Search This Blog

Saturday, June 20, 2020

United States Space Force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States Space Force
Seal of the United States Space Force.svg
Founded20 December 2019(as an independent service)
1 September 1982
Country United States
TypeSpace force
RoleSpace warfare
Size88 active duty Space Force members
16,000 assigned airmen
77 spacecraft
Part ofSeal of the United States Department of the Air Force.svg Department of the Air Force
HeadquartersThe Pentagon
Arlington County, Virginia, U.S.
Anniversaries20 December
Websitewww.spaceforce.mil
Commanders
Commander-in-Chief President Donald Trump
Secretary of Defense Mark T. Esper
Secretary of the Air Force Barbara Barrett
Chief of Space Operations Gen John W. Raymond
Senior Enlisted Advisor of the Space ForceCMSgt Roger A. Towberman
Insignia

Flag of the United States Space Force.svg

The United States Space Force (USSF) is the space warfare service branch of the U.S. Armed Forces, and is one of the eight U.S. uniformed services. The sixth and youngest branch of the U.S. Armed Forces, it was the first branch of the military established since the formation of the independent U.S. Air Force in 1947. The direct antecedent of the Space Force, Air Force Space Command, was formed on 1 September 1982 with responsibility for space warfare operations. The National Defense Authorization Act for 2020 redesignated Air Force Space Command as the U.S. Space Force, and established it as an independent branch of the U.S. Armed Forces on 20 December 2019.

The U.S. Space Force is organized as a military service branch within the Department of the Air Force, one of the three military departments within the Department of Defense. The Space Force, through the Department of the Air Force, is headed by the Secretary of the Air Force, who reports to the Secretary of Defense, and is appointed by the president with Senate confirmation. In terms of personnel count, it is the smallest U.S. armed service within the U.S. Department of Defense.
The most senior Space Force officer is the Chief of Space Operations, unless a Space Force officer also serves as either the chairman or vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Chief of Space Operations exercises supervision over the Space Force's units and serves as one of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Certain Space Force components will be assigned, as directed by the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Air Force, to unified combatant commands. Combatant commanders will be delegated operational authority of the forces assigned to them, while the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Space Operations will retain administrative authority over their members.

Mission, functions, and duties

Mission

The U.S. Space Force's mission is to "organize, train, and equip space forces in order to protect U.S. and allied interests in space and to provide space capabilities to the joint force. Its responsibilities include developing military space professionals, acquiring military space systems, maturing the military doctrine for space power, and organizing space forces to present to the Combatant Commands".

The Space Force is specifically responsible for organizing, training, and equipping forces for the following mission sets:
  • space superiority;
  • space domain awareness (military, civil, and commercial);
  • offensive and defensive space control;
  • command and control of space forces and satellite operations;
  • space support to operations (e.g., satellite communications);
  • space service support (e.g., spacelift and space range operations for military, civil, and commercial operators);
  • space support to nuclear command, control, communications and nuclear detonation detection; and
  • missile warning and space support to missile defense operations.

Functions

As described in the United States Space Force Act, it will be organized, trained, and equipped to:
  1. Provide freedom of operation for the United States in, from, and to space
  2. Provide prompt and sustained space operations

Duties

Its duties include to:
  1. Protect the interests of the United States in space
  2. Deter aggression in, from, and to space
  3. Conduct space operations

Organization

The Space Force is organized as one of two coequal military service branches within the Department of the Air Force, with the other service being the United States Air Force. Both services are overseen by the Secretary of the Air Force, who has overall responsibility for organizing, training, and equipping the Space Force and Air Force.

Organization of the United States Space Force Within the Department of Defense

The military head of the Space Force is the Chief of Space Operations (CSO), who is an officer in the grade of general. The Chief of Space Operations will become a member of the Joint Staff one year after the passage of the Space Force Act. If authorized by the Secretary of Defense, the Chief of Space Operations may be dual-hatted as the Commander of United States Space Command.

The Space Force will assume responsibility for all major space acquisitions programs, as well as manage a distinct and separate budget, ensuring independence from the Air Force. The Space Force is intended to include all uniformed and civilian personnel within the Department of Defense conducting and supporting space operations, centralizing management of space professionals. The Space Force will also create career paths for military and civilian space personnel, to include operations, intelligence, engineering, science, acquisitions, and cyber. While establishing the Space Force, the Defense Department intends to utilize inter-service transfers, initial lateral entry, direct commission authorities, career incentive pays and retention bonuses, and waivers to accession policy.

Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) was redesignated as the Space Force by the 2020 NDAA, elevated to become the new service. All of AFSPC's former personnel, organizations, and components were then assigned to the Space Force. AFSPC's principal components were 14th Air Force, which controls operations, and the Space and Missile Systems Center, which is responsible for research and acquisitions.

The first organizational change occurred on 20 December 2019, when the Fourteenth Air Force/Air Forces Strategic was redesignated as Space Operations Command (SpOC). Major General John E. Shaw, former Commander, Fourteenth Air Force, was redesignated as Commander, Space Operations Command; in addition to Shaw's role as U.S. Space Command's Combined Force Space Component Commander.

The Space Force is also intending to stand up Space Systems Command (SSC) and Space Training and Readiness Command (STARCOM). SFSC is intended to centralize Space Force launch, procurement, research, and development activities. STARCOM is intended to grow a cadre of space professionals and be comprised of Space Force Centers focused on training, readiness, and doctrine.

Structure

As of mid-2019, as regards actual satellites in orbit being operated and controlled by the then-AFSPC, the Air Force reported that there were four Advanced Extremely High Frequency communications; one ATRR; five Defense Meteorological Satellite Program; six Defense Satellite Communications System satellites; five Defense Support Program; 31 Global Positioning System satellites; four GSSAP; five Milstar communications; seven Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS, infra-red, launch warning); two SBSS; and seven WGS. The Boeing X-37B and its low-profile missions also represent a significant U.S. orbital asset. The fifth and latest X-37 mission, USA-277, was launched on 7 September 2017, and was the longest X-37 mission to date, landing on 27 October 2019 after 780 days in orbit.

On 12 March 2019, the Space Development Agency (SDA), a new space-focused development agency, additional to the Space and Missile Systems Center and the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, was established. It was established under the authority of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. As of January 2020, the SDA is planned to become part of the U.S. Space Force in October 2022.

In early April 2020, a list of twenty-three units to be transferred from the Air Force to the Space Force was publicly reported. Those units included the 17th Test Squadron, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado; 18th Intelligence Squadron, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH; the 25th Space Range Squadron, Schriever AFB, CO; the 328th Weapons Squadron, Nellis AFB, NV; the 527th Space Aggressor Squadron, Schriever AFB, CO; Operating Location A, 705th Combat Training Squadron, Schriever AFB, Colorado (ultimately part of the 505th Command and Control Wing); the 7th Intelligence Squadron, 659th Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Group, 70th ISR Wing, Ft. Meade, Maryland*; Sixteenth Air Force/Advanced Programs*, Schriever AFB, Colorado; the 32nd Intelligence Squadron, Ft. Meade, Maryland*; the 566th Intelligence Squadron, Buckley AFB, Colorado*; the 544th Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Group, Group Staff & Detachment 5, Peterson AFB, Colorado; Detachment 1, USAF Warfare Center, Schriever AFB, Colorado; the 533d Training Squadron, 381st Training Group, Vandenberg AFB, CA (initial training); the National Security Space Institute, Peterson AFB, CO National Security Space Institute, a place for space education; the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Research Lab Mission Execution, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio*; the AFRL Space Vehicles Directorate, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico*; the AFRL Rocket Propulsion Division, Edwards AFB, CA; the AFRL Electro-Optical Division, Maui, Hawaii & Kirtland AFB, New Mexico*; the AFRL Sensors Directorate, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio*; the Counter-Space Analysis Squadron and the Space Analysis Squadron, collectively half of the Space and Missiles Analysis Group, National Air and Space Intelligence Center, both at Wright-Patterson AFB; the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center Detachment 4, Peterson AFB, CO; and the Air Force Safety Center – Space Safety Division, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico.

Personnel

All members of the former Air Force Space Command are currently assigned to the Space Force. Members of the Army and Navy will also be detailed to the Space Force. There are currently 16,000 individuals assigned to the Space Force. Air Force airmen will begin transferring to the Space Force beginning in FY 2020, while Army soldiers and Navy sailors will begin transferring in FY 2022. The FY 2021 budget allocates 10,000 civilian and military billets to the USSF.

The Space Force is creating career tracks for Space Force Core Organic specialties, including space-specific operations, intelligence, engineering, acquisitions, science, and cyber/communications. Support specialties, such as legal, medical, civil engineering, logistics, financial management, security forces, and public affairs will be detailed by the Air Force to support the Space Force.

Officers and enlisted personnel

The Air Force Academy commissioned the first Space Force officers on 18 April 2020.
All members of the Space Force currently retain their respective grade and rank carried over from the Air Force. However, it has not yet announced what the permanent rank structure will be.

Space Force officers are accessed through the United States Air Force Academy, Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps, and Air Force Officer Training School. Enlisted personnel are accessed through Air Force Basic Military Training, although some of the curriculum may be modified to be more space-related. The Space Force is also leveraging the Air Force's infrastructure, curriculum, and instructors for initial training, while creating space-specific training programs as well.

The Space Force recently announced that it will be absorbing 16 integral specialties.

