Ya, it was the same with Air Force at its start.

The joke isn't pulling airforce responsibilities into a new branch(all this did) the joke is the name is stupid.

@@Josh-ks7co and that's the same thing that happened with the air force too, but know on earth the air force is one of the tips of the spear the us can deploy and the next level would be the space and simple naming convention would be space force.

@@eaglesviper79 Ok, let me repeat the above since you didn't get it. The. Name. Is. Stupid. Just like the US Army is not called Ground Force. The. Name. Is. Stupid

@eaglesviper79 regardless if you think the name isn't funny a lot of people do and that's the joke. People reading more into it are ignorant or lying to you. If Trump didn't do it and Biden did people would be laughing just as much if not more. It's like calling the Navy "Water Force" does that not sound silly?

That sound more like something you would hear on HAI

Lol 😹 my comment was going to be time stamped as well. I’ll share here now, at 23:45 he proved we now live on a flat earth because of satellites 🕳

@@NGC-catseye honestly can’t tell if it’s a joke lol

They should hire you to write for Wendover.

​@@NGC-catseyebro doesn't listen

How could one join the proverbial space nerds?

@foxphire0093 If you are actually working in defense for the government and yet promoting it on the internet to be targeted by foreign powers and hobby hackers for the intrusion of privacy you must doing it on purpose because you can be sure Google is not in a position to protect data they got on you (phone, debit card, location, likely income & personal profile) against China nor Russia. So, you are either making bait to which US cyberspace defense personnel will be targeting intruders of your privacy or you really don't know what you are doing, then there is quite a good chance that you are lying because promoting your government job resume on the internet is something government personnel of any self-decent institution with access to classified information must be warned against unless you are already in pension. It's not like you see people bragging in the comment section that they are working on 6th-generation jet fighters or doing cyberspace counterintelligence for NSA...

@@imonbanerjee2997 Your local Air Force recruiter can help! Similar to how the Marine Corps is a subdepartment of the Navy, the Space Force falls under the Department of the Air Force.

We’re the mighty watchful eye

But what we need is Desert Power. The spice must flow!

What do you do in the space force 😮 🫡🫡

@@TheAlchemist1089 Missile warning tech ... which would have taken you like 4 seconds to work out if you knew how to Internet.

i was also in this video (it showed a picture of earth and it included the general region where i am located)

@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721 You have been doxxed!

​@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721me too! I was the Russian satellite

Never Say NEVER 😎 Justin Bieber

Incredibly important to the day to day. The disinformation would certainly have a tougher time getting around which wouldn't suck... At the cost of shear chaos.

are you fir space conflict or not😂

😂 if only you knew how ridiculous this comment is

Most people are so stupid that they don't even distantly understand what can happen with their worthless lives within 2 hours.

I think Russia used to give them shotguns cause of the bears in Siberia. Not 100% sure

Only Cosmonauts carried weapons, and it was a hybrid shotgun/rifle. Most, if not all, Astronauts land in the Ocean.

@@ASlickNamedPimpback I can understand how hybrid shotgun/rifle would be useless against shark with laser so it's pointless to carry one

@ASlickNamedPimpback US astronauts are still given weapons to protect themselves in case they land off-course. SpaceX astronauts have a knife in their pants even during launch and an unloaded gun in their survival packs an arms' reach away.

they dont do that anymore

Broooo I need your reference

"National Defense"

I don't trust the US as far as I can throw a stone. Particularly not the US' military.

Thank you for your service

Good old US, always on the defensive. Never starting wars that gets way over a million people killed in the 21st century alone so far.

To be fair, it was also subject to a lot of Pentagon infighting slowing the whole process down. The Air Force didn't want to give up USAF Space Command, after all, that was their budget and a lot of importance and control for the Air Force going to a new department, and you can't have that!

In addition, a dedicated "Space Force" moves another step closer to normalizing space warfare as a legitimate theater of war. As long as US military space operations was part of the Air Force the United States could portray it as "Oh, yeah, we've got a few military folks that look after a few satellites, but it isn't a big deal like NASA." This was always a pure PR piece, meant for the consumption of the "unwashed masses," but... well, lots of _politicians_ fall into that category. Perhaps the lack of an official "Space Force" resulted in a few million less being invested in Russia / China space budgets. Probably not, but it can't hurt, right?

its literally the only thing I can remember agreeing with Trump about. (ironically it was also one of the few times my republican friends actually disliked trumps decision)

@@speedy01247 people forgot that, yes trump like to take credit but forgot that he takes it from somewhere. Probably from his.

