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.
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.
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.
That was airplane mounted, not space based. :P
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.
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?
Yes, especially when we know they're gonna outsource the system security to Microsoft.
Satellites and missiles are the threat being countered here. These aren't designed to shoot humans from space if that's what you're thinking lol.
What things are 'designed' for and what things are used for don't always match up.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
But it was a trial for what would become a space shuttle based weapon if the ad opening the movie was any indication. After that, then what?
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 read "Space Force", I think this
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.
Edwin Windsor would not approve.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Not necessarily. This beam weapon would probably not have to run for much longer than minutes.* In that case, I think electric batteries would be a much more straightforward way to go - far fewer technical risks.
But speaking more generally, I think it would be a benefit to human space exploration to develop nuclear reactor technology for space. While perhaps not a pre-requisite for colonization on the moon and Mars, a MW-class nuclear reactor would make some things easier.
* Within minutes of the start of the attack, an end point is reached:
1) The threat has been neutralized - you've blown up the incoming missile
2) You have been neutralized - the beam weapon has been taken out by an anti-satellite missile that accompanies the original attach.
3) You've lost the war, in which case further countermeasures aren't going to matter very much
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?
Can't believe that after over 3 millenia of recorded human history, there are fucking morons who don't see humans as a threat.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
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
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.
Go nuclear for energy. Its only to stop one rocket at a time. The energy needed is great but its for one rocket at a time.
The US expects it has the energy, aim and detection ready.
The US detects a nation is getting ready to attempt a rocket test.
Their rocket fails to get into orbit.
The enemy nation is expected to look over its failed rocket for weeks and months. Then try again.
Another US beam is used. The enemy nation takes months to look over the next crash.
Try again.
Then start looking at its own staff for security issues.
Attempt another launch months later.
This is not some 1980's system to have a repeated use over vast numbers of Soviet rockets within a very short time.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
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?
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.
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.
I thought we'd already been through this?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
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!
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
Found it: Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty prohibits placing in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It also prohibits the testing and the deployment of any kind of weapon on the moon or other celestial bodies
Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say.