Feasibility of Danger from Ground-Based Laser
on
Columbia Coverage
·
· Score: 1
I actually just joined Slashdot so I could ask a similar question. Actually, two related questions: First, could a ground-based laser be a threat to a manned spacecraft in the first place (and, along with that question, should NASA be taking this into consideration for future missions)? Second, assuming the answer to the first question is yes -- that a laser threat is realistic -- should NASA be including that possibility, far out as it may be, in the range of possible causes of this disaster?
Unlike inKubus, I wouldn't think that a hostile power aiming to bring down the shuttle with a laser would do it during the vehicle's reentry. I would think a more likely scenario might be for the laser to be trained on the shuttle as it passed overhead during orbit, with the intention to simply do enough damage to ensure its destruction on reentry. The malefactor could seriously damage a few of the heat-resistant tiles on the bottom of the craft, and I suspect such damage would go undetected until it was too late. (Q: Would temperature sensors on the shuttle be likely to detect anything happening while the lasering was occurring?)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty certain it's established fact that the Soviets and, more recently, the Chinese, have investigated the use of high-powered ground-based lasers to disable our surveillance satellites, so the general idea isn't science fiction.
Another question is, how sophisticated would the technology have to be? Do we need to be concerned about rogue states developing this capability? Would Saddam hesitate for a moment to use such a weapon on our craft, especially if he could be reasonably assured that the resulting tragedy could not be pinned on him?
Again, for anyone who can answer, there are two questions here: (1) is it possible to do (and should we be worrying about it) and (2) is it possible that it was done?
Thanks,
Dave
Slashdot Mirror
I actually just joined Slashdot so I could ask a similar question. Actually, two related questions: First, could a ground-based laser be a threat to a manned spacecraft in the first place (and, along with that question, should NASA be taking this into consideration for future missions)? Second, assuming the answer to the first question is yes -- that a laser threat is realistic -- should NASA be including that possibility, far out as it may be, in the range of possible causes of this disaster? Unlike inKubus, I wouldn't think that a hostile power aiming to bring down the shuttle with a laser would do it during the vehicle's reentry. I would think a more likely scenario might be for the laser to be trained on the shuttle as it passed overhead during orbit, with the intention to simply do enough damage to ensure its destruction on reentry. The malefactor could seriously damage a few of the heat-resistant tiles on the bottom of the craft, and I suspect such damage would go undetected until it was too late. (Q: Would temperature sensors on the shuttle be likely to detect anything happening while the lasering was occurring?) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty certain it's established fact that the Soviets and, more recently, the Chinese, have investigated the use of high-powered ground-based lasers to disable our surveillance satellites, so the general idea isn't science fiction. Another question is, how sophisticated would the technology have to be? Do we need to be concerned about rogue states developing this capability? Would Saddam hesitate for a moment to use such a weapon on our craft, especially if he could be reasonably assured that the resulting tragedy could not be pinned on him? Again, for anyone who can answer, there are two questions here: (1) is it possible to do (and should we be worrying about it) and (2) is it possible that it was done? Thanks, Dave