@@speedy01247 Most Republicans actually like the idea too. Attend a CPAC event and ask the people there what they think and you'll probably come up with 60 - 70% support for the Space Force.

The show as a whole also does a lot of work defining the importance of space and realistic conflicts that could occur in the near future

It's impossible for some people to admit Trump was correct about anything. 1. His speech at the UN warning Germany of the dangers of being reliant on Russian Gas. 2. His warning/threat to NATO member to start paying their agreed upon share otherwise they were inviting conflict because of their weakness. 3. Space Force 4. etc etc.

If I remember right, the concept of the show is that the general Carell plays is like "sure whatever" and then gets overburdened by the new job. People just made fun of it because Trump was president. It was already something that had been pushed by the military for about a decade.

Citation needed

@@andrewarnold9818it's the odd thing where it sounded funny, but the reason for doing it was to co-ordinate the previously separate airforce, navy and army space regimes. It wasn't really an interesting news item if the words 'space force' hadn't sounded silly' - it was a long overdue bureaucratic reshuffling.

You are welcome glad I could help

also the Star Wars program isn't dead yet, since the director of the anit-ICBM Brilliant Pebbles project moved to continue working on it along with SpaceX for semi-obvious reasons.

Only a few years after Sputnik 1 was launched the USA launched their own satellite. A newspaper carried a cartoon with one man holding a sheet of paper out to two others holding pens shaped like black painted V-2 rockets. Below were the words, "Oh goody, now we can sign too."

Nobody cares. Go touch grass 😂

@@linkrock4644 I'm inside your home.

@@cooltwittertag don't threaten me with a good time 😉

I'm in the kitchen. You want anything?

​@@linkrock4644you ok hun? Just a correction

The greatest threat to space exploration.

Is that when you make the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs ??

​​@@goulddddablemore aptly when you fail it... spectacularly and catastrophically 😅 Edit: to all of you replying to @goulddddable explaining Kessler Syndrome: they were making a Star Wars joke. The Millennium Falcon supposedly "made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs."

​@goulddddable It's when there's so much debris that space travel becomes too risky because each piece of debris is like a bullet hurtling through space fast enough to easily poke holes in space craft.

​@@NexAngelus405more specifically, the cause of such a situation. Kessler Syndrome refers to the increasing number of collisions because each collision dramatically increases the amount of fragments that could cause another collision, and then another, exponentially, like a nuclear chain reaction. at first we would only see a few collisions, than a significant amount more, then an overwhelming amount. Kessler Syndrome is happening right now, collisions are increasing, but they are doing so slowly enough it's not yet cause for panic. but it very easily could be.

As a physicist, as you say, you should know that those are the same thing. A circular orbit always requires a given speed, whether or not there is a planet's surface beneath it. Classically, the additional speed is required for the centripetal forces to balance the gravitational, and higher gravity means you fall faster, so you must go faster to remain in a circle. However, to say that the reason is not additional gravity is to misunderstand your relativistic classes entirely. The spacetime nearer to the earth exhibits a greater curvature, and the path of the satellite follows the tighter curve. But perhaps you are a particle physicist. The ISS's orbital velocity at 230 miles altitude is 97.2% of the orbital velocity at sea level, by the way, which kind of makes your "90%" comment a red herring.

​@@richdobbs6595As someone who is not a physicist, they both sound like they are explaining the same phenomenon using slightly different terminology.

I guess we need more folks to use Kerbal Space or take Brilliant courses. The formulas for this were published by Issac Newton on July 5, 1687. They are routinely taught in high school physics classes.

Assuming constant centripetal acceleration, the required velocity should actually _increase_ per the square root of distance, as per the centripetal acceleration formula, a=v^2/R. You may verify this formula up to a constant multiplier via dimensional analysis. An object having more distance to cover to miss the planet doesn't help it. It has to go faster to cover that distance.

