Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 397 posts

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#241

Post by JumpCrisscross »

reptileIllumina wrote: post #40
jonkoops wrote: post #8

Space really should be a neutral ground like Antarctica. Especially since the consequences of space debris might trigger the Kessler effect [1], denying humanity future access to low-earth orbit for the considerable future. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

Funny you mention Antarctica. Pretty sure that place is also heavily militarized. Some Norwegian sailors has being severely punished for sailing boats there. The funny thing is people in conspiracy circle has being taking about that space has being militarized for years! China and Japan just openly talked them: https://san.com/cc/nasa-china-wants-military-moon-base/ Really at this point between conspiracy and officia…

> Pretty sure that place is also heavily militarized

To what end? Seriously. Maybe submarine listening devices on the seabed?

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#242

Post by beambot »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #238
hajile wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX satellites are doing about 1000 collision avoidance maneuvers every single day. The addition of new networks is going to congest things even more and the risk of unavoidable cascading failure keeps increasing at a massive rate.

> SpaceX satellites are doing about 1000 collision avoidance maneuvers every single day Genuine question: how many avoidance maneouvres does maritime traffic execute in the open ocean?

The blast radius from a maritime collission is (mostly) relegated to the vehicles in question [1]. The same is not true for satellite collisions.

[1] There are counterexamples, like in narrow chokes & whatnot.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#243

Post by JumpCrisscross »

tialaramex wrote: post #33
alfiedotwtf wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say goodbye to satellites and space tourism for the next 200 years :(

Kessler trashes LEO and yes, "space tourism" because that means bare orbital joyrides and those would become unacceptably hazardous for a tourist attraction. But it makes no real difference for GEO or outer orbits, or for leaving if we, or more likely a non-human probe wanted to leave Earth's orbit. So, no Starlink, but you'd still have COSPAS SARSAT in a reduced form, you'd still have geostationary telecoms birds, s…

> it makes no real difference for GEO or outer orbits

GEO is one of the few orbits we could actually one-shot trash for generations. (Well, any high-altitude orbit is. But GEO is special. If a random high-altitude orbit gets trashed, you can probably do fine with a slightly-different trajectory.)

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#244

Post by JumpCrisscross »

beambot wrote: post #242
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SpaceX satellites are doing about 1000 collision avoidance maneuvers every single day Genuine question: how many avoidance maneouvres does maritime traffic execute in the open ocean?

The blast radius from a maritime collission is (mostly) relegated to the vehicles in question [1]. The same is not true for satellite collisions. [1] There are counterexamples, like in narrow chokes & whatnot.

> same is not true for satellite collisions

Space is big. Volume grows with radius in a way our intutiions don't seem to intuitively understand. Yes, debris in a space collision go further. But they're still bound by their energies. And that larger volume of collision debris (plus all other stuff in orbit minus the Moon) is still a smaller fraction of the orbital space than e.g. commercial air space on earth, and yes, that's including oceans.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#245

Post by nomel »

sgustard wrote: post #224

Reagan and Gorbachev came within inches of abolishing nuclear weapons, but the sticking point was the US would not back away from building space weapons. As long as warmongers are in control we will continue to live in danger and fear.

> As long as warmongers are in control we will continue to live in danger and fear.

Can you expand on your solution to world peace?

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#246

Post by nomel »

rl3 wrote: post #196
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A major provocation? "Oh, you deny using your satellites to supply them with imaging? All right, then it wasn't us who blew up your spy satellite that wasn't supplying imaging." That is, China's in a bit of an awkward position to complain very much.

Problems start when their complaints take the form of using their own deniable capability against U.S. satellites. I've a feeling our satellites are far more expensive and advanced than theirs. Nobody wants a space tit-for-tat that can escalate dramatically.

So, what solution do you have in mind, if China supplies military support to an adversary? Politely ask them to stop? Let them continue? Seems not so trivial to me, especially since everyone has satellites up there for this purpose, and there's a good chance China would do the same.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#247

Post by notahacker »

gorgoiler wrote: post #211
mapt wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bullet travels at a relative speed of about 250 to 1250m/s. A ~10g projectile moving that fast has an energy of 600-16000 joules. Everything in low Earth orbit is moving at 7600m/s. A ~10g projectile moving that fast has an energy of 580,000 joules. Getting hit by something moving that fast is roughly equivalent to getting hit by a whole ammo case of bullets at the same speed. There is no armor that can protect you…

While armor is indeed much harder in space, it is not impossible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield Whipple shields use spaced plates to disperse the impact of a projectile on the first plate over a larger area on the second plate, and so on and so forth over four or five plates such that the final plate is not penetrated. My father worked on high velocity impact ballistics and has some very nice multiple…

Whipple Shields are a very important part of protecting things like the ISS, but are optimized more for chance high velocity impacts with tiny bits of debris than an adversary's targeted projectile or their robotic arm grappler, or indeed non-kinetic weapons like directed energy or EMPs which is probably the capability the US intends to imply here.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#248

Post by freebsd_lovefes »

hiddencost wrote: post #180
bdamm wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even space telescopes have been built on the skeletons made for spying, and rockets in almost any form were weapons before they were carrying peaceful missions. That we have Russian, American, and European components communicating together at the ISS is kind of a lovely, if temporary, closure of the circle.

From a certain point of view ICBMs are a method of communicating.

Trajectorial calligraphy is a subject in some schools where individuals who like to communicate unconventionally study.

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#249

Post by asdff »

Wasn't the shuttle originally planned to be a weapon as well, capable of intercepting and sabotaging satellites using its loading bay workshop? There are also the various "mini shuttles" the three letter agencies fly around the earth for several hundred day stints of doing who knows what exactly with who knows what capabilities (other than having a similar sabotage potential as the original shuttle perhaps).

Re: US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons

#250

Post by whh »

nomel wrote: post #245
sgustard wrote: post #224

Reagan and Gorbachev came within inches of abolishing nuclear weapons, but the sticking point was the US would not back away from building space weapons. As long as warmongers are in control we will continue to live in danger and fear.

> As long as warmongers are in control we will continue to live in danger and fear. Can you expand on your solution to world peace?

I think it's generally acceptable to make a statement without proposing a solution.
Post reply on HN