View Single Post
  #11  
Old December 16th 16, 07:35 PM posted to sci.space.history
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default The Space Race was about Power Projection - Miles O'Brien

On 12/15/2016 10:03 AM, Stuf4 wrote:
From David Spain:
On Monday, December 12, 2016 at 6:31:27 AM UTC-5, Stuf4 wrote:

Nuclear ICBMs are the only fielded weapon that has NEVER undergone an end-to-end test.


Well technically for a "ballistic missile" that is correct. However
historically for a non-ballistic missile or non-ballistic rocket, of
intermediate range (Thor) not true.


I specifically stated INTER-CONTINENTAL ballistic missiles, and you come back with (paraphrase) "That's not true, there were cases of INTERMEDIATE RANGE..."

Hello? I was operating under the assumption that we were speaking the same language. Maybe I should try putting your reply into Google Translate.



Please don't paraphrase when the exact wording is available to you.
I said "technically for a "ballistic missile"" and left unsaid "of
INTER-CONTINENTAL range" since that was what you were describing and I
said you were correct. No disagreement. I did NOT say "That's not
true.... blah", I said "However..." and described a different scenario
where that was not the case. Please don't put words in my mouth I did
not use.

I would not think translation would be necessary.


Prior to the 1963 Limited Nuclear Test Ban treaty there were a few
documented tests of nuclear devices detonated in space via rocket by the
USAF & Los Alamos in the early 1960's. See the "Starfish Prime" test series:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime


Yes, I remember my surprise decades ago when I first learned about those tests.

Good we are in agreement then.


On 12/12/2016 10:00 PM, Scott M. Kozel wrote:
How would any other country know that it had a nuclear warhead when it was launched?


Point taken. There may be historical record of test objects launched as
prototype nuclear warheads that had the mass/design-shape needed for
missilery but without the required nuclear material. I can't document
that fact just now, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. In fact I'm
certain it did, quite a bit...


I do not know the exact protocol, but I would expect that countries be required to register (perhaps with the UN?) any plan to launch any missile or rocket that had the range of impacting other countries.

Or maybe this guess is mistaken, and that instead there is a long tradition of countries unilaterally doing whatever they want. No notice at all.

Your guess is mistaken. And the later is true. A country may, as a
courtesy, inform other countries of a test, but when a test does not
involve their airspace there is no requirement. BTW a country is free to
orbit anything in space regardless of what territory it crosses. When
North Korea does this we can rant, fume, bloviate all we want but they
are not doing anything any other country or private corporation has not
already done.

It seems to me that a spotlight has been shined on a deficient area of space history. One that I myself cannot recall reading about:
How can something like even the Space Shuttle be launched without a country on the other side of the planet not be terrified that the US just launched a nuclear warhead at them?


Countries capable of a response also have national means to identify
whether a rocket trajectory is on a path that would allow something to
fall on their territory or not. The space shuttle would obviously not
qualify as an attack due to its trajectory. And even if subject to a
catastrophic failure it would instead present a debris field that would
obviously not qualify as an attack to anyone experienced in the field of
missile detection.

Countries without the means of detecting such probably don't have the
means to retaliate either and therefore would not be considered a threat
and unlikely to be targeted in the first place.

If a surprise attack was intended, it would be very easy to roll video tape of astronauts being strapped
into the cabin while in fact warhead were there.


It would a particularly unusual method of attack. One that would leave
the perpetrator susceptible to a counter-attack unless other strategic
forces were engaged at the same time. And if not attacking an enemy
capable of retaliation why all the subterfuge? Also it's pretty hard to
disguise the aftermath of a nuclear explosion.

There was even a Star Trek episode from 1967ish that showed the Saturn V as launching a bunch of nuclear warheads at the Soviet Union.


OK I'll concede that this is space history only in the sense that it
involves a Science Fiction TV show episode about space explorers that
aired in the 1960s... And you are not quite recalling that episode
correctly... :-) The rocket was launching an orbiting nuclear warhead
platform not "launching a bunch of nuclear warheads at the Soviet
Union". The TV series was Star Trek and the name of that episode was
"Assignment: Earth" It guest starred Robert Lansing as "Gary Seven" and
Teri Garr as his assistant "Roberta Lincoln".

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Gary_Seven



Have any space historians, the folks who do this as a profession, ever mentioned this a single time? Again, if so, I haven't seen it.

Mentioned what? Countries launching stuff into space unilaterally? Using
astronauts to disguise a secret attack? Or the Start Trek episode?

Dave