Officer specialties include:
  • 13S - Space Operations Officer
  • 14N - Intelligence Officer
  • 17D - Cyberspace Operations Officer
  • 17S - Cyber Warfare Operations Officer
  • 62E - Developmental Engineer
  • 62S - Materiel Leader
  • 63A - Acquisition Manager
  • 63G - Senior Materiel Leader-Lower Echelon
  • 63S - Materiel Leader
Enlisted specialties include:
  • 1C6 - Space Systems Operations specialist
  • 1N0 - All Source Intelligence Analyst
  • 1N1 - Geospatial Intelligence Analyst
  • 1N2 - Signals Intelligence Analyst
  • 1N4 - Fusion Analyst
  • 3D0 - Cyberspace Operations specialist
  • 3D1 - Cyberspace Systems specialist

Uniforms

A Space Force general's OCP uniform.
While the Space Force develops its own set of distinctive uniforms, it is using the Air Force's service dress uniform and has adopted the OCP uniform as its own combat utility uniform.

Awards and badges

In addition to basic uniform clothing, various insignia are used by the USSF to indicate a billet assignment or qualification-level for a given assignment. Insignia currently in use by the USSF include the United States Space Command identification badge and the Command Space Operations badge.

Equipment

The USSF operates both of the X-37 spaceplanes currently in the DOD inventory, although it contracts out for launches. The first flight operated by the USSF of the X-37 was OTV-6, on May 17, 2020 on an Atlas V.

Budget

The proposed Fiscal Year 2021 budget for the Space Force would transfer over $15 billion from the Air Force.

United States Space Force Budget 2020 2021 (proposed)
Operation & Maintenance $40,000,000 $2,608,400,000
Procurement - $2,446,100,000
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation - $10,327,600,000
Total $40,000,000 $15,382,100,000

The 2021 Department of Defense Budget requests $1.6 billion for three National Security Space Launch vehicles. $1.05 billion of this budget will fund three launches: AFSPC-36, AFSPC-87 and AFSPC-112. The United States Space Force is reported to be working closely with commercial leaders in the space domain such as Elon Musk (SpaceX) and Jeff Bezos (Blue Origin) to determine their capability in serving the mission. According to Lt. General David Thompson, the United States Space Force is already in contracting talks with Blue Origin. The budget includes $560 million to upgrade the launch systems of Blue Origin, Northrop Grumman, and United Launch Alliance. Further, the 2021 DOD budget requests $1.8 billion for two Lockheed Martin Global Positioning System (GPS) III systems and other projects to fulfill the Space Superiority Strategy. The GPS III system, first launched on 23 December 2018, is the latest GPS system from contractor Lockheed Martin; the GPS III system has improved anti-jamming capabilities and is three times more accurate than current GPS systems. The FY 2021 Budget also includes $2.5 billion allocated to the Next-Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared (Next-Gen OPIR) satellite constellation as part of a DOD wide increase on missile defense capacity to defend from threats such as North Korea. The Next-Gen OPIR constellation will provide the U.S. military with a resilient worldwide missile warning system. This new generation of satellites will work in tandem with the existing Space Based Overhead Persistent Infrared System (SBIRS); production of the SBIRS will conclude in 2022 and the first Next-Gen OPIR satellite is expected to be delivered in 2025.

History

Early military space program (1945–1982)

Military space activities began immediately after the conclusion of World War II, with General of the Army Hap Arnold, commanding general of the United States Army Air Forces, becoming an early visionary for the potential of military space operations. In 1946 General Arnold directed Dr. Theodore von Kármán of the RAND Corporation to determine the feasibility of a satellite for strategic reconnaissance. In 1946 this study identified nearly all current space mission areas, including intelligence, weather forecasting, communications, and navigation.

General Bernard Schriever was the father of the military space program.
After the United States Air Force gained its independence in 1947, General Bernard Schriever was appointed to head the Western Development Division, made responsible for the Air Force's space and intercontinental ballistic missile programs. It was responsible for developing the Advanced Reconnaissance System, which would have been the Air Force's first satellite constellation. On 4 October 1957 the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1, which was the world's first satellite. This event transformed space development overnight, helping the national security establishment understand the importance of the space domain.

Early military space development was marked by strong interservice rivalry, with each developing their own proposals for satellites and launch vehicles. The first American satellite was the Army Ballistic Missile Agency's Explorer 1 which was launched on the Naval Research Laboratory's Vanguard rocket. The Air Force still continued military space development amidst this competition from the Army and Navy. In 1958 the newly formed Advanced Research Projects Agency assumed control over all military space programs, but this centralization was short lived and gave control back to the services in September 1959. The creation of NASA in 1958 significantly hampered the Army and Navy's space programs, absorbing the Army's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Army Ballistic Missile Agency and Navy's Project Vanguard and Minitrack satellite tracking network, but only absorbed the Air Force's Man in Space Soonest program, merging it with Project Mercury.

Development of Air Force space systems continued with the Missile Defense Alarm System (MIDAS) and Strategic Air Command's SAMOS reconnaissance satellites, as well as the Thor, Atlas, and Titan space launch vehicles. The Air Force and Central Intelligence Agency also jointly developed and operated the Corona reconnaissance satellite. The development of reconnaissance satellites became a national priority after an American U-2 reconnaissance plane was shot down over the Soviet Union, making aerial reconnaissance impractical. In 1961 the National Reconnaissance Office was created as a joint Air Force–CIA activity to manage all spy satellites.

"Space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man. And only if the United-States occupies a position of preeminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theatre of war. I do not say that we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space, any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea."
John F. Kennedy, speech at Rice University, 12 September 1962

In 1961, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara designated the Air Force as the lead military service for space, further relegating the space programs of the Army and Navy. The relationship between the Air Force space program and NASA continued to grow closer, with agreements being reached to share information and personnel. The Air Force also began development on the crewed Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar spaceplane and Manned Orbiting Laboratory, both of which were later canceled as their functions could be carried out by uncrewed systems. General Schriever's advocacy for military space led to the 1961 establishment of Air Force Systems Command (AFSC), which included a dedicated Space Systems Directorate to centralize all space development, separating it from the missile program. Prior to Air Force Systems Command's creation, spacecraft design, acquisitions, and launch was split between Air Material Command and Air Force Research and Development Command, however, the new command centralized all of these activities.

The Air Force provided space support to forces during the Vietnam War, with a focus on providing space–based weather and communications capabilities. In the 1970s development began on the Global Positioning System, Defense Satellite Communications System, and Defense Support Program missile warning satellites. The Space Shuttle also began development, with significant Air Force input. For much of the 1960s and 1970s, Air Force space operations were centralized in Aerospace Defense Command, but it was disestablished in 1980, transferring its space surveillance and missile warning systems to Strategic Air Command. In 1979, Air Force doctrine recognized space as a mission area for the first time, and led to the creation of a space division on the Air Staff. Air Force Systems Command also established a deputy commander for space operations.

Air Force Space Command (1982–2019)


Towards the 1980s, the Air Force began to realize that it was insufficiently organized for military space operations, with assets and responsibilities split across Strategic Air Command, Air Force Systems Command, the Aerospace Defense Center, and the Air Staff. In 1979, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board concluded that "currently, the Air Force is inadequately organized for operational exploitation of space and has placed insufficient emphasis on inclusion of space systems in an integrated force study." In 1981, the Air Force took a measure to address this discontinuity, establishing the consolidated space operations center in Colorado Springs and began discussing the creation of a space command to centralize its space activities. On 1 September 1982, Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) was created as an Air Force major command. Air Force Space Command centralized all space operations, including missile warning, launch operations, satellite control, space domain awareness, and satellite communications.

Air Force Space Command was absolutely critical during the Persian Gulf War, which would later be described as the first space war by Air Force Chief of Staff General Merrill McPeak. Specifically, its GPS support enabled the left hook across the Iraq desert.[8] Defense Meteorological Support Program satellites provided a significant amount of weather data and over 90% of communications were provided by satellite systems. The Defense Support Program early-warning satellites provided indications of SCUD launches to fielded forces.

In the 1990s, AFSPC led the development of the MILSTAR communications satellite constellation and completed the GPS constellation. In accordance with the recommendations of the 2001 Space Commission, the Space and Missile Systems Center was transferred from Air Force Material Command to Air Force Space Command, becoming its integral research and acquisitions arm. In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, Air Force Space Command provided space support as part of the global war on terrorism.

Independence (2019–present)

U.S. Space Force logo used from 20 December 2019 on public social media accounts
The idea of an independent service for U.S. military space operations had been under consideration since 2000. The Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization, chaired by former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld and composed of a number of military, space, and intelligence professionals, was set up to examine the national security space organization of the United States. The commission itself concluded that the military needed to develop space–specific doctrine, operations concepts, and capabilities – including the development and deployment of space–based weapons. The Space Commission came to the conclusion that the Air Force treated space operations as a secondary mission in comparison to air operations, and recommended the creation of a space corps within the Department of the Air Force, and in the long term, creating a military department for space.

President Donald Trump signs the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which established the Space Force, in Hangar 6 at Joint Base Andrews, 20 December 2019. General John "Jay" Raymond, the first Chief of Space Operations, stands on the left.
In 2017, a bipartisan proposal to create the U.S. Space Corps, as a military service within the Department of the Air Force, was put forward by Representatives Mike Rogers and Jim Cooper. This was done specifically due to the realization that the Air Force's space mission had become a secondary concern in contrast with the air dominance mission. The proposal passed in the House of Representatives, but was cut from the final bill in negotiations with the U.S. Senate.

