LEO could go first, as any old korea with a dozen mega rockets, lifting beach gravel into orbit can
give earth the ring system, around which remenant humanity can create myths
verdverm 19 hours ago [-]
I'd like to hear the plan in the event of an orbital nuke designed to take out LEO constellations. Space internet doesn't seem like a great backup plan imho
southernplaces7 16 hours ago [-]
Well, propose an alternative then. Our existing ground internet can be taken out by something as cheap and simple as a heavy piece of metal dropped in one or more strategic, unguarded locations from a modestly-sized ship, and nearly anyone can do it. With an orbital internet, only a small number of agents, nations basically, could launch the orbital weapons to cause destruction.
A mix of both is ideal, more robust. Also, nukes in orbit is movie stuff. In reality the vacuum makes them absurdly weak for the cost and political fallout of launching them. Other weapons would be used to take out satellites. Hell, a precisely aimed lug nut would do the trick.
Also, the US intel believes Russia is moving forward with plans to put nukes in space, but that's not the point. They don't need to exist in space to have a detonation in LEO, which would wipe out constellations and leave lingering interference for months, as we've seen before.
> In reality the vacuum makes them absurdly weak
This seems to be incorrect based on prior results. One nuke is far more efficient than a per satellite regime. Frying electronics is easier than kinetic strikes
> With an orbital internet, only a small number of agents, nations basically, could launch the orbital weapons to cause destruction.
Students can reach above the karman line, which means groups like the Houthis could as well. Space is increasingly becoming privatized and with it the risk of malicious payloads slipping into ride shares as rocket .companies compete for business.
southernplaces7 2 hours ago [-]
On your first point, I stand partly corrected. Thanks for the details and especially those involving Starfish Prime. In my defense, I was referring mainly to the blast effects of nukes, which are indeed much weaker in a vacuum than they are in a terrestrial landscape since, obviously, there's no gas to transmit the destructive overpressure that causes most of the physical destruction at a distance that nukes are famous for. I also considered the possibility of satellites being hardened against EMP effects.
However, I'd forgotten about the heat transmission caused by radiation or the destructive effects on electronics caused by said radiation.
Still though, it would be a way of destroying satellites that would be damn expensive and damn hard to control precisely, which is why I still think a realistic scenario for some power destroying satellites would involve much simpler, smaller weapons.
As for your last point, bear in mind that getting an object above the Karman line has been easy for a while now and isn't nearly the same as getting an object to have enough launch energy to stay in a stable orbit, or stay in orbit at all. Pulling that off would be much harder, and especially if you want to lob something as heavy as a nuke into space, and then have it travel enough distance in an orbital circuit to reach a specific part of the sky.
V__ 14 hours ago [-]
This is a non issue. Space is big, and you would need a lot of nukes or missiles to disrupt even a LEO constellation. Which means, by the time it becomes an issue the parties involved will have MADed themselves and the world into oblivion.
verdverm 13 hours ago [-]
> you would need a lot of nukes or missiles to disrupt even a LEO constellation
History seems to indicate otherwise. It's the EM effect, not kinetic, that does the damage, with effects spreading and lingering for months
V__ 2 hours ago [-]
> The HEIST team plans to work on this, in part, by using higher bandwidth laser optics systems to communicate with satellites.
I'm sure they thought about this, the usage of lasers not only increases data throughput but makes EM interruptions less likely, especially when the satellites themselves are also EM hardened.
WeylandYutani 13 hours ago [-]
Reminds me that America had a bunker with a few billion in cash for after WW3 in case all the bank servers got nuked...
NoZZz 18 hours ago [-]
Nato's plan to spend money on outdated tech.
Rendered at 15:26:37 GMT+0000 (UTC) with Wasmer Edge.
A mix of both is ideal, more robust. Also, nukes in orbit is movie stuff. In reality the vacuum makes them absurdly weak for the cost and political fallout of launching them. Other weapons would be used to take out satellites. Hell, a precisely aimed lug nut would do the trick.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl
Also, the US intel believes Russia is moving forward with plans to put nukes in space, but that's not the point. They don't need to exist in space to have a detonation in LEO, which would wipe out constellations and leave lingering interference for months, as we've seen before.
> In reality the vacuum makes them absurdly weak
This seems to be incorrect based on prior results. One nuke is far more efficient than a per satellite regime. Frying electronics is easier than kinetic strikes
> With an orbital internet, only a small number of agents, nations basically, could launch the orbital weapons to cause destruction.
https://www.dogonews.com/2024/12/9/student-built-rocket-brea...
Students can reach above the karman line, which means groups like the Houthis could as well. Space is increasingly becoming privatized and with it the risk of malicious payloads slipping into ride shares as rocket .companies compete for business.
However, I'd forgotten about the heat transmission caused by radiation or the destructive effects on electronics caused by said radiation.
Still though, it would be a way of destroying satellites that would be damn expensive and damn hard to control precisely, which is why I still think a realistic scenario for some power destroying satellites would involve much simpler, smaller weapons.
As for your last point, bear in mind that getting an object above the Karman line has been easy for a while now and isn't nearly the same as getting an object to have enough launch energy to stay in a stable orbit, or stay in orbit at all. Pulling that off would be much harder, and especially if you want to lob something as heavy as a nuke into space, and then have it travel enough distance in an orbital circuit to reach a specific part of the sky.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl
History seems to indicate otherwise. It's the EM effect, not kinetic, that does the damage, with effects spreading and lingering for months
I'm sure they thought about this, the usage of lasers not only increases data throughput but makes EM interruptions less likely, especially when the satellites themselves are also EM hardened.