Live data from Hacker News

Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

spacex.com

71–80 of 162 posts

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three things: 1) That way you would have a single Starship launching a single kill vehicle in more than 1000 pieces. In order to be truly independent, each kill vehicle needs significant delta-v on its own, which lowers the number of kill vehicles by two orders of magnitude. 2) Starship has pretty weak engines for this task. While the missile used to launch the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle reaches ~10 km/s in less tha…

1. Not sure what you mean by significant delta-v. An 8km/s vehicle meeting a 6km/s warhead coming from the opposite direction will kill it just as surely as a 10km/s one. If you mean delta-v to go laterally, for that 1km/s is probably more than enough. A vehicle with 1km/s delta-v is, in the worst case scenario, twice as heavy than one with 100m/s delta-v, not 100 times as heavy. 2. 9 minutes is plenty. A ballistic m…

1. This is just basic orbital mechanics. Multiple missiles are launched from different locations at different targets. The launches are not fully simultaneous. Each kill vehicle must be at the right place at the right time to intercept its target. If you launch all kill vehicles from the same location at the same time, the differences between the required velocity vectors are easily several km/s.

2. The midcourse phase typically takes ~20 minutes. You can't predict the trajectory accurately during the boost phase, and you have the wrong kind of missile for intercepting the target during the terminal phase. If your boost phase is 9 minutes instead of 4 minutes, you have 11 minutes instead of 16 minutes for political and tactical decisionmaking.

3. What is the price of a fully disposable Starship? How many of them do you need to have one ready to launch at any time? Because if you have them on standby, you can't use them for any other purpose, and they are effectively disposable.

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually SpaceX's first contract and the name 'Falcon' came from the DARPA Falcon Project https://wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Falcon_Project

I believe I read in Eric Berger's book Liftoff that the name came from the Star Wars Millennium Falcon. But your theory has some merit since the timing of the Falcon project's award to SpaceX could be coming about the same time that they named the rocket. Both theories may be right. The Falcon project grew out of the Reagan era Star Wars project, so it's likely a backronym.

You nailed it...

Dig deeper and the story only gets more interesting.

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is well known that Shotwell runs the business side and Musk runs the engineering/R&D side. Eg. Falcon Heavy was almost cancelled because the engineering side turned out to make it more expensive to develop than expected (with the original plan for fuel crossfeed) and F9 had improved so much that it ate up most of FH's potential market. So Musk's preference was to cancel it. But because it was favorable for the bus…

It wasn't important to the business side -- they'd only sold a couple launches or so. But Shotwell convinced Elon that it was important to their reputation. Musk has since cratered his, but Shotwell's is intact.

I feel like that's nitpicking, when the company's reputation is obviously a business issue.

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#74

It sounds like they’re trying to sell two things: 1. Hosted payloads, where DoD entities pay to have something (telescope, Sigint equipment, whatever) strapped on to a starlink satellite with comms all figured out for them. Probably a good deal if your stuff fits on that big flat satellite. SpaceX starlink launches do sway the launch market significantly enough (offering a launch at half othe price or less, beholden…

It's part of this program,

https://www.science.org/content/article/decades-after-reagan...

More on Wikipedia: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Military_capabilities

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#75
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you elaborate for those of us who don’t typically follow space news? Has Space-X had some trouble recently?

I can’t tell if you’re being cute and trying to carve out some exemption here when it’s clear what I’m talking about I think but let’s operate on good faith. The owner with an 80% voting control of the company has had some very serious issues in judgement lately not limited to the Twitter fiasco but has also made a number of public moves that were very friendly towards what the US has called their biggest national se…

[deleted]

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democrats / Clinton shut down the original Star Wars program because they favored arms control (arguing Star Wars was illegal under the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty) That treaty expired in 2002 and then Elon went to Russia to buy some ICBMs...

The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty was a Nixon-Brezhnev 1972 thing, albeit ratified by a Democratic Senate in the same year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty

Yes Good recent discussion: https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/12/16/approaching-third-r...

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#77
post #6

One thing that people miss is the fact that in the event of any type of a "big" war between superpowers satellites are going to be heavily affected and probably one of the first targets. Having something like this, having that kind of speed in deploying new satellites is going to be a superpower to the USA.

Kessler Syndrome notwithstanding.

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#78
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kill vehicles are staged in orbit just like Starlink satellites.. See Brilliant Pebbles.

I think there's a consensus that orbital weapons are bad.

Weapons are bad in general. The military, however, takes a practical view rather than a moral one, and will not limit themselves based on what is good and bad, but will arm themselves based on what is effective. This is why we can't have nice things.

Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities

#79
post #77
post #6

One thing that people miss is the fact that in the event of any type of a "big" war between superpowers satellites are going to be heavily affected and probably one of the first targets. Having something like this, having that kind of speed in deploying new satellites is going to be a superpower to the USA.

Kessler Syndrome notwithstanding.

Such low orbits should prevent that being a long term problem. I also wonder how much more difficult it is to target satellites going this fast than say the one China destroyed a few years ago?
Post reply on HN