Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Considers Anti-Satellite Laser
SpaceAdmiral writes "The U.S. government wants to develop a ground-based weapon to shoot down enemy satellites in orbit. The laser will be much more powerful and sophisticated than a similar endeavor a decade ago. From the article: '... some Congressional Democrats and other experts fault the research as potential fuel for an antisatellite arms race that could ultimately hurt this nation more than others because the United States relies so heavily on military satellites, which aid navigation, reconnaissance and attack warning.'"
Far more likely it's to protect America's "intellectual property economy" when it's cheap enough for private individuals to launch their own satellites to disseminate information under any laws they see fit.
Oh - and registration free link courtesy of Coral Cache
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
It'll be ready when Kent gets back from the cleaners to finish mounting the optics.
Nothing says 'Peace' like the United States blasting another country's satellite out of the sky. I can't see how doing so would help prevent attacks on the U.S. Perhaps the idea is to disable communications and espionage capabilities, but there are other, more conventional means of warfare, as ineffective as they may be.
The other theory, give countries warnings about removing satellites? Countries love ultimatums too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I'm against this (or for it, really) but I'm suggesting that perhaps the political and diplomatic repercussions might need to be investigated more thoroughly.
From a sci-fi point of view, its Spies Like Us all over again! Sounds interesting and technological to say the least.
And they said zombies weren't real!
WTF? What happened - the Iranians are now developing satellites? al-Qaeda? What a waste of money.
I've never tried, but I'd assume its relatively difficult to make satellites out of sticks and dirt.
And they said zombies weren't real!
A mirror.
As the USA concetrates on the development of these so called lasers, al-Qaida and its affiliates will enter the USA through the porous southern and norther borders and do greater harm.
Folks, do not be suprised to hear in future that this project has corruption and greed behind it. Remember that the USA spent US$5.99 billion on the shuttle which was never value for money!
Militarizing the space in near-earth orbit and creating a military highly dependant on satellites is just stupid. A few missles that blast millions of ball-bearings into to orbit, and the entire planet will be locked out of space for hundreds, or even thousands of years. High-altitude, high-endurance vehicles that can hover over a single area for long periods of time leave us far less vulnerable (we just need air-superiority), and don't make near-earth orbit a target. Unfortunately the current administration is crazy-arrogant and shortsighted.
Regarding your comment...it's a bit pointless to work on a defense measure for a military threat AFTER it has been deployed or its deployment is iminent. While it sure is popular to bash the US these days, I'm sure there is all kinds of research going on around the world to counter perceived threats that might seem silly now, but may become dead serious 10 years from now.
An object in a stable orbit cannot be "shot down". Its not an aircraft.
You can destroy it but all that will happen is that the pieces will
spread out from the point of explosion/impact and eventually become
space junk that could cause problems from friendly satellites.
Hopefully the laser would only disable a satellite and not cause its
fuel tanks to detonate , since if they do then the US will simply
be causing problems for itself , its allies and all space farers in
the future.
Umm, read some history. There's even a picture of one National Socialist German Labor Party nuke design.
Imperial Japan had nuclear bomb programs too.
Personally, I'm glad America got there first.
The Soviets took the easy route. They had some Useful Idiots steal the technology.
The Soviets had ASAT programs too. ASAT weaponry is old news, it's just that now they're using lasers rather than missiles. Heck, even that's not all that new, though making it work would be.
Don't you think the way for the US to really ensure its population's security would be to try to track down the arsenal of the former USSR?
Don't you think Putin ought to take nuclear security more seriously? The Russians built the damn things and they're not so poor that they can't deal with them if they want to, especially with high oil prices pouring hard currency into Russian state coffers.
My response to reading the article: duh!
Here are some recent articles on the developments in China. The US is not starting this race, but it'd be nice to keep up regardless.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2005-07 -27-china-satellites_x.htm m l
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HD20Ad03.html
http://www.house.gov/coxreport/chapfs/ch4.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/china-01c.html
http://www.taiwandc.org/twcom/84-no3.htm
http://www.afio.com/sections/wins/1998/notes48.ht
The world is, a dangerous place. As with Sudan and Iran, the UN is no deterrent to aggression. Enlightened self-interest directs us to investigate these types of systems for the same reasons we investigate lethal pathogens. Surviving them requires understanding them even if we never intend to use them.
#-#
Ad Astra Per Aspera
A rough road leads to the stars
All you'd need is a large rotating mirror and a tracking system, and you could vaporize a human targ -- er, I mean, Intellectual Property Thief from space!
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I think you are actually right on the money here.
The U.S. isn't really concerned about enemy spy satellites -- god knows our borders are so porous, you could just send a TV crew in and photograph almost anything you want, as long as they don't look Middle Eastern -- but navigation satellites are another matter.
The saving grace of the GPS system, from a U.S. military perspective, is that an enemy really can't depend on it; we can throw errors into it pretty much anywhere, anytime we want without having our equipment be affected (except all the guys using civilian GPS receivers because they haven't been issued real ones). I think there's a real concern that if there was a competing GPS-like system, that an enemy could use it to pilot a cruise missile at a U.S. target in such a way that we wouldn't get much warning.
Now, I think this is kind of a false threat: I think, given what I said earlier about our borders, that it's a whole lot easier to just drive a truck up to said U.S. target and blow it up than it would be to cobble together a homemade V-1 or V-2 with Galileo navigation, but apparently others disagree.
At any rate, any navigation system that provided GPS-like accuracy that wasn't within direct U.S. control would almost certainly necessitate the creation of a way to destroy it, or at least temporarily disable it in certain areas (if you de-orbited a satellite or two you might be able to make a hole in the system's coverage that would take a while for the operators to replace from spares).
Not that it would do any good against ICBMs, Chinese or otherwise, since they use astro- and inertial navigation systems anyway.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
This was basicly the logic behind the ABM treaty. It still holds good.
With our current terrorist enemy, I cannot see blinding any satellites would help. With potential enemies, most of them have nukers and likely would get very edgy blinded.
Not sure why this is modded at zero ... I think the AC is onto something here! Take this to its logical conclusion, ie otherwise totally powerless citizens against a superpower, and you end up with terrorists, as that is the only apparent way to strike back!
Of course, the US has historically had the benefit of being physically remote from the people they wage war on - no V1 or V2 flying bombs flying over the channel in US history (discounting the Japanese balloons of WWII I guess). The threat of ICBMs brings this a little closer to home, but we know who has these, and "we" tend not to wage war on them so much! But now we have the age of the bomb in a backpack and all bets are off!
Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
handmadehands.co.uk
The US is not starting this race, but it'd be nice to keep up regardless.
From your SpaceDaily.com link above: "China will become the third nation after U.S. and Russia to possess an ASAT system." China can make arguments identical to yours about enlightened self-interest. They could make the same argument about WMDs -- and Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong Il, and the regime in Iran have all done just that. Deterrence, etc.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.