@@richdobbs6595 The centrifugal force due to uniform circular motion is mv²/r. The centripetal force due to gravity is GMm/r². These are equal when v² = GM/r. In other words, orbital speed is inversely proportional to the square root of the orbital radius. Think about it this way. If you double your distance from the earth, gravity drops fourfold, but speed only drops by a factor of 1.4. So Thomas sort of has it backwards. It's not that gravity only changes "slightly," it changes tremendously. The reason Thomas probably had this wrong impression is that he was comparing LEO to the surface of the earth, which is just not a very large distance, so of course the difference in gravity isn't that large. But the difference in orbital speed also isn't that large (ignoring terrain and air resistance). When we compare orbits that have significantly different radii, like LEO and geosynchronous orbits, the gravitational force changes a lot, and that's why a lower speed is required. Or think about it another way. If Thomas's claim were true, then we should expect to see higher satellites moving slower even in a uniform gravitational field. But that's backwards. Higher satellites would actually have to move _faster_ than lower satellites if gravity were uniform, in order to keep v²/r constant.

Let me fix that fear for you real quick. Things in low-earth orbit (LEO) (the orbit that could "imprison" us) still has atmospheric drag which causes everything in it to naturally de-orbit. This can take a very long time but the process can be rapidly solved with one thing. A nuclear detonation in upper atmosphere/LEO can shorten the de-orbit time by a factor of ten or more. This is also one of the biggest reasons we are so afraid of nukes in space. It will wipe out almost everything we have in LEO. Even in space, nukes are still mutually assured destruction.

There are multiple ways to get off a planet affected by kessler syndrom, even if some of them are not pretty. Lasers, bombs, ablative armour, you name it. Plus, kessler syndrome would only affect one orbit, that being the one that has all the stuff in it. go higher, and you are fine. stay lower, you are fine too. Plus, you know, th Earth is a nice planet to be trapped on in any case....

@@Alexander_Kale Earth is indeed a fine planet, but I'd like to think our species can at least colonize the Milky Way. We need to just stop like...warring, and such.

@@sarysa Warring amongst ourselves has not stopped us from colonizing this planet, it will not stop us from colonizing all the others. I prefer the idea that we will build utopia despite having flaws and recognizing them, not because we will eventually get rid of said flaws.

@@JoviaI1 A fun fact I love about this that you didn't mention for anyone reading this comment thread and curious, detonating a nuclear device in LEO would obviously destroy anything within the conventional blast wave, but what is does thats way way more powerful and destructive, is release an insanely powerful EMP that can whip out anything on something like half the side of the planet in orbit (think everything the sun touches during the day but in space). It wont physically destroy them, but instead fry all the electronics. The US government tested this way back in the 50s and saw these effects, and then pushed for no more nuclear testing in space as satellites became a real possibility.

There's been a lot of discussion that the current laws around space, particularly around liability and responsibility, are no longer fit for purpose. Space law is an evolving field, and some law schools are starting to research it.

The relative velocities in geosynch would be much lower though, and uncontrolled debris would dissipate into a much larger volume

@@Croz89 True, the tricky thing is though, as with all matters of international law, even if everyone can agree there is a problem, unless the geopolitics align it's very difficult to do anything about it, especially given the increased diversity of space actors. One paper I read was basically saying we need a catastrophe to get real change. Once there is a big collision that makes news headlines, costs money, kills someone and/or causes an international dispute then the treaties might be reopened. Which is a bit depressing, but checks out to me.

@@personzorz That's an interesting point, one that I've struggled to find good data on. Yes, geosynchronous orbit is much larger, given it's so much further away than LEO, but it's also relatively narrow and clustered around the equator, as opposed to LEO which is more like a fuzzy shell. By my understanding, a lot of the debris from a collision in GSO would stay within the orbital band of the satellite. GSO satellites also tend to be much larger, which I suppose both makes collisions less likely, and means any collisions that do happen will result in more debris. I'd love to see a proper simulation comparing the relative impact of debris-forming events in both orbits (particularly with sun-synchronous orbit in LEO, given I believe that's the most heavily used one) The relative speed thing is interesting. I would imagine that matters most for the very small debris, which is just as well given that stuff is all but impossible to track, especially that far out!

@@merrymachiavelli2041 I think we can look at things like the UN convention on the law of the sea for laws we could adapt to space. Such as every artificial object in space having a registered country whose laws govern its operation and who assumes responsibility in the event of an incident. Space is in a lot of ways like international waters.

Call of Duty: Ghost*

​@@Jaka.Ellinsworth Nope, it's more Ace Combat and you need to do more with your life than play CoD.

Are you really freindlies? Get the general to safety!

@@Ramonathoits been 10+ years since Ghosts. ithink he’s done smth between then and now bro. AC7 isn’t much better my bro get a real flight model

where is the space elevator then

Putting space before F would solved the issue

Also, great video, as always! 😁

Yeah, that's an argument I've seen a lot regarding things like massive arrays of internet satellites. I haven't heard a lot of talk about how military stuff will do the same thing.

​@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721imo internet satellites provide net benefits to humans on earth, military ones don't. It's a lot easier to justify putting stuff out there that benefits us without a way to take it down then stuff that's designed to kill everyone

well, any space activities besides janitor

So we can expect chaos when china decides to attack Taiwan and try to cripple the US's response capabilities.

I disagree most things will burn up on its way back to our atmosphere

If it looks stupid but it works, it ain't stupid!

It's the predecessor to an orbital equivalent to the A-10.

Those stupid rooskies and their functional technology working and whatnot they'll get what's coming one day I bet they smell

Ironically at those speeds even rifle bullets are slow

@@lenarianmelon4634 The bullet speed will be relative to the satellites, match orbits and you're good.

You are expecting people who pay no attention to anything except what their social betters tell them to, to understand that.

It seemed they mocked it because of Trump derangement syndrome, and the view that anything the Orange Man did must be bad and mocked.

Because Trump brought it back, so to these dumbasses it's bad just because...

donald trump said it, that means it's silly and bad.

Literally just orange man bad syndrome

You can still see when they occlude light from, e.g., stars behind them

Considering how effective Ukraine’s response was especially in those early days, it’s hard for me as a dumdum layman to say it had much of an impact

They also said ghost of Kiyv was real with stupid amounth of A2A takedowns, and yet it turned out to be a wet fart.

@@PicturesqueGamesRussia was suppose to take 3 days to invade, and yet here we are

@@hdjono3351please tell me how to find a direct source for this claim. I’ve been searching for a single direct source for months and the best I’ve ever found was some low level lawmaker there saying they would win eventually, but not giving any timetable at all. So if you have a link to a document or a speech that supports you I’d love to see it. Tell me how to find it thanks…

​@@hdjono3351 they actually meant 3 years

The biggest thing you're going to expect if we every get in space warfare is that offensive craft will have very prominent radiators - every hit you take in space will generate tons of heat that you'll desperately need to get rid of. But something like a warship I don't consider likely for a long time. Better to do it with unmanned craft for now.

Space warfare between earth factions is the worst timeline

i imagine mostly unmanned, very small ships/missiles designed to destroy things with pure kinetic energy or shrapnel bombs

​@@WasatchWind I doubt this. There are more effective ways of dissipating heat for one, for two any impact you do take in space from hostile weaponry is probably going to be the only hit and last hit you can take. There's no reason for weaponry to not be able to accelerate to ludicrous speeds or impact with devastating charges. Nuclear warheads are actually perfect space based weaponry due to both disruptive effects on electronics and a hit on a ship is pretty much guaranteed hull breach as it would instantly vaporize the hull upon impact. What is cool however is that we may see scaled up versions of tech that Boeing has a patent for that dissipates the energy from explosive shockwaves by super-heating the air around the defensive system, disrupting the shockwave. I'm not sure how effective this specific method would be in a vacuum, however.

Space warfare is going to be boring robotic craft resembling kitbashes of telescopes and probes launching clouds of lead at high velocity towards each other. Manned craft won’t happen until colonies become common enough for a persistent human presence in interplanetary travel. One of those satellites attack a crewed Martian lander, we will see some real Frankenstein spacecraft. Orion drive, Casaba howitzers and all.

"stop and think about it" that's asking a lot.

@@dimesonhiseyes9134 very true

Anti trump cult will hate anything he does even if it's good for them

@@dimesonhiseyes9134 You want Dems to think hahah good luck :D

It’s not a new thing. It was just a rebranding of some things the Air Force already did.

Ugh India space agency is decades behind those 3 major countries.

​@joeboydedaev6393 whatever you wish to believe. They achieved the same in 2019 so it's definitely not 30 years behind

They can't accept that poor country India is achieving something in space tecnology. Their little ego hurts 🤕😂​@@sanskarvyas9888

​@@joeboydedaev6393I would argue otherwise. India is proving that a space program doesn't have to cost their country a significant portion of their budget. I don't think they're decades behind -- their rapid advancement at lower costs tells me they're gonna catch up in a matter of single digit, not double digit years.

People were making fun of space force as a surrogate for President Trump. They made fun of or complained about (and still do) literally everything he did or does.

More like the USAF being created in 1930 before all the strategic bombing from WW2.

Its bc of who started it

Two things: dumb name, and all of these actions were already being done by different branches that interacted with each other anyway All the space force does is what the Air Force, NOAA, and DoD did anyway

How is it a dumb name when it makes sense being a child of the Air Force? Additionally, your second point is the reason it was made. To streamline aspects each did into one for military usage. Plus, the Air Force was birthed from the Navy.@@Ramonatho

ooh ooh space rock, play cool

Couldn't help but imagine the space core from Portal 2.

What's your favorite thing about space? Mine is space.

gotta go to space

Hey. Hey. Hey lady. Hey, hey lady. Space?

to be fair, most wall street finance geniuses are high on crack...

Genuinely don't understand how people watch that every day

Jim Cramer?

Someone needs to start watching more hard sci fi lmao

It won’t, religion alone makes that impossible🤷🏾‍♂️

@@Hydrologist how

@@Hydrologistdo you mean that religion divides people too much to have entire planets be part of a single nation?

@@Hydrologist only as long as there’s more than one religion

But of course

X-37B

The Space Force *will* literally become the largest and most important branch of the military the more we develop our civilization and expand, it's just taking its first steps

@@squidward5110 oh thats a fact, but they all mock each other

Really? Who mocked it, can I see some citations?

@@roo72 ok try this it’s called google they still are mocked today. And also high ranking members of the armed forces didn’t see a future in flying during war time situation. But have others do the research for you since you may be to lazy to do it yourself

@@eaglesviper79 That's not how it works. You made a statement, it's up to you to prove it

That's wild, their delivery is on the better side of things. There's plenty of creators out there who speak half this speed and then also add 5 second long "dramatic pauses" for effect. I typically listen to their videos at 2x speed. Wendover is right where I expect an announcer to be.

And the US Army Air Corps already had aviation handled, right? They did, I'm not trying to say that the USAF was made because the Army sucked, but as the capabilities and strategic necessity of aircraft became more prevalent, the cost, the required infrastructure, and the specific knowledge necessary made it more reasonable to create a new branch of the military dedicated to aviation. And we see the same thing here with the Space Force, the cost, strategic necessity, and the capabilities of satellites in relation to warfare were all explained in the video, so I won't harp on that here. While the Air Force almost certainly had it handled, with the rising likelihood of space warfare, it seems that it has become more reasonable to have a dedicated military branch for it than to leave it to a subset of the Air Force. Additionally, it's not like all of the systems that were previously in place will go unused, just as the Army transferred assets, personnel and locations such as Warren AFB, to the Air Force, they have likely already transferred assets, and personnel to the Space Force, so all of the experts and equipment hasn't been lost.

It is but its attack took place on the ground. It enters space to get to its target but its target (the field south of London) is not in space. The Israeli interception rocket's target was in space. If the British launched an anti ballistic missile and shot down the V2 in space, that would count.

The space part was peaceful. Actually the V2 was thinking, "oh, this is lovely. I wonder what they have planned for the landing?"

Well not yet, if human could travel to another star then star force would be a thing

I still think Space Corps would've been the perfect name

Or kept the name Space Command

​@@AzyumardiSuntana yeah but that would have caused confusion as a command is a subset of a military branch.

Astronaut are star sailor already

is that true? satellites just follow newtonian mechanics right? what is causing the error

@@henryzhang3961 It looks like it purged my original comment for some reason- probably because I tried to link an article. In short, yes. The problem is that no observation is perfect. Even top tier Space Sitautional Awareness ('SSA') capabilities are only going to give you a limitedly accurate reading. Remember, this is usually a ground based radar or telescope, and often it's not a gold plated solution. Satellites are quite small by contrast, so being wrong by a meter or so already gives you a probable area potentially larger than the satellite in question. Then, the issue is that you need to check on them repeatedly. Because they follow newtonian paths, a small error begins to perpetuate, because you know you don't know exactly what angle it's going at. The longer you don't check on an object in space the larger an area it could theoretically be in. Now, live objects get checked on pretty frequently so you usually do know pretty exactly where they are. In truth this is actually at its worst for dead objects and debris (Not least because dangerous debris can be a centimeter wide or smaller! Picture designing a system that can get a return that small entirely right!). However, the basic principle stands. There's this misconception that satellites have like a video game unit icon that tells you where they are, or some kind of internal beacon, but GPS satellites as an example are actually tracked just by ground stations. This actually also has the neat feature that you can protect a satellite by checking on it. Since an orbital map is just a bunch of uncertainty clouds, a potential collision is often going to be something like 'There's a 2.1% chance of a collision with this object.' You could evade, if you're lucky enough to have propulsion, but your propellant is limited and if you intend to perform an End of Life Manoeuvre it essentially determines your 'lifetime.' So you can just check on the offending object, narrowing where it might be, and thus seeing if it really will cause a solution. I was mostly just calling out a little technical phrasing error that any normal person, would totally still use, but it's a funny little factoid that nobody truly knows where anything in space is.

Cuz trump and air force doesn't want to compete with budget.

1. The name is just funny. We have the air force, but we don't call the navy the sea force, or the army the land force. Space force just sounds like a ridiculous name. 2. Trump was advocating for it despite whenever he talked about it giving contradictory answers. It made it sound like it was something he wanted credit for without actually knowing anything about what it'd entail. 3. There was already the Air Force Space Command which was doing what Space Force is currently doing, so really the only change was making a new agency despite all the push for it to exist.

​@@scragar It's worth noting though that while Air Force Space Command was doing everything the Space Force does now, there is a point somewhere in the hypothetical future where we have space warships, and Air Force Space Command and the Navy would've argued endlessly about who should wind up in command of those, and there are good arguments on both sides frankly. The Navy has more relevant experience operating ships, and especially submarines which are similar to space ships in many ways - but AF Space Command has direct experience with space itself, and the Air Force has collaborated with NASA and it's predecessor since shortly after WW2. By introducing a Space Force, that conflict was resolved before it could happen.

This isn't hard, the name sounds funny. People that try to imply it's more than that are trying to make liberals seem incompetent.

@@Josh-ks7co does "air" force sound funny? Maybe I'm too boring to find it funny

I said the same, same thing people were up here defending the cornball comedians, but you know he didn’t do anything amazing but give credit where it is due.

I don't. All he did was rebrand the thing with a cartoonish name as it is still under the air force.

I know what you mean. Of course the name "Space Force" sounds cartoonish, but the function makes more sense every day.

Literally all the Space Force did was create a branch of the department of the Air Force that does the stuff that the Air Force was already in charge of.

​@crabman8321 the same thing happened with the USAAF, you just don't like that Trump did something useful lmao and I hate the guy

Have you met humans? Lol

Thats what i was thinking too, Trump does X, then people whos job it is to ridicule everything trump does ridicule what trump does. And where supposed to what? Be suprised? Cause im not 😂

They both are funny; it would be even funnier if the Marines were called the Water Force, and the rest of the US military were called the Dirt Force.

In Germany the "Air force" is called Luftwaffe which translates to "airweapon". I honestly could not think of another name for it, it is an accurate description after all

Because Trump announced it. That's about it. Look at the media that portrayed it as silly. Just doing their job.

Those shows stopped being funny long ago lol. They just press the laugh track buttons on the show, you will be surprised by how many people that don't find any of those shows funny at all.

Seeking applause, not laughter

So true. They're nothing more than uninformed talking heads who have never had to work in the national security arena - and it's gigantic.

They just didn't watch enough star wars

They just didn't watch enough starwars

To be fair, space force is kind of a stupid name...

Pseudo intellectual babble there Bubba. They don't purport to be social commentators. They're comedians. Comedians make fun of stupid people and things. Space Force was the dumbest damn name that could have been applied. Are you sure you don't harbor ill will towards the shows? It seems like you just jumped on the opportunity to put down late night shows.

s