Slashdot Mirror
Pentagon Wants To Test a Space-Based Weapon In 2023 (defenseone.com)
pgmrdlm writes: Defense officials want to test a neutral particle-beam in orbit in fiscal 2023 as part of a ramped-up effort to explore various types of space-based weaponry. They've asked for $304 million in the 2020 budget to develop such beams, more powerful lasers, and other new tech for next-generation missile defense. Such weapons are needed, they say, to counter new missiles from China, Russia, North Korea and Iran. But just figuring out what might work is a difficult technical challenge.
So the Pentagon is undertaking two studies. The first is a $15 million exploration of whether satellites outfitted with lasers might be able to disable enemy missiles coming off the launch pad. Defense officials have said previously that these lasers would need to be in the megawatt class. They expect to finish the study within six months. They're also pouring money into a study of space-based neutral particle beams, a different form of directed energy that disrupts missiles with streams of subatomic particles traveling close to light speed -- as opposed to lasers, whose photons travel at light speed.
So the Pentagon is undertaking two studies. The first is a $15 million exploration of whether satellites outfitted with lasers might be able to disable enemy missiles coming off the launch pad. Defense officials have said previously that these lasers would need to be in the megawatt class. They expect to finish the study within six months. They're also pouring money into a study of space-based neutral particle beams, a different form of directed energy that disrupts missiles with streams of subatomic particles traveling close to light speed -- as opposed to lasers, whose photons travel at light speed.
Cant believe that in 21th century there are fucking morons living who see human as at threat. Greatest country for sure.
We use China's satellites as justification to build space weapons. Then China uses our space weapons to justify space weapons of their own. The we use that to justify bigger and better weapons, On and on. The only winner is the MIC.
And it will be about as successful at its primary objective. Though as a secondary objective the Star Wars undid the USSR, which was a huge benefit to the world.
"What fucking good have they done in 40 years" - Well, Europe is more or less self-determinant and not a vassal state, nobody is lobbing nukes around... I think you're underestimating the worst case scenario rather badly, in fact.
It could be worse. That's no apology, it's a warning. It could very well be a lot worse, very quickly. It still may. It could make everything you'd cite to complain about here pretty much moot, instantly. Think on that.
And then what? If you put weapon platforms in space, what is the next step? Well, for the other side to develop means to disable those armed satellites, of course! And what happens if you start exploding satellites in space? Kessler syndrome and losing our ability to get into space entirely.
I cannot see why the US wants to lead a race to the bottom. Respond to aggressive measures by other nations in this field, yes. But to be the one to actually start this craziness? So stupid.
And will it pop corn?
When I was younger I used to read a magazine called Quest. All about science and tech. I recall they had one issue that was all about Star Wars and SDI and US laser weapons in space. I think it was all just bluster at the time to make the USSR overspend but now it seems we are entering that stage for real. While I am excited by the technology I am not so keen to see more and deadlier weapons on the planet (or indeed in orbit of it)
They want to attack the missile at launch, in early boost phase, instead of in space. OK, so to do it at launch, early in boost, there's thick atmosphere to penetrate but it's not moving so fast. I'll let the next physicist readin' this explain better, but would the atmosphere affect the beam, spread it at least? Why would they want to hit it that early, unless they're hedging their bets? Or is there something they're not telling us mere taxpayers?
Olphart at play. Ruck FepubliKKKans. Welcome to the Worldwide Idiocracy, y'all.
will we hear about "Russia/China denouncing the Space Peace Treaty" when they start developing a strategy to protect themselves from this.
They want to rule everyone.... this is just their latest tool to do so. Nothing to do with defense at all
Can't have Spaceforce without some pew pew. I wonder if the space force logo will be an eagle with Trump's haircut.
as opposed to lasers, whose photons travel at light speed
My tachyon-based proposal can blow shit up before it even fires.
Lead a race to the bottom.... might want to check your facts:
Polyus space-based megawatt laser anti-missile weapon system launched by Russia in 1987.
Ironically, much of the engineering that went into this Russian weapon system is now an integral part of the International Space Station.
It's not a race to the bottom until someone pulls the trigger.
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells
"They've asked for $304 million in the 2020 budget to develop such beams, more powerful lasers, and other new tech for next-generation missile defense."
I can't help but think...
+ A company already built it. ...on the taxpayer's dime.
+ They can't say anything due to a military non-disclosure agreement.
+ A consumer application for the tech is found.
+ CEO sees dollar signs.
+ Makes excuse to make it public that it's 'starting' to be worked on.
+ Consumer equivalent released when manufacturing cost hits consumer price point.
+ Profit.
+ Military application still isn't perfect.
+ Congress says "In for a penny, in for a pound."
