Agree on Logistics:
No matter what you call them; Corps of Engineers, Combat engineers, Seebees, they are Infrastructure Specialists. Without them, the relatively small number of combatants, don't get to do their job.

In the scenario I posited, every single crew member would have several assignments. Including soldier, the effort to build, equip and project such a force would be immense. Additionally, consider the amount of life support, etc each crew would require. You cross train them, a lot.
View it in the same light as a SOCOM team, normally four to six members. Each well trained for multiple tasks, example, radio, 1-3, is also trained in demo.

I just read the ?Hunters in the Great Dark, Part 2: The Weapons of Deep-Space Warfare.?

Very disappointing.

I agree, the author seems to casually dismiss advances in technology, tactics, stretegy and technique.

Any conflict Out There Where the Big Ships Go will have factors and limits that we cannot imagine at this point.

Consider the current state of battlefield conditions we see now, all-weather precision guided munitions, fire-and-forget missles, over-the-horizion visual intelligence courtesy of the ever growing fleet of UAV's in the air, real time tactical control of the battlefield down to individual soldiers through digital communications. Tanks that project increasingly deadly accurate fire while moving fast over rugged terrain. The ability to take out a single structure in a crowded urban setting.

Today the possibility of unmanned warplanes flown by remote control is not only very possible, but in practical development right now. The days of hotdogging fighter jocks are numbered.

Though there will be a place for them when combat moves into space. Time lag will play a vital role in the revival of that peculiar breed of pilot.

Could anyone have predicted all of this 50 years ago? Much less a century ago?