A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Technology
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Future Space War



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 15th 04, 10:37 AM
Susanooh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message ...
"Abrigon Gusiq" wrote in message
...
I know a bit like science fiction, but what is the plans and doctrine
with dealing with space related warfare?
Especially now that China (PRC) is working on a consistant manned
presense in space, with a possible space station in the next 5-10 years.


Well, for what I found in the past weeks, US is taking the question
quite seriously.
Here the Transformation Flight Plan.
http://www.insidedefense.com/secure/...us2004_401.pdf
there are a couple of counter-documents that I can't locate right now.

Darpa has a section that is going straight ahead on the subject.
Anyway, the major threat is damage on expensive satellites with
inexpensive suicidal satellites and rockets. One calculated nuclear
explosion in space would generate an EMP that would cripple most of
the electronical equipment.
  #12  
Old March 15th 04, 12:17 PM
Paul F. Dietz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

EAC wrote:

It also should be noted that the current Space Shuttle is probability
also was designed to be a carrier of nuclear missiles.


In the same sense that any cargo-carrying vehicle of sufficient size
can carry nuclear missiles.

If your insinuation was that this was a mission of the space shuttle,
then you are completely mistaken, and I would like to know where you
acquired this bizarre idea.

Paul
  #13  
Old March 15th 04, 01:12 PM
Dirk Bruere at Neopax
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War



"Karl Hallowell" wrote in message
om...
"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message

...
"Abrigon Gusiq" wrote in message
...
I know a bit like science fiction, but what is the plans and doctrine
with dealing with space related warfare?
Especially now that China (PRC) is working on a consistant manned
presense in space, with a possible space station in the next 5-10

years.

Having seen the US station FUBAR Spacehole One I doubt they'll want to

copy
that mistake.
They'll go straight for a moonbase.


Why? They should be able to demonstrate a large space station at a
fraction of the cost of ISS. Sounds like a cheaper political victory
than going to the Moon. They have to avoid the cost plus structure of
NASA bidding, the multilateral approach, and the constant redesigning
of the space station. If they can do that, then they should be able to
embarrass NASA quite handily.


Not as embarassing as going back to the moon before the US.
Most of the cost of a moonbase is getting off Earth, so it should not be
significantly more expensive than a space station if its done right.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


  #14  
Old March 15th 04, 07:59 PM
Ami Silberman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War


What if it were discovered that a Moon sized asteroid were on a collision
course with Earth, and would arrive in 25 years? Would we have enough time
to evacuate anyone? Could we establish a sizeable O'neal colony jin that
amount of time?

There are no moon sized asteroids. The largest asteroids are about 1/10 the
moons diameter. The largest earth-orbit crossing asteroids are about ten
miles in length. Still a very bad thing if it hits.


  #15  
Old March 16th 04, 03:05 AM
Dirk Bruere at Neopax
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War



"Susanooh" wrote in message
m...
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message

...
"Abrigon Gusiq" wrote in message
...
I know a bit like science fiction, but what is the plans and doctrine
with dealing with space related warfare?
Especially now that China (PRC) is working on a consistant manned
presense in space, with a possible space station in the next 5-10

years.

Well, for what I found in the past weeks, US is taking the question
quite seriously.
Here the Transformation Flight Plan.
http://www.insidedefense.com/secure/...us2004_401.pdf
there are a couple of counter-documents that I can't locate right now.

Darpa has a section that is going straight ahead on the subject.
Anyway, the major threat is damage on expensive satellites with
inexpensive suicidal satellites and rockets. One calculated nuclear
explosion in space would generate an EMP that would cripple most of
the electronical equipment.


A megaton nuke exploded in space will wipe out every bit of unshielded
electronics for around 800 miles around the ground zero.
That means computers, car ignition systems, telephones, radios, TVs etc
It would wipe out a modern nation's economy overnight.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


  #16  
Old March 16th 04, 07:24 AM
Roger Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

"Ami Silberman" writes:

There are no moon sized asteroids.


Only because anything that big in orbit around the sun is called a planet
rather than an asteroid. I'll agree, though, that it would be very
difficult for something the size of the moon to hide well enough that we
wouldn't see it until it was just 25 years away. FWIW, NASA has just
announced the discovery of a new object in the Kupier belt that is
estimated to be significantly smaller than the moon and several times
further away than Pluto. I'd expect that we would have caught anything
bigger and closer than that already.

--
Roger Moore | Master of Meaningless Trivia | )
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the
people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by
violent and sudden usurpations. -- James Madison
  #17  
Old March 16th 04, 10:35 AM
Master and Owner, Beryl J. Turner III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

Just to answer that question...no. And it doesn't have to be nearly that
big.

"Deep Impact" and "Armageddon" were not that far off in their descriptions
of what could and would happen, but "When Worlds Collide" would be more on
the mark of what we could do to escape. One ship with our best and
brightest...and you and I both know that neither of us are going on that
trip.

Beryl Turner
"Bootstrap Bill" wrote in message
...

"Ian Stirling" wrote in message
...
Or just that an asteroid was in route to hit earth? How would we deal
with it, other than to take it in the chin?


