12 ms·
UK and US say Russia fired a satellite weapon in space
- aaron695 6y agoIt's interesting that this seems a propaganda piece for Space Force. America Really Does Have a Space Force. We Went Inside to See What It Does https://time.com/5869987/spaceforce/ https://time.com/5869987/spaceforce/
- DataGata 6y agoWhy is Russia or China even trying to take out our satellites at this point? We have SpaceX, guys. We can put replacements up whenever we want to. How about the Russians start figuring out how to use a launch system that isn't worrying about whether or not its saved up enough for retirement?
- odomojuli 6y agoDebris in orbit has a finite limit until we're then trapped on this planet. Micrometeroids and space trash will katamari until we then have to start thinking about blowing significant parts of our geocentric orbit. Warfare in space is a negative-sum game for every player.
- barkingcat 6y agothis is how we'll not get to mars. I envision a future where nation-states governed by strong-dictators shoot down each other's mars attempts while also denying climate change exists.
- anon73044 6y agoSounds like something Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven would write, maybe with some Peter F. Hamilton thrown in for good measure.
- dredmorbius 6y agoWhat is katamari in this sense?
- odomojuli 6y agoKatamari is a Japanese term used for "clump" or "clod". It is basically what dung beetles do. They roll things up until they're bigger. The bigger the ball, the faster it grows from size. Like making a snowman. I'm referring to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEAP-4iUirY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEAP-4iUirY To answer your question, in this sense: I mean to say that the more space debris there is hurtling through our orbit capturing other space debris, the more likely we are to end up with micrometeroids building up mass, momentum and velocity until we just end up with an extremely hostile environment for our satellites and vehicles.
- dredmorbius 6y agoAh, thanks. I'd found a videogame ref, based on the same definition I now realise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katamari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katamari There is an established term, Kessler syndrome, effectively a runaway debris cascade: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
- kinghajj 6y agoHow long would it take SpaceX & other companies to launch replacements? (Further, how much would a large attack against US space infrastructure affect SpaceX's capabilities?) In that time, how much damage would be done to US government agencies, military, corporations, and citizens' lives?
- Rebelgecko 6y agoDarpa's recent Responsive Launch Competition (launch a payload to space with 30 days notice) ended without a winner. So my guess is more than 30 days, and that's assuming that you already have a replacement ready to launch
- mc32 6y agoI have no clue as to why Russia insists upon playing the neighborhood punk in international politics. I mean to what end? They’ve got massive problems internally, most of their armed forces run on vapors, are they hoping to sell this to the highest bidder? Just a few last chest thumps before they become less relevant? They still have some good lead in some highly technical areas like weapons and rocketry and ancillary technology, but most everything else is being wasted and no one seems to care there. It’s a slow degradation. So much potential just wasted. They could work with Europe, even the US, if they just reset the way they play. Play your part—you’re not the old USSR any more.
- YarickR2 6y agoLike, I have no clue why western media is constantly trying to scare citizens. I guess, they need to be kept in a state of alertness, or fear of an enemy.
- ceejayoz 6y ago> I have no clue as to why Russia insists upon playing the neighborhood punk in international politics. This is why: > They’ve got massive problems internally... An external enemy to blame does wonders.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoApplies globally. Literally.
- mc32 6y agoI don’t think that’s it. This is more for international audiences. For internal distraction they’ll threaten some Caucasus republic or Ukraine.
- ceejayoz 6y agoHard to blame economic woes on internal threats; "the Americans are sanctioning/interfering our exports" is a lot easier to sell. Cuba and North Korea have done this for decades; it works well.
- YarickR2 6y agoNo you can't (put something into orbit whenever you want to). Both SpaceX launch sites (Vanderberg AFB and Cape Canaveral) are very close to oceans, and any surface to air missile from a ship in international waters will reliably prevent launch attempts. Of course, this'll mean war, but the same can be said about shooting down sats in space. In other words, this news article is a part of blame and smear campaign against China and Russia; lacking any details and evidence, just like "Taliban bounties"
- hchz 6y agoRussian surveillance vessels or warships in the proximity of Cape Canaveral and Kings Bay NSB have and will provoke a fleet-level response of hunter-killer submarines that harass them out of the Atlantic. Russia has no capability to project naval power to this region.
- bonestamp2 6y agoSpaceX is one part of a replacement solution. But, you would still have to fund and build all those replacements... which could take decades, and a lot of surveillance capabilities and therefore a lot of potential deaths could occur in that time from unseen attacks.
