Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pentagon Wants To Test a Space-Based Weapon In 2023 (defenseone.com)

Posted by msmash on from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.

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.

14 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. Spiral of escalation by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Spiral of escalation by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not sure why this is modded as troll. Even presidents have been warning about the military industrial complex for ages. It's not even a partisan thing. Dislike of the MIC is something you see on both sides of the political spectrum.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  2. It's Star Wars all over again by melted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:It's Star Wars all over again by thereddaikon · · Score: 2

      1: SDI's primary objective was always to get the USSR to waste money. Nobody in the know actually believed it was feasible in the 1980's. Both sides greatly overestimated eachother's technical capabilities to the point where even vague reports of new weapons could get the top military leaders buzzing all at once. They did it to us with the MiG-25 unintentionally. It was meant to be just an interceptor but when we saw it everyone lost their minds and thought it was an F-15 killer. SDI was a targeted social engineering attack to get the Soviets to panic and waste tons of money on something we knew couldn't be done at the time. 2: It's secondary goal was to fund real foundational research into directed energy and other types of exotic weapons that is paying off today. Because of the original funding and research in SDI and subsequent programs both the Army and Navy are field testing laser based point defense systems today. It's no longer science fiction. It's not 1985 anymore. Lasers are actually pretty mature technology. Back then to get enough power to be a weapon they had to be chemical lasers or the hilarious nuclear X-ray lasers they showed in promotional material. The X-ray lasers were a joke and chemical lasers are big, heavy, complicated and finicky. Not something you want on a space weapons platform that may orbit for years before being used. Solid state lasers are now powerful enough to be useful.

    2. Re: It's Star Wars all over again by Kame-sennin · · Score: 2

      I think part of the confusion over the narrative of what happened after the fall of the Soviet union is because a rather raw and unrestricted form of capitalism, in which western businessmen were involved, was released over Russian society and was in various ways damaging it. This was then in some camps perceived as a conscious hostile act on the part of the West, which it of course wasn't. Putin was seen as a rescuer when he restored order. This explains why westerners can have the view that Putin is something self-inflicted while many Russians have the view of Putin as a hero while the West has let them down.

  3. And then what ... by CptJeanLuc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:And then what ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a great way to funnel tax money to the military-industrial complex. You don't even have to deploy these weapons, just waste billions developing them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:And then what ... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      It's a great way to funnel tax money to the military-industrial complex.

      Hey, it's still JOBS and helps move the economy along....

      Nice thing about it...is that often these types of jobs require clearances, and pretty much ONLY US citizens can qualify, so it keeps the jobs IN the US.

      Generally well paying jobs too!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  4. If you act like a paper tiger, you get attacked... by DanDD · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  5. Re: Is it like lasing dynamite? by hackwrench · · Score: 2

    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?

  6. Resurrect the 80's Start Wars program ? by Laxator2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  7. Re:Megawatts... by necro81 · · Score: 2

    Meaning we’re going to have a nuclear reactor in space.

    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

  8. Re:What an idiots by RedK · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  9. Re: If you act like a paper tiger, you get attack by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Informative

    Did you even fucking READ the first link, asshole? Here, let me quote it for you.

    Although these treaties ban the placement of weapons of mass destruction in space, they do not prevent states from placing other types of weapons in space. As a result, many states argue that existing treaties are insufficient for safeguarding outer space as âoethe common heritage of mankind.â In order to address this, the final document of the UN General Assemblyâ(TM)s Special Session on Disarmament mandated that negotiations should take place in what is now the Conference on Disarmament (CD), âoein order to prevent an arms race in outer spaceâ that are âoeheld in accordance with the spirit of the [Outer Space Treaty].â

    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.