The basic way seems to be to get several-many nuclear weapons out there
as fast as possible.
The more weapons and the more time you have, the more it can be

diverted.
Having years is good.
Centuries is great.

The basic idea is to blow up the bomb around a radius or so from the
asteroid, and flash-vapourise the surface of the asteroid.
This then boils off almost instantly, and pushes the asteroid the other
way.
Repeat until course misses earth.


What if it were discovered that a Moon sized asteroid were on a collision
course with Earth, and would arrive in 25 years? Would we have enough time
to evacuate anyone? Could we establish a sizeable O'neal colony jin that
amount of time?




  #18  
Old March 16th 04, 10:43 AM
Master and Owner, Beryl J. Turner III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

One to consider that a common tactical axiom is that whomever has the high
ground, has the advantage. And it doesn't get any higher than space.

Moonbases, L5 stations, orbital missile platforms...it's a lot to take in.

You put a mass-driver on the moon, calculate the ballistics and wham!

You get missiles in orbit, wait for the right moment, launch and bam!

You build a gigantic magnifying glass in orbit, aim it just right and
sizzle!

Seriously, the point here is that the US has to re-establish a significant
orbital and lunar presence. If somebody else starts building little pink
houses up there, we're screwed. Our administration is looking at NASA as a
soak-off, while the European Union and the ESA is about to commercialize it.
Remember, the Imperials in Star Wars were British, not American....
"Abrigon Gusiq" wrote in message
...
I know a bit like science fiction, but what is the plans and doctrine
with dealing with space related warfare?
Especially now that China (PRC) is working on a consistant manned
presense in space, with a possible space station in the next 5-10 years.

As well as the possible access to space by more than the current access.
Namely instead of just Soyuz/Shuttle, but a possible X-prize winner or
like?

Examples being: What if someone attacked and took over the International
Space Station?

Or someone found ways to get to the asteroid belt and start throwing
rocks?

Or just that an asteroid was in route to hit earth? How would we deal
with it, other than to take it in the chin?

Mike


  #19  
Old March 16th 04, 11:45 AM
James Moughan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

(Gordon D. Pusch) wrote in message ...
"Bootstrap Bill" writes:

What if it were discovered that a Moon sized asteroid were on a collision
course with Earth, and would arrive in 25 years?


Then everything on the Earth would die.


Unarguably. :-)



Would we have enough time to evacuate anyone?


Not enough to form a viable population, let alone a civilization.


Could we establish a sizeable O'neal colony jin that amount of time?


No.


Hmmm, I wonder? Biologists generally put the viable population for a
species at about 10,000 for reasons of genetic diversity. In fact we
could probably do better than that, both by incorporating as
genetically mixed a population as possible and by using frozen
eggs/sperm. But let's stick with 10,000 anyway.

It's not clear exactly what would be required to support a
civilization in orbit. Let's for the sake of argument say that we
need on the order of 100 tonnes of mass in orbit per person. Assuming
that we can retrieve some resources in situ for radiation shielding
and the like.

That means about a megatonne to orbit. At current Proton launch costs
(cost, not price) of $700/lb that would amount to about 1.5 trillion
dollars. That's, what, less than 5 years of the current US defence
budget? And I would imagine that you could get a discount if you need
25K launches. :-) Add some on for the cost of the equipment too,
though probably not to the ISS-level of $40K/lb for a pressure shell.

The variables are, I guess, what number of people you would need to
preserve the skill set necessary for a technological civilization, and
the minimum amount of equipment necessary to allow that skill set to
work. Plus the overhead coefficient of how many politicians we have
to support off their backs.

However, it doesn't sound totally undoable. If we could get an Orion
system working then I'd image quite a few people could be saved.


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

  #20  
Old March 16th 04, 04:03 PM
Charles Buckley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Future Space War

Karl Hallowell wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" wrote in message ...

"Abrigon Gusiq" wrote in message
...

I know a bit like science fiction, but what is the plans and doctrine
with dealing with space related warfare?
Especially now that China (PRC) is working on a consistant manned
presense in space, with a possible space station in the next 5-10 years.


Having seen the US station FUBAR Spacehole One I doubt they'll want to copy
that mistake.
They'll go straight for a moonbase.



Why? They should be able to demonstrate a large space station at a
fraction of the cost of ISS. Sounds like a cheaper political victory
than going to the Moon. They have to avoid the cost plus structure of
NASA bidding, the multilateral approach, and the constant redesigning
of the space station. If they can do that, then they should be able to
embarrass NASA quite handily.



That really does not match their overall strategy though.
They have been slow and methodical. If they go for a space station,
it would far more likely be a one or two element station launched off
their heaviest launch vehicle. Probably a single launch. At this stage,
they are far more likely aiming at slowly building up core skills
and tech. If they went into a full up competition, they would be
taking an unnecessary risk and investment.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) Stuf4 Space Shuttle 150 July 28th 04 07:30 AM
European high technology for the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 May 10th 04 02:40 PM
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 18 February 14th 04 04:28 AM
International Space Station Science - One of NASA's rising stars Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 December 27th 03 02:32 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.