Interestingly, Heinlein's _Starship Troopers_ is the only book, other than _The Bible_ to be on the reading lists of _all_ the U.S. Service Academies.
That said, while the Marines dream about powered armor and self-deploying troops, the reality is nowhere near that yet.
As noted, one needs to have control of the LZ --- if that weren't critical, then Spec. Ops. would have actually done something with the idea of putting pods containing soldiers under the wings of Harrier jump jets, and the V-22 Osprey would have a forward-firing weapon --- keeping control of an airfield is hard, which is why AF Sec. Police train to fight against Spetsnaz and the U.S. had RoK Marines guarding their bases during Vietnam.
What does a supply chain look like in a time of drone warfare? How does one control a perimeter and maintain the surface of a runway against an opponent which is well-equipped? (For an example of how critical that can be, see AF-4590)
stackskipton · 1m ago
Starship Troopers is on the reading list because of politics of the books, not technical warfighting side. There is also interesting passage in there about how Service Academies are insane idea since books has chapters on officers in infantry are enlisted personnel who go to OCS and training period with much higher washout rate.
galacticaactual · 1h ago
You have no idea what you’re talking about. An Osprey doesn’t have a “forward firing weapon” because Direct Action Penetrators followed by -47s from the 160th are better suited to such a scenario.
On the topic of USAF security forces training to fight Spetsnaz…lol.
> Why would you do any of that if you could deliver 300,000 pounds on a Starship anywhere in the world in an hour?
How much does it cost to destroy that vehicle and its 300,000 pounds of cargo before it lands?
TMWNN · 6m ago
Cargo aircraft like the C5 Galaxy the author mentioned are also vulnerable to antiaircraft fire, including when they approach.
joezydeco · 1h ago
That slow moving vehicle...
cptaj · 40m ago
Massive, shiny and slow
1oooqooq · 16m ago
well, maybe it could deliver 200k pounds of gear while carrying 100k pounds of counter measures?
but again, the original plan was always good enough for humans dropping slowly on parachutes
jvanderbot · 1h ago
I don't see why a drop ship needs to be all that sophisticated. A parachute and some shipping crates and send the rocket home from orbit, don't risk it.
faitswulff · 1h ago
Meh, dropping actual human troops anywhere is largely romanticized. I'd bet on orbital drones, myself.
nocoiner · 2h ago
> So why go meet the enemy in an hour on the frontlines of a battlefield they have picked?
> Why not instead point your Starships at their capital city?
Can’t think of a single thing that could possibly go wrong with sending a few dozen ballistic projectiles toward the enemy’s capital.
Kim_Bruning · 1h ago
If you can drop a soldier or a tank in the enemy capital under an hour, why not go all in and drop a thermonuclear device?
I'm sure no one has ever thought of that! O:-)
stoolpigeon · 1h ago
SpaceX is reusing spaceships, landing them, catching rockets in chopstick contraptions. But a spaceship that lands near its launchpad can also land anywhere in the world. In an hour. Loaded with military might.
No - no they can't. Referencing Starship Troopers is appropriate because this is fiction.
Telemakhos · 53m ago
It's an old military dream; Ithacus [0] was a 1966 concept for a vertical take-off, vertical landing troop transport rocket that could put 1200 soldiers plus materiel anywhere in the world in an hour. Issues that others have brought up here (like the vehicle being mistaken for a nuclear missile) were brought up then, and the obvious flaws killed the project.
As [0] points out, and as I vividly recall from the antiquated books of my childhood, a similar concept was prominent in the 1979 Usborne Book of the Future. The idea of being able to put boots on the ground anywhere within an hour is probably still a military dream somewhere, although I don't think US doctrine has a place for that right now, since achieving air supremacy over the theater, a prerequisite to boots on the ground, would probably take longer than an hour.
Yep. If a ballistic missile such as this one ends up aimed at Europe logistics will be the last thing on everyone's mind.
Coffeewine · 1h ago
I agree, that line jumped out at me. They need the chopstick contraption, it isn’t available worldwide!
pinewurst · 1h ago
The booster needs chopsticks, but the Starship payload (theoretically as it hasn’t happened yet) does not.
ItsHarper · 1h ago
The current version of it does, it only has catch pins, no landing legs.
rbanffy · 1h ago
Good luck not getting shot down during a mostly ballistic trajectory.
