I’m not getting this story or its context. Can you explain it?
From the blog CTOvision:
Like so many others in the national security domain I am tracking what I can about the new US Space Force, the newest US military force. I believe their mission is important and establishing Space Force was the right move.
Space is, by definition, a domain that will require deep technological expertise to enable mission success. But we should heed the lessons our military has learned in other domains and understand that victory is never just about technology.
This should not be a surprise to any student of war. This same lesson about war not being about technology is consistent, wether we are reading the ancient writings of Thucydides and Sun Tzu or analyzing our own operations in combat through the years. An over reliance on technology can contribute to feelings of arrogance. If you start relying too heavily on your technology and allow arrogance to set in, you open yourself up to defeat by a technologically inferior force.
We can learn this lesson by reading our own history and the extensive reporting done from current military operations. But here is another way, tailor made for members of US Space Force. In 1951, Arthur C. Clarke wrote an incredible short story he titled “Superiority” (available in the collection: The Collected Stories of Arthur C. Clarke). This short story is such a great read because it captures some key, apparently enduring qualities of militaries that become seduced by their technological superiority. The result: Even though the story was written almost six decades ago Clarke gave us all a lens perfect for the viewing of technological arrogance. And he gave us warnings that apply across the full spectrum of technologies, including the technologies enabling our move into Space.
In addition to the OP, I think that this story is something of a critique on the German attitude in WWII, and a warning to not repeat the same mistakes.
I mean, how much time/money/effort did they put into things like the ME-262, Maus, etc. when their soldiers were freezing on the battlefield in summer uniforms? How many of their machines that they did manage to field had frequent mechanical issues due to overengineered engines/transmissions?
The list goes on and on.
And do note that to a certain (large) extent, we’ve adopted their philosophy toward weapon systems. And how many wars have we won lately with our wunderwaffen?
Quantity over quality can win.
Examples: T-34 tank vs the German tanks.
Our tanks and planes vs the Germans and Japanese.
Our planes became better later while the enemy had prototypes.
We later had issues with fighter planes like the F-4 Phantom that had no gun as the ‘experts’ thought missiles would all that would be needed.
Luckily lessons were learned and in the 1970s along came the F-14, F-15, F-16.