The proposal gained new life when President Donald Trump first publicly spoke about an independent space force during a March 2018 speech. In a June 2018 meeting of the National Space Council, he directed the Department of Defense to begin the necessary processes to establish the U.S. Space Force as a branch of the Armed Forces. On 19 February 2019, Space Policy Directive–4 was signed, initially calling for the placement of the U.S. Space Force within the Department of the Air Force, before later creating and transferring the service to the Department of the Space Force.[44] Legislative provisions for the Space Force were included in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump during a signing ceremony at Joint Base Andrews on 20 December 2019. The Space Force was established as the sixth armed service branch, with Air Force General John "Jay" Raymond, the head of Air Force Space Command and U.S. Space Command, becoming the first Chief of Space Operations. On 14 January 2020, Raymond was officially sworn in as chief of space operations by Vice President Mike Pence. Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett approved the transfer of 14th U.S. Air Force to the Space Force and re-designated as Space Operations Command, with the transfer effective 20 December 2019. The former commander of the 14th Air Force, Maj. Gen. John E. Shaw, was appointed commander of Space Operations Command while also serving as U.S. Space Command's Combined Force Space Component commander.

About 16,000 Air Force active duty and civilian personnel are to be assigned to the Space Force while the branch is gradually integrated into the U.S. Armed Forces, including establishing independent procedures for manning equipment, training personnel, and creating uniforms, ranks, logo, patch, awards, and official song, reportedly within an 18-month period. 1,840 billets from 23 units of the Air Force are being transferred to the Space Force in 2020. On 18 April 2020, 86 graduates of the United States Air Force Academy became the first group of commissioned second lieutenants in the U.S. Space Force. The force's flag debuted at signing ceremony for the 2020 Armed Forces Day proclamation on 15 May 2020 and is based on the service's official seal.

The Space Force's first space launch was on 26 March 2020 with the AEHF-6 communications satellite launching from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Patrick Air Force Base, Schriever Air Force Base, Peterson Air Force Base and Buckley Air Force Base, are expected to have their name changed as they have mostly space-related missions.

Planned obsolescence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Planned obsolescence (also called built-in obsolescence or premature obsolescence) in industrial design and economics is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so that it becomes obsolete (i.e., unfashionable, or no longer functional) after a certain period of time. The rationale behind this strategy is to generate long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases (referred to as "shortening the replacement cycle"). It is the deliberate shortening of a lifespan of a product to force consumers to purchase replacements.

Producers that pursue this strategy believe that the additional sales revenue it creates more than offsets the additional costs of research and development, and offsets the opportunity costs of repurposing an existing product line. In a competitive industry, this is a risky policy, because consumers may decide to buy from competitors instead if they notice the strategy.

Planned obsolescence tends to work best when a producer has at least an oligopoly. Before introducing a planned obsolescence, the producer has to know that the consumer is at least somewhat likely to buy a replacement from them. In these cases of planned obsolescence, there is an information asymmetry between the producer, who knows how long the product was designed to last, and the consumer, who does not. When a market becomes more competitive, product lifespans tend to increase. For example, when Japanese vehicles with longer lifespans entered the American market in the 1960s and 1970s, American carmakers were forced to respond by building more durable products.

History and origins of the phrase

The 1923 Chevrolet is cited as one of the earliest examples of annual facelifts in the car industry, because it had a restyled body covering what essentially was nine-year-old technology.
 
In the United States, automotive design reached a turning point in 1924 when the American national automobile market began reaching saturation. To maintain unit sales, General Motors head Alfred P. Sloan Jr. suggested annual model-year design changes to convince car owners that they needed to buy a new replacement each year, an idea borrowed from the bicycle industry, though the concept is often misattributed to Sloan. Critics called his strategy "planned obsolescence". Sloan preferred the term "dynamic obsolescence".

This strategy had far-reaching effects on the auto business, the field of product design, and eventually the American economy. The smaller players could not maintain the pace and expense of yearly re-styling. Henry Ford did not like the constant stream of model-year changes because he clung to an engineer's notions of simplicity, economies of scale, and design integrity. GM surpassed Ford's sales in 1931 and became the dominant company in the industry thereafter. The frequent design changes also made it necessary to use a body-on-frame rather than the lighter, but less easy to modify, unibody design used by most European automakers. 

Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence, by Bernard London, 1932

The origins of phrase planned obsolescence go back at least as far as 1932 with Bernard London's pamphlet Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence. The essence of London's plan would have the government impose a legal obsolescence on consumer articles, to stimulate and perpetuate consumption. However, the phrase was first popularized in 1954 by Brooks Stevens, an American industrial designer. Stevens was due to give a talk at an advertising conference in Minneapolis in 1954. Without giving it much thought, he used the term as the title of his talk. From that point on, "planned obsolescence" became Stevens' catchphrase. By his definition, planned obsolescence was "Instilling in the buyer the desire to own something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary."

The phrase was quickly taken up by others, but Stevens' definition was challenged. By the late 1950s, planned obsolescence had become a commonly used term for products designed to break easily or to quickly go out of style. In fact, the concept was so widely recognized that in 1959 Volkswagen mocked it in an advertising campaign. While acknowledging the widespread use of planned obsolescence among automobile manufacturers, Volkswagen pitched itself as an alternative. "We do not believe in planned obsolescence", the ads suggested. "We don't change a car for the sake of change." In the famous Volkswagen advertising campaign by Doyle Dane Bernbach, one advert showed an almost blank page with the strapline "No point in showing the 1962 Volkswagen, it still looks the same".

In 1960, cultural critic Vance Packard published The Waste Makers, promoted as an exposé of "the systematic attempt of business to make us wasteful, debt-ridden, permanently discontented individuals". Packard divided planned obsolescence into two sub categories:
  • obsolescence of desirability; and
  • obsolescence of function.
"Obsolescence of desirability", a.k.a. "psychological obsolescence", referred to marketers' attempts to wear out a product in the owner's mind. Packard quoted industrial designer George Nelson, who wrote: "Design... is an attempt to make a contribution through change. When no contribution is made or can be made, the only process available for giving the illusion of change is 'styling!'"

Types

Contrived durability

Contrived durability is a strategy of shortening the product lifetime before it is released onto the market, by designing it to deteriorate quickly. The design of all consumer products includes an expected average lifetime permeating all stages of development. Thus, it must be decided early in the design of a complex product how long it is designed to last so that each component can be made to those specifications. Since all matter is subject to entropy, it is impossible for any designed object to retain its full function forever; all products will ultimately break down, no matter what steps are taken. Limited lifespan is only a sign of planned obsolescence if the lifespan of the product is made artificially short by design.

The strategy of contrived durability is generally not prohibited by law, and manufacturers are free to set the durability level of their products. While often considered planned obsolescence, it is often argued as it's own field of anti-consumer practices. 

A possible method of limiting a product's durability is to use inferior materials in critical areas, or suboptimal component layouts which cause excessive wear. Using soft metal in screws and cheap plastic instead of metal in stress-bearing components will increase the speed at which a product will become inoperable through normal usage and make it prone to breakage from even minor forms of abnormal usage. For example, small, brittle plastic gears in toys are extremely prone to damage if the toy is played with roughly, which can easily destroy key functions of the toy and force the purchase of a replacement. The short life expectancy of smartphones and other handheld electronics is a result of constant usage, fragile batteries, and the ability to easily damage them.

Prevention of repairs

Pentalobe screws used in an iPhone 6S. Critics have argued that Apple's use of pentalobe screws in their newer devices is an attempt to prevent the consumer from repairing the device themselves.

The ultimate examples of such design are single-use versions of traditionally durable goods, such as disposable cameras, where the customer must purchase an entire new product after using them a single time. Such products are often designed to be impossible to service; for example, a cheap "throwaway" digital watch may have a casing which is simply sealed in the factory, with no designed ability for the user to access the interior without destroying the watch entirely. Manufacturers may make replacement parts either unavailable or so expensive that it makes the product uneconomic to repair. For example, inkjet printers made by Canon incorporate a print head which eventually fails. However, the high cost of a replacement forces the owner to scrap the entire device.

Planned obsolescence: a plastic latch (indicated by the head of a match) designed to break after a certain number of deformations, making it difficult to use Bosch blenders
 
Other products may also contain design features meant to frustrate repairs, such as Apple's "tamper-resistant" pentalobe screws that cannot easily be removed with common consumer tools. Front loading washing machines often have the drum bearing - a critical and wear-prone mechanical component - permanently molded into the wash tub, or even have a sealed outer tub, making it impossible to renew the bearings without replacing the entire tub. The cost of this repair may exceed the residual value of the appliance, forcing it to be scrapped.

Bosch, despite the up to 10-year availability of spare parts declared on websites, assembles in the popular MaxoMixx mixers easily breaking plastic latch, refusing users to sell the latch later and proposing to replace the entire drive consistent of many elements as a single spare part, which is almost equivalent to buying a new device.

According to Kyle Wiens, co-founder of an online repair community, a possible goal for such design is to make the cost of repairs comparable to the replacement cost, or to prevent any form of servicing of the product at all. In 2012, Toshiba was criticized for issuing cease-and-desist letters to the owner of a website that hosted its copyrighted repair manuals, to the detriment of the independent and home repair market.

Non-user-replaceable batteries

Some products, such as mobile phones, laptops, and electric toothbrushes, contain batteries that are not replaceable by the end-user after they have worn down, therefore leaving an aging battery trapped inside the device. While such a design can help make the device thinner, it can also make it difficult to replace the battery without sending the entire device away for repairs or purchasing an entirely new device. On a device with a non-openable back cover (non-user-replaceable battery), a manual (forced) battery replacement might induce permanent damage, including loss of water-resistance due to damages on the water-protecting seal, as well as risking serious, even irreparable damage to the phone's main board as a result of having to pry the battery free from strong adhesive in proximity to delicate components. The manufacturer or a repair service might be able to replace the battery. In the latter case, this could void the warranty on the device.

The practice in phone design started with Apple's iPhones and has now spread out to most other mobile phones, notably Samsung Mobile starting in 2015 with the Galaxy S6. Earlier mobile phones (including water-resistant ones such as the Samsung Galaxy S5 and the Sony Xperia V) had back covers that could be opened by the user in order to replace the battery.

Perceived obsolescence

Obsolescence of desirability or stylistic obsolescence occurs when designers change the styling of products so customers will purchase products more frequently due to the decrease in the perceived desirability of unfashionable items.

Many products are primarily desirable for aesthetic rather than functional reasons. An obvious example of such a product is clothing. Such products experience a cycle of desirability referred to as a "fashion cycle". By continually introducing new aesthetics, and retargeting or discontinuing older designs, a manufacturer can "ride the fashion cycle", allowing for constant sales despite the original products remaining fully functional. Sneakers are a popular fashion industry where this is prevalent - Nike's Air Max line of running shoes is a prime example where a single model of shoe is often produced for years, but the color and material combination ("colorway") is changed every few months, or different colorways are offered in different markets. This has the upshot of ensuring constant demand for the product, even though it remains fundamentally the same. 

To a more limited extent this is also true of some consumer electronic products, where manufacturers will release slightly updated products at regular intervals and emphasize their value as status symbols. The most notable example among technology products are Apple products. New colorways introduced with iterative “S” generation iPhones (e.g. the iPhone 6S’ “Rose Gold”) entice consumers into upgrading and distinguishes an otherwise identical-looking iPhone from the previous year's model.

Some smartphone manufacturers release a marginally updated model every 5 or 6 months compared to the typical yearly cycle, leading to the perception that a one-year-old handset can be up to two generations old. A notable example is OnePlus, known for releasing T-series devices with upgraded specifications roughly 6 months after a major release device. Sony Mobile utilised a similar tactic with its Z-series smartphones.

Systemic obsolescence

Planned systemic obsolescence is the deliberate attempt to make a product obsolete by altering the system in which it is used in such a way as to make its continued use difficult. Common examples of planned systemic obsolescence include not accommodating forward compatibility in software, or routinely changing screws or fasteners so that they cannot easily be operated on with existing tools. This may either be designed to intentionally cause obsolescence, or by interface standards being superseded by better standards that were not available when the product was designed, such as serial ports, parallel ports, and PS/2 ports largely being supplanted or replaced by USB on newer PC motherboards in the 2000s.

Programmed obsolescence

In some cases, notification may be combined with the deliberate disabling of a product to prevent it from working, thus requiring the buyer to purchase a replacement. For example, inkjet printer manufacturers employ smart chips in their ink cartridges to prevent them from being used after a certain threshold (number of pages, time, etc.), even though the cartridge may still contain usable ink or could be refilled (with ink toners, up to 50 percent of the toner cartridge is often still full). This constitutes "programmed obsolescence", in that there is no random component contributing to the decline in function. 

In the Jackie Blennis v. HP class action suit, it was claimed that Hewlett Packard designed certain inkjet printers and cartridges to shut down on an undisclosed expiration date, and at this point consumers were prevented from using the ink that remained in the expired cartridge. HP denied these claims, but agreed to discontinue the use of certain messages, and to make certain changes to the disclosures on its website and packaging, as well as compensating affected consumers with a total credit of up to $5,000,000 for future purchases from HP.

Samsung produces laser printers that are designed to stop working with a message about imaging drum replacing. There are some workarounds for users, for instance, that will more than double the life of the printer that has stopped with a message to replace the imaging drum.

Software lock-out

Another example of programmed obsolescence is making older versions of software (e.g. YouTube's Android application) unserviceable deliberately, even though they would technically be able to keep working as intended. 

This could be a problem, because some devices, despite being equipped with appropriate hardware, might not be able to support the newest update without modifications such as custom firmwares. 

Additionally, updates to newer versions might have introduced undesirable side effects, such as removed features or non-optional changes which might be unsolicited and undesired by specific users.

Software companies sometimes deliberately drop support for older technologies as a calculated attempt to force users to purchase new products to replace those made obsolete. Most proprietary software will ultimately reach an end-of-life point—usually because the cost of support exceeds the revenue generated by supporting the old version—at which the supplier will cease updates and support. As free software and open source software can always be updated and maintained by somebody else, the user is not at the sole mercy of a proprietary vendor. Software that is abandoned by the manufacturer with regard to manufacturer support is sometimes called abandonware.

Legal obsolescence

Governments wanting to increase electric vehicle ownership through purchase subsidies mechanisms could increase the replacement rate of cars. Several cities such as London, Berlin, Paris, Antwerp and Brussels have introduced low-emission zones (LEZ) banning older diesel cars. LEZs force people owning cars affected by these legislations to replace them.

Advantages and disadvantages

Estimates of planned obsolescence can influence a company's decisions about product engineering. Therefore, the company can use the least expensive components that satisfy product lifetime projections.

Also, for industries, planned obsolescence stimulates demand by encouraging purchasers/putting them under pressure to buy sooner if they still want a functioning product. These products can be bought from the same manufacturer (a replacement part or a newer model), or from a competitor who might also rely on planned obsolescence. Especially in developed countries (where many industries already face a saturated market), this technique is often necessary for producers to maintain their level of revenue.

While planned obsolescence is appealing to producers, it can also do significant harm to the society in the form of negative externalities. Continuously replacing products, rather than repairing them, creates more waste and pollution, uses more natural resources, and results in more consumer spending. Planned obsolescence can thus have a negative impact on the environment in aggregate. Even when planned obsolescence might help to save scarce resources per unit produced, it tends to increase output in aggregate, since due to laws of supply and demand, decreases in cost and price will eventually result in increases in demand and consumption. However, the negative environmental impacts of planned obsolescence are dependent also on the process of production, as well as technical details pertaining to product disposal. Products that are difficult to disassemble can be very difficult to recycle properly.

There is also the potential backlash of consumers who learn that the manufacturer invested money to make the product obsolete faster; such consumers might turn to a producer (if any exists) that offers a more durable alternative.

Regulation

In 2015, as part of a larger movement against planned obsolescence across the European Union, France has passed legislation requiring that appliance manufacturers and vendors declare the intended product lifespans, and to inform consumers how long spare parts for a given product will be produced. From 2016, appliance manufacturers are required to repair or replace, free of charge, any defective product within two years from its original purchase date. This effectively creates a mandatory two-year warranty.

Critics and supporters

Shortening the replacement cycle has critics and supporters. Philip Kotler argues that: "Much so-called planned obsolescence is the working of the competitive and technological forces in a free society—forces that lead to ever-improving goods and services."

Critics such as Vance Packard claim the process is wasteful and exploits customers. With psychological obsolescence, resources are used up making changes, often cosmetic changes, that are not of great value to the customer. Miles Park advocates new and collaborative approaches between the designer and the consumer to challenge obsolescence in fast-moving sectors such as consumer electronics. Some people, such as Ronny Balcaen, have proposed to create a new label to counter the diminishing quality of products due to the planned obsolescence technique.

In academia

Russell Jacoby, writing in the 1970s, observes that intellectual production has succumbed to the same pattern of planned obsolescence used by manufacturing enterprises to generate ever-renewed demand for their products.
The application of planned obsolescence to thought itself has the same merit as its application to consumer goods; the new is not only shoddier than the old, it fuels an obsolete social system that staves off its replacement by manufacturing the illusion that it is perpetually new.
Camille Paglia characterizes contemporary academic discourse influenced by French theorists such as Lacan, Derrida, and Foucault as the academic equivalent of name brand consumerism. "Lacan, Derrida, and Foucault," she says, "are the academic equivalents of BMW, Rolex, and Cuisinart." Under the inspiration of the latest academic fashions, academic planned obsolescence is to manufacture content with little merit for the same reason fashion designers come out with new fashions.

Laws

In 2015 the French National Assembly established a fine of up to 300,000 euros and jail terms of up to two years for manufacturers planning the failure of their products in advance. The rule is not only relevant because of the sanctions that it establishes but also because it is the first time that a legislature recognized the existence of planned obsolescence. These techniques may include "a deliberate introduction of a flaw, a weakness, a scheduled stop, a technical limitation, incompatibility or other obstacles for repair".

The European Union is also addressing the practice. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), an advisory body of the EU, announced in 2013 that it was studying "a total ban on planned obsolescence". It said replacing products that are designed to stop working within two or three years of their purchase was a waste of energy and resources and generated pollution. The EESC organised a round table in Madrid in 2014 on 'Best practices in the domain of built-in obsolescence and collaborative consumption' which called for sustainable consumption to be a consumer right in EU legislation. Carlos Trias Pinto, president of the EESC's Consultative Commission on Industrial Change supports "the introduction of a labeling system which indicates the durability of a device, so the consumer can choose whether he/she prefers to buy a cheap product or a more expensive, more durable product".

American Association for the Advancement of Science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_...