecture of Desire, with
> 5 directions all at right angles nstead of 4, and the much more recent
> Dichronauts by Greg Egan, who explores life on a world that has a hyperbolic
> 2+1 -spatial- geometry (plus time) which works analogously to how relativistic
> 3+1 spacetime geometry does) ... or suspend the 6th side in orbit above the
> others, with stepping discs to connect them in (obSF - Shendering, the
> Scrambled City in Sucharitkul's Inquestor series, which had bits of itself on
> the local moon).

Does the eponymous structure in _And He Built a Crooked House_ (RAH)
offer unlimited space? If so, perhaps a crooked Pentagon is called for 
.. oh! ... never mind.

✍

Thank you,

-- 
Don

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493833

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 11:19:04 AM UTC-6, Peter Trei wrote:
 
> ...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
> have actual Space Cadets!

I wonder if they'll get to use computers with cool keyboards:

http://world.std.com/~jdostale/kbd/SpaceCadet.html

...an early version of the keyboard for the Symbolics LISP Machine that had the 
mathematical symbols available through extra shifts visible on the keys.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493852

In article <e68cfed7-7e78-4474-8285-0dd2948845da@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc  <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 11:19:04 AM UTC-6, Peter Trei wrote:
> 
>> ...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
>> have actual Space Cadets!
>
>I wonder if they'll get to use computers with cool keyboards:
>
>http://world.std.com/~jdostale/kbd/SpaceCadet.html
>
>...an early version of the keyboard for the Symbolics LISP Machine that had the 
>mathematical symbols available through extra shifts visible on the keys.

Well, dammit, my eyes are not good enough to read those itty
bitty key images.  But the line about "It was designed by
committee and no suggestion was rejected" is a good one.

Wait, my system haS a Zoom function ... no, dammit, even at 400x
I can't read the keys, because the plastic was shiny.  I only get
an impression that there were LOTS of little characters on each
key.

I earned my living typing for forty years, and I came across a
few weird keyboards.  I can only be thankful that I never had to
deal with that one.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493955

On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:30:04 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <e68cfed7-7e78-4474-8285-0dd2948845da@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc  <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 11:19:04 AM UTC-6, Peter Trei wrote:
> > 
> >> ...and if they have an academy for training Space Force officers, then we'll
> >> have actual Space Cadets!
> >
> >I wonder if they'll get to use computers with cool keyboards:
> >
> >http://world.std.com/~jdostale/kbd/SpaceCadet.html
> >
> >...an early version of the keyboard for the Symbolics LISP Machine that had the 
> >mathematical symbols available through extra shifts visible on the keys.
> 
> Well, dammit, my eyes are not good enough to read those itty
> bitty key images.  But the line about "It was designed by
> committee and no suggestion was rejected" is a good one.
> 
> Wait, my system haS a Zoom function ... no, dammit, even at 400x
> I can't read the keys, because the plastic was shiny.  I only get
> an impression that there were LOTS of little characters on each
> key.
> 
> I earned my living typing for forty years, and I came across a
> few weird keyboards.  I can only be thankful that I never had to
> deal with that one.

Click on the images, and you'll get the full sized images.

pt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493759

On 6/19/2018 9:11 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
> 
> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
> either older service:
> 
> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
> 
> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
> 
> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
> neat logos and patches..
> 
As much as I would like some kind of Space Force I find it hard to take 
Trump's "order" here seriously.  He has a history of saying things that 
he never follows up on and as the article referenced says it really 
isn't up to him.  I say get back to us when Congress passes the bill.

-- 
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation 
instinct are running screaming.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493761

In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>
>Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>either older service:
>
>	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>
>Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..

From your mouth to God's ear, amen.

>All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>neat logos and patches..

NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.

I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
do better than that?

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493762

djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
>Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>>heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>>that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>>
>>Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>>either older service:
>>
>>	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>>
>>Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>>grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>
>From your mouth to God's ear, amen.
>
>>All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>>neat logos and patches..
>
>NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.
>
>I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
>do better than that?

Personally I'd rather they concentrate on cool spacecraft rather than
cool logos....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493767

In article <QtbWC.178656$pg3.81253@fx29.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>>In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
>>Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>>A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>>>heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>>>that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>>>
>>>Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>>>either older service:
>>>
>>>	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>>>
>>>Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>>>grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>>
>>From your mouth to God's ear, amen.
>>
>>>All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>>>neat logos and patches..
>>
>>NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.
>>
>>I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
>>do better than that?
>
>Personally I'd rather they concentrate on cool spacecraft rather than
>cool logos....

No reason they can't have both, particularly since the cool logos
will cost a lot less than the cool spacecraft.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493783

On 6/19/2018 12:25 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <QtbWC.178656$pg3.81253@fx29.iad>,
> Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>>> In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>>>> heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>>>> that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>>>>
>>>> Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>>>> either older service:
>>>>
>>>> 	https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>>>>
>>>> Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>>>> grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>>>
>> >From your mouth to God's ear, amen.
>>>
>>>> All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>>>> neat logos and patches..
>>>
>>> NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.
>>>
>>> I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
>>> do better than that?
>>
>> Personally I'd rather they concentrate on cool spacecraft rather than
>> cool logos....
> 
> No reason they can't have both, particularly since the cool logos
> will cost a lot less than the cool spacecraft.
> 
And the logos can be cooler with cool spaceships on them.  :)

-- 
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation 
instinct are running screaming.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493768

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
> In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
>>A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
>>heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
>>that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
>>
>>Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
>>either older service:
>>
>>       https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
>>
>>Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
>>grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
>
> From your mouth to God's ear, amen.
>
>>All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
>>neat logos and patches..
>  
> NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.
>
> I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
> do better than that?
>

Submitted for your approval.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gen_Merrill_McPeak_1993.jpg

✍

Thank you,

-- 
Don

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#493770

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 3:54:05 PM UTC-4, D B Davis wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
> > In article <foso99FkropU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > Ted Nolan <tednolan> <tednolan> wrote:
> >>A lot of SF (milsf especially, of course) assumes a Space Navy with
> >>heavy wet Navy traditions.  In real life, it appeared for a long while
> >>that in the US, the "space" arm of the military would be the Air Force.
> >>
> >>Now it appears we will have an actual "Space Force" separate from
> >>either older service:
> >>
> >>       https://www.space.com/40932-trump-space-force-next-steps.html
> >>
> >>Of course, this is contingent on Congressional action, so it may all
> >>grind to a halt if the midterms shift control..
> >
> > From your mouth to God's ear, amen.
> >
> >>All apart from the important military ramifications, there should be some
> >>neat logos and patches..
> >  
> > NASA has already had some nifty logos and patches.
> >
> > I just googled "SpaceX logo."  It's pretty drab.  Surely they can
> > do better than that?
> >
> 
> Submitted for your approval.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gen_Merrill_McPeak_1993.jpg

His uniform is way too drab, even if you count the rings on the cuffs. American officers who aren't Navy don't usually have rings. Other places do. Here's the chief of the RAF. http://www.quazoo.com/q/Chief_of_the_Air_Staff_(United_Kingdom)?alt=Chief_of_the_air_staff_(united_kingdom)
He has lots of rings, and lots of other things.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written

csiph-web