StopDisinfo910 · 1h ago
This is yet another article writing without taking into account the reality of the nuclear weapon.
In an age where all your significant opponents have nuclear ICBMs, anything which could look like a nuclear strike will be interpreted as such by your opponent in an open conflict and generate direct retaliation.
This is frankly weird to me how some American commentators like to pretend this has not been the reality for 70 years. I don’t know if it’s because most of America recent wars have been mostly asymmetric or if it’s because the army propaganda needed to be insanely strong to occult the long series of strategic losses despite the costs of the wars but it’s kind of scary.
ashoeafoot · 14m ago
The world is filled with desperate young men, living in power fantasies far away from reality.
A spaceship landing or starahip troppers it all ends swarmed by flies(drones).
The problem is these COD operetta heroes with a death wish due to no future voted in a warchieftain who does not deliver and they get antsy. Game Theory didnt factor in a humanity that would be selfdefeating in crisis mode.
I would assume this would also disrupt airlines as well as wealthy people could jet around from London to California to Tokyo in ten minutes. For less than a jet.
1oooqooq · 17m ago
starship troopers is a book about how to break young people into Sargeants. not about supply lines. lol
davidw · 1h ago
The Pentagon is also busy firing anyone who cares about boring woke things like 'logistics' in favor of manly men who can go head to head with Defense Secretary Whiskey Pete downing shots.
galacticaactual · 1h ago
1/75 would not have fallen under 24th ID as even then the 75th was under SOCOM. That is the first of a dozen fallacies in this article.
This person was probably in the 24th ID at one point in their adult life. Their credibility stops about there.
rbanffy · 1h ago
Good luck not being shot down during a mostly ballistic flight.
That said, while the Marines dream about powered armor and self-deploying troops, the reality is nowhere near that yet.
As noted, one needs to have control of the LZ --- if that weren't critical, then Spec. Ops. would have actually done something with the idea of putting pods containing soldiers under the wings of Harrier jump jets, and the V-22 Osprey would have a forward-firing weapon --- keeping control of an airfield is hard, which is why AF Sec. Police train to fight against Spetsnaz and the U.S. had RoK Marines guarding their bases during Vietnam.
What does a supply chain look like in a time of drone warfare? How does one control a perimeter and maintain the surface of a runway against an opponent which is well-equipped? (For an example of how critical that can be, see AF-4590)
On the topic of USAF security forces training to fight Spetsnaz…lol.
> Why would you do any of that if you could deliver 300,000 pounds on a Starship anywhere in the world in an hour?
How much does it cost to destroy that vehicle and its 300,000 pounds of cargo before it lands?
but again, the original plan was always good enough for humans dropping slowly on parachutes
> Why not instead point your Starships at their capital city?
Can’t think of a single thing that could possibly go wrong with sending a few dozen ballistic projectiles toward the enemy’s capital.
I'm sure no one has ever thought of that! O:-)
No - no they can't. Referencing Starship Troopers is appropriate because this is fiction.
As [0] points out, and as I vividly recall from the antiquated books of my childhood, a similar concept was prominent in the 1979 Usborne Book of the Future. The idea of being able to put boots on the ground anywhere within an hour is probably still a military dream somewhere, although I don't think US doctrine has a place for that right now, since achieving air supremacy over the theater, a prerequisite to boots on the ground, would probably take longer than an hour.
[0] https://blog.firedrake.org/archive/2015/12/Ithacus_and_SUSTA...
In an age where all your significant opponents have nuclear ICBMs, anything which could look like a nuclear strike will be interpreted as such by your opponent in an open conflict and generate direct retaliation.
This is frankly weird to me how some American commentators like to pretend this has not been the reality for 70 years. I don’t know if it’s because most of America recent wars have been mostly asymmetric or if it’s because the army propaganda needed to be insanely strong to occult the long series of strategic losses despite the costs of the wars but it’s kind of scary.
The problem is these COD operetta heroes with a death wish due to no future voted in a warchieftain who does not deliver and they get antsy. Game Theory didnt factor in a humanity that would be selfdefeating in crisis mode.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventional_Prompt_Strike
This person was probably in the 24th ID at one point in their adult life. Their credibility stops about there.