+ CEO sees dollar signs.
+ Profit.
+ Still doesn't work.
+ CEO says, "Yes, but we got this great gadget out of it."
+
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Checking facts, like how we are a party to a UN treaty prohibiting this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No, that's an undesirable fact-- gotta IGNORE that part!
LEARN TO READ. "it bars states party to the treaty from placing weapons of mass destruction in Earth orbit,"
How stupid do you have to be in order to link to a wikipedia article which says the exact opposite of the claim you're making?
And they keep wondering whether there is an intelligent life out there, when the real questions whether there is an intelligent life down here.
...so doesn't that make him a "Space-Based Weapon" already? He does have access to a rather large military force.
So when exactly does this fiscal year start and end? And why be explicit it's in fiscal 2023 and not in actual 2023?
This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.
I think this is the right sentiment. Ever since 1958(Sputnik 1) there has been plans, contingencies and attempts at readying for space warfare.
So far, because orbit is orbit: Generally attacking the ground from space isn't feasible. Everything that enters orbit is costy, and re entering means a lot of missiles won't really do anything. So as it has to come, that means Space warfare as envision is going to be vs other satellites to establish control over space.
Space warfare is by itself a plan on how to deny the enemy satellites during a global war, since pre and post satellite navigation is currently a given in civilian life.
So the current day fact is that preparations for space warfare has been undergoing since 1958, for 60 years, but the logistics involved means that it also needs to be accompanied by global warfare for the actual spark to trigger.
The theory behind it seem to hinge on a lot of the same issues as the Cold War and MAD: Once the spark has ignited, you need to consider all material to be a net economic loss. With no guarantee that you can win the warfare, or the costs of destroyed infrastructure to be worth fighting said war.
You might be thinking along the lines 'But satellites are in space? Surely thats not the loss of humans lives, so we are free to proceed?'
But that isn't true. One of the fears from satellite space warfare is that once you have gone a round, the debris and scrap parts from disabled equipment will accumulate in such a manner that launching new satellites or crews will be cumbersome or impossible. So the winner might have intact GLONASS, Baidou or GPS, but can't replace them once their lifespan expires. So a decade later there is no satellites up there for space exploration, no Satellite phone, no GPS, no space research, no spy satellites, no updates to Google Earth, etc.
So the economic loss of space warfare is so enormous that its a deterrent.
We simply don't know how bad it is until it happens, and once the genie is out of the bottle you can't really put it back in.
Did they learn nothing at all from the Star Wars program of the 80's ? The obstacles that made that program fail had to do with Physics not computing power. And physics did not change that much in 40 years.
Sure there was some progress since then (just look at the power output of semiconductor lasers now vs 40 years ago) but nothing on the scale that will make the program feasible.
"Ever since 1958(Sputnik 1)"
Crap. Did I wake up in a parallel universe?
I don’t know if anyone else caught it, but this energy beam weapon requires megawatts. Meaning we’re going to have a nuclear reactor in space. IMO that’s a pretty fucking dumb idea, since it basically hands your enemy a dirty nuclear bomb they can drop on your head.
Edwin Windsor would not approve.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
They want their military program back!
This will start a very dangerous arms race. Once again the US is obsessed with creating new ways to kill people. And you claim to be the good guys?
I remember how Kafka destroyed the world once he rob the Gods of their power.
Kinda like space weapons. Just shoot wherever you want.... no need to nuke..... just burn the White House lawn when the president is walking by. 5secs and it's over
If they are truly interested in world peace, they should share this technology with everyone, including their enemies. If it is only for defensive purposes and it is meant to prevent nuclear war, it would be a great sign of good faith for the U.S. to make the entire world safe from these weapons, including their own stockpile.
Of course, if we can't nuke anything anymore... what do we do when the ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE happens?!
And the parts about not installing bases of operation for military purposes, and all that shit, is what, chopped liver? the intent of the treaty is very fucking clear, and the "Not a weapon of mass destruction! *raspberry*" loophole you seem so enamored by, is exactly why there was a followup resolution in 2005, which the US of course, vetoed.
You are welcome to check that out. It outright forbid *all* space based weapons.
https://www.nti.org/learn/trea...
and we even attempted to pass legislation on this--- MANY TIMES-- but warmongering asshats like the GP get butthurt over such things immediately, so we have never actually passed it.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/...
https://www.congress.gov/bill/...
https://www.congress.gov/bill/...
Because we just *GOTTA* fucking have space lasers. /s
And the parts about not installing bases of operation for military purposes, and all that shit, is what, chopped liver?
No, stupid, it applies to "celestial bodies", as in the moon, other planets, or asteroids. It says nothing about space stations or other artificial satellites.
the intent of the treaty is very fucking clear
To everyone except you, it seems.
exactly why there was a followup resolution in 2005, which the US of course, vetoed.
If it was vetoed then it is not in force which, again, directly contradicts your earlier statement that "we are a party to a UN treaty prohibiting this". Congrats, all of your sources agree that you're wrong. Brilliant strategy, that.
Your approach, (or funded argument) is that we should just abdicate and let the Chinese have the high ground? Brilliant!
Did you even fucking READ the first link, asshole? Here, let me quote it for you.
The last fucking sentence is pretty damn contradictory to your argument. It is pretty abundantly clear that the consensus position of the UN and its member nations is that the treaty should have applied to all weapons, and they have been trying VERY hard ever since to make that so.
Our own legislature, as I pointed out, has *ALSO* tried several times.
The problem, is that for some reason that escapes me, people like you and the GP are hell bent on creating an escalation of force in space for no tangible benefit.
What you stated has been the situation until very recently however things are changing. New typeds of ASAT weapons that do not create mass amount of collateral are being developed by the Chinese. Instead of blasting a satellite with a laser, warhead or KE projectile these are derived from the emerging servicing probes that are just now reaching the market. These probes have the ability to disable satellites in ways that dont create debris. They can burn out sensors, damage solar panels and antennas, things like that. So its no longer a situation of space MAD involving Kessler syndrome.
You idiot, the arms race already started, and your hero Obama decided to pay off insurance companies rather than respond to it. We're playing catchup now.
I personally would like to see my tax dollars spent on completing the Baltimore Metro (a local issue of concern to me) and bringing Amtrak into the 21st century.
Some cheaper heathcare wouldn't hurt either.
General Sline: A weapon unused is a useless weapon.
Just call it the "Zeus Cannon"
The next step is to teach the president how to do SQL queries. Example:
DELETE from Humanity where country='Iran' and religion like '%sl%';
Oh, hey, I remember that movie! It was called... Real Genius, right?
So after all these years, Hathaway has finally figured out the power problem?
Do you want a Space Force, because this is how you get a Space Force.
It doesn't matter what some asshats retroactively want it to apply to; you stated that it the US is a signatory to a treaty which prohibits these types of systems. Literally every single link you've posted specifically states that the treaty does not prohibit them. Ergo you're wrong, you yourself have demonstrated that you're wrong and your continued inability to acknowledge that you're wrong only demonstrates that you're unreasonable in addition to being wrong.
Glad we could sort that out. Feel free to continue ranting like a retard, if you like.
...for megacorporations. Like Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore, running the night. He robs for the poor and gaves to the rich. Stupid bitch!
Think you are all looking at this wrong, there is now a real plan to start mining in space, I see having these as a first step to laying claim to space I as others have mentioned doubt this will ever work pointing back to earth.
I seem to recall that the U.S. is signatory to a treaty that specifically prohibits putting weapons in space, as well as claiming any celestial real estate. Has this changed, or is the U.S. just so arrogant that treaties are only relevant when other people try to evade or violate them? Just wondering.
Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say.
America claims the right to deny its adversaries the use of space.
Fine.
North Korea should loft a few tonnes of ball bearings and sand wrapped around some high explosives to a retrograde low earth orbit, and set it off. It's within their technological capabilities, and would be a very effective asymettric technique to deny *their* adversaries the use of space.
I thought we'd already been through this?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I believe the US might have been a signatory to a treaty banning weapons in space. Anyone know anything more about this?
I don't agree with this sentiment.
So lets say one of the big players deploy their SPACE WEAPONS
What happens? The other players need to react or lose all their satellites. And then every satellites that can be justified to be destroyed will be, even civilian stuff so long they can transmit or be reprogrammed in some way. And then we get WW3 or Kessler until somebody can clear up orbit and we get new satellites.
lol. I just clicked through to see the rest of your links ... oh my! Three bills sponsored by Denni Kucinich ... the nubag who spread 9/11 conspiracy theories, buddied around with Alex Jones, apparently had a profound visitation from a UFO, and petitioned the US government to create a "Peace Department".
Sounds like exactly your kind of guy!
While these weapons may be nice to have, they are also easily destroyed from the ground or by asteroids rendering them useless. So spend millions to put shit in space only to have it shot down with a cheap laser. Because if you can shoot something down, we can shoot something up.
We can't be secretive about them any more.
We are forming an official Space Force.
Kinda implied we'll have some... well,.. *space* *force*.
Announcing the creation of the Space Force was also a terrible idea for the same reasons, but it doesn't necessarily have to be compounded by announcing individual space weapons. The air force is public knowledge, but various aircraft and the technologies behind them have been kept secret.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel