El punto más débil en futuros conflictos no será el frente de batalla sino las líneas de abastecimiento. Ante la eventualidad de un conflicto en el que se ha perdido la capacidad de ejecutar el abastecimiento logístico por los medios habituales, en el presente artículo se expone conveniencia de desarrollar la infraestructura y capacidad de lanzamiento de cohetes con trayectorias sub-orbitales, como medio apto para la entrega de recursos materiales en tiempos extremadamente cortos. Un concepto que no es nuevo en el ámbito de los programas espaciales y en el cual, algunos países ya están trabajando para su incorporación en el ámbito militar. El empleo de motores cohete “reusables” como el SpaceX “Starship”, ha mostrado que la implementación de estas tecnologías es una posibilidad cada vez más cercana.
In the Crosshairs – What is Contested Logistics?
The weakest link in any future fight may not be the frontline, but the supply line. Imagine the opening blow of a conflict: ports suddenly offline, convoys stranded, warehouses in flames, and networks flickering into silence. No bullets fired, yet an entire force grinds to a halt. This is the essence of Contested Logistics—a battlespace where fuel lines, data streams, and cargo routes are as much a target as tanks and aircraft.
Contested Logistics refers to sustaining forces under conditions where an adversary deliberately seeks to deny, disrupt, degrade, or destroy logistics operations, facilities, and networks.1 The concept first appeared in DoD doctrine and strategy in the mid-2010s, reinforced by wargames showing adversaries can strike every layer of the logistics enterprise. Its danger lies in ambiguity: attacks often blur attribution, sliding neatly into gray zone2 activity. Crucially, success doesn’t require destroying logistics outright; even short delays can cripple operations and cost lives.
In Contested Logistics, speed may be the best deterrent. This is where rockets enter the fight.
Beyond Astronauts – The Dawn of Suborbital Delivery
Space is no longer just a domain for satellites and astronauts—it’s becoming a highway for logistics. The rise of reusable rockets and a surge of private investment have fueled explosive growth in space-based transport. One of the most promising frontiers is point-to-point suborbital delivery (P2P-SD): using rockets to move cargo or people across the globe by briefly exiting the atmosphere and reentering on a suborbital arc. Instead of circling the Earth like an airplane, a rocket launches nearly straight up, skips through space, and lands near its destination—covering thousands of miles in under an hour. A New York–Tokyo trip, for example, could take less than one hour.
For the military, that might mean rapid resupply to include critical medical supplies. For humanitarian missions, it could enable life-saving deliveries of food, water, or medical aid to disaster zones as suborbital trajectories bypass chokepoints and contested A2/AD zones.3
The value of P2P-SD hinges on rapid transload operations, which is heavily dependent on vehicle design and recovery method. A rocket that lands quickly but takes hours to unload loses much of its advantage. SpaceX’s Starship, for example, is built for massive payloads that would likely require ramps, cranes, or specialized loaders—similar to today’s heavy airlift operations. By contrast, Sierra Space’s Dream Chaser is optimized for gentle runway landings, allowing it to plug directly into existing airport cargo-handling systems. These design choices shape not just how fast cargo can move, but also what missions each platform is best suited for.
Safety and reliability pose additional challenges. Structural failure, thermal extremes, loss of control, or debris from failed launches all pose risks. Reusable components—critical to keep costs down—must withstand repeated inspection, refurbishment, and turnaround times. And like any transportation mode, inclement weather remains an uncontrollable variable.
Cost and scalability are the ultimate questions. Today, P2P-SD is an expensive endeavor. But costs are falling as competition grows, and efficiencies improve. SpaceX’s Starfactory facility in Boca Chica, Texas, for example, projects producing one Starship per day, a pace on par with Boeing’s production of 737 aircraft. Starship is designed to carry approximately 150 metric tons of cargo—five to eight times that of a C-130J.4
From Concept to Capability
For the military, the payoff is clear: P2P-SD could transform Contested Logistics by moving critical cargo at rocket speed. But turning this concept into a true capability requires more than purchasing launches—it demands a deliberate effort to integrate commercial innovation into military doctrine and operations, as well as developing and building infrastructure to support P2P-SD. Doctrine must define not only when and how P2P-SD is employed, but also how it integrates with existing airlift, sealift, and prepositioning. Training and command-and-control processes must prepare joint forces to operate with suborbital assets as seamlessly as they do with aircraft or ships.
History shows how quickly a novel concept can become an indispensable capability. At the end of World War II, airlift was still an emerging tool, often overshadowed by sea and rail. But in 1948, when the Soviet Union blockaded Berlin, the United States and its allies launched what seemed an impossible operation: sustain an entire city by air alone. At its peak, the Berlin Airlift delivered more than 8,000 tons of coal, food, and supplies per day, with nearly one plane landing every 45 seconds at Tempelhof Airport.5 What began as an untested response became a doctrine-shaping, alliance-defining success. Airlift was no longer supplemental; it was strategic. For the newly independent U.S. Air Force, it was also a defining moment—proof that airpower could serve as a decisive instrument of national power. Suborbital delivery may offer the United States Space Force a similar proving ground.
Suborbital delivery now sits at a similar inflection point. Like airlift in 1948, P2P-SD is unproven at scale, but the logic is undeniable: when adversaries target every port, convoy, and pipeline, bypassing chokepoints entirely may be the only way to sustain the fight. And unlike past innovations, this one will not wait on government investment. Commercial players—SpaceX, Sierra Space, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic—are already pouring billions into suborbital systems for tourism, research, and eventually transport. The question for the Department of War is not if the technology will mature, but whether the U.S. military will be ready to use it when it does.
Partnership will be central. The Department of War must work hand in hand with the commercial sector, which is driving the technology, as well as with allies and partners who may host, support, or benefit from P2P-SD operations. Investments in flexible, distributed infrastructure—both physical and digital—will be required to support launch, recovery, and rapid transload in austere or contested environments. Done right, P2P-SD would not replace traditional logistics, but it would add an entirely new dimension: a global, high-speed layer of resiliency and flexibility. Just as the Berlin Airlift turned the skies into a lifeline, suborbital delivery could turn space itself into a logistics highway. The question isn’t whether suborbital delivery will arrive—it’s whether the U.S. will be ready before its adversaries.
Fuente: https://www.defenseone.com