- Someone1234 6y agoBetween the Air Force X-37B and the new Space Force, I find it a little hard to take pearl clutching about the "militarization of space" seriously. Don't get me wrong, Russia aren't some good guy, but when you actively do a thing for tens of years and then the other guy does that thing, you have no moral high ground left to complain.
- barkingcat 6y agothe press releases mean that US and UK are both jealous of the capabilities being tested, and its a precursor to getting funding to expand X37B program.
- vsareto 6y agoAny time a nation complains about another nation doing something that it itself does, you shouldn't ever take it seriously at face value. Nations are regularly two-faced as a form of politics. They're not going to stop being that way just because of a moral hypocrisy.
- disabled 6y agoThis is exactly how Russian propaganda works: “Other countries do bad stuff too, therefore we (Russian Federation) are not so bad after all” Have a read about Sputnik News, for example, which is considered to be “slick” propaganda: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_(news_agency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_(news_agency) Perhaps Americans and others should stop falling for it. I get that we are in some really dark times, but this is appalling to tolerate as Americans.
- int_19h 6y agoThe classic Soviet agitprop trope is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes But it's a bit different, because it's about bringing up some completely unrelated point to distract. In this case, though, the subject matter is the same. This isn't to say that Russia ought to be excused, or that countries that are not currently involved in militarizing space shouldn't criticize it. But if they do, shouldn't they be criticizing US, as well? And as for Americans, well, the hypocrisy there is rather obvious.
- sschueller 6y ago"threaten the peaceful use of space" and what exact is the US space force for? Cleaning up after Elon's space junk? I don't think so. Kind of hypocritic to accuse others of militarizing space.
- ceejayoz 6y agoThe US Space Force is largely a paper reshuffling of what were previously US Air Force Space Command assets. Nothing in it is really new.
- kingkawn 6y agoThat is not pertinent to the point being made above. Regardless of the bureaucratic nomenclature the US is actively in pursuit of weaponizing earth orbit space tech.
- ceejayoz 6y agoThe point I'm making: None of that has anything to do with the Space Force formation. It was already happening when those assets were under the Air Force, for decades. The radars, GPS satellites, etc. formerly run by the Air Force Space Command are now run by the Space Force. Same thing for the staff; they're the same people.
- mlindner 6y agoRepeatedly saying it with no evidence doesn't make it true. Stop doing this. The US has not to anyone's knowledge put weapons in space. Russia has now. That's a clear escalation.
- rumanator 6y ago> Nothing in it is really new. That isn't really the point. The point is that the US armed forces already use space for military purposes so extensively that they even have a whole branch dedicated to space militarization.
- 6y ago
- lifeisstillgood 6y agoWhat bothers me most is not "Russia has a Geo-political imperative that has as much a claim to legitimacy as US or China" but the timing ... Russia has for years been laundering billions through the lax City of London, and days after reports alleging sitting Lords took bribes from Russians to stop Anti Money Laundering Acts, we see a show of strength. Not for geo politics, but for rich russian elites worrying about the cash. Once upon a time Putins manoeuvres made some twisted strategic sense. Now not so much.
- eloff 6y agoOr, the simpler explanation, they could just be unconnected events.
- lifeisstillgood 6y agoIt's possible - but then Russia was fairly foolish for conducting it anytime near the much heralded report. It seems far more likely the timing of the report was known and not avoided.
- rorykoehler 6y agoWhy would they care about a report? That for the Brits to care about. Russia couldn't give a shit and they probably planned this launch years out.
- lifeisstillgood 6y agoThe satellite has been up for years. The test firing is whenever they press a button. And they give a shit because the UK is making serious noises about tightening up on money laundering - I mean FFS one of our own lawmakers has been implicated in taking russian cash for putting down amendments - that's basically Russian cash paying for UK laws - it's huge. And it will make it harder for Russian money to move in London.
- 6y ago
- Zenst 6y ago"It is the first time the UK has made accusations about Russian test-firing in space" Have there been previous cases of Russian test-firing in space? [edit grammer]
- vilhelm_s 6y ago> The US said the Russian satellite system was the same one it raised concerns about in 2018 and earlier this year
- ceejayoz 6y agoYes, Salyut 3 had either a 23mm or 30mm cannon, which was apparently test fired: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_3#On-board_gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_3#On-board_gun
- m4rtink 6y agoThere were also plans for a manned Soyuz based satellite interceptor armed with cannons and/or missiles but it was never flown and nothing really built: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Soyuz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Soyuz
- strictnein 6y agoIf you want to learn more about Russia and China's militarization of space, The Shadow War by Jim Sciutto (Chief National Security Correspondent for CNN) is a good place to start. It could be a one-sided effort (I doubt he has access to RU and PLA national security insiders like he does in the US), but it definitely sounds like Russia and China have moved ahead of the US in this realm, in terms of actual satellite based shenanigans. You'll also understand the at times seemingly random actions of those two countries a little more. https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-War-Russias-Operations-America/dp/0062853643 https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-War-Russias-Operations-America...
- credit_guy 6y agoThe US military has a certain tension in its communications. On one hand they have to get money from the Congress, and the way to do this is "the gap between us and these other guys is shrinking, we can't continue to do our job with what money we have right now, hence, give us more money". On the other hand, they have to communicate to their allies that the gap between themselves and the Russians/Chinese is not actually shrinking, it's all good, and even expanding (which it should better be, considering their budget is equal to the defense budget of the next 20 nations combined). I personally doubt Russia and China have moved ahead of the US in any realm, satellite, rockets, cyber, or anything. But if you want to get a book sold, you can do worse than arguing as such, and you certainly will have a lot of evidence from the available various Congressional hearings, and other official military communications, just because the Pentagon is not beyond crying wolf when it serves its interests. Edit: the book you mentioned looks quite good, thanks for mentioning it. I just bought it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nyokodo 6y agoAfter saying that Russia was witnessed "launching a projectile with the characteristics of a weapon." the Air Vice Marshall said "Actions like this threaten the peaceful use of space and risk causing debris that could pose a threat to satellites and the space systems on which the world depends." My understanding of these words are that it wasn't that Russia having weapons in space per se threatens the peaceful use of space but how they tested their weapons in this case. This is because it risked causing debris and a lot of damage. I don't see the basis for calling out the US for hypocrisy based on this article. I'm unaware of any anti-satellite projectile weapons being tested by the US like this over the past 12 years, I suppose you could call the US a hypocrite for previous tests but that's a bit of a stale accusation given how much more peaceful space activity there has been since then. Edit: for clarity.
- grecy 6y ago> I'm unaware of any anti-satellite projectile weapons being tested by the US like this over the past 12 years. It seems very arbitrary to draw the line at 12 years. In 2008 the US tested and proved their anti-sat tech works [1]. Now they don't need to keep testing it, because everyone knows it works, and that's enough. Now the Russians want only to do the same thing, and they're bad because of it. [1] https://science.howstuffworks.com/shoot-down-satellite.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/shoot-down-satellite.htm
- an0f6a2bb51bb 6y agoKnocking out another countries satellites is what would be done in a first strike nuclear attack according to modern military theorists. China has tested space to space satellite weapons. Russia has now tested space to space satellite weapons. The US has not tested any space to space military assets and doesn't have this functionality as far as what is currently known. (The rumor mill also currently says the US has no such functionality and requires ground take off). The reason this is important is that any response to a direct satellite attack would potentially take greater than 30 minutes using ground based weapons. (Again rumor mill).
- m4rtink 6y ago>The US has not tested any space to space military assets and doesn't have this functionality as far as what is currently known. (The rumor mill also currently says the US has no such functionality and requires ground take off). Um, most recently in 2008 the USA shot down it's own dead satellite by a ASAT missile fired from a ship: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Burnt_Frost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Burnt_Frost While the story goes that the satellite was dangerous due to frozen ball of hydrazine fuel on board (as it failed soon after launch and still had full fuel load) it was also a perfect chance to test the existing ASAT capability. Also in 2019 India tested their ASAT missile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Shakti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Shakti
- credit_guy 6y agoIf you can dock a spacecraft to the ISS, you have all the capability to space-to-space destroy a satellite and then some.
- jcun4128 6y agoKind of curious what this weapon is, said "projectile" so I guess it's not a laser, I was thinking of those "Gods rods" but that's for targeting the ground
- ndesaulniers 6y agoI just hope someone is building a Gundam.
- ianai 6y agoWelp have I got a link for you!! https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/robots/a33381411/japan-giant-gundam-robot/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/robots/a33381411...
- justanotheranon 6y agogood. i hope an all out Space War does happen. therefore, i support any escalation in support of acceleration. bring on Kessler Syndrome. end all space based telecommunications. that will end drone wars, NRO spying on the whole Earth, and dramatically scale back most navy and submarine opations as well as air force capabilities. the less capabilities to fight WW3 there are, the less war there will be. and that is a net benefit to all humans on Earth.
- trhway 6y agoThe main US strategic advantage over Russia is the networked military platforms under the "Total Global Awareness" paradigm which are able to deploy smart precision weapons, and the satellites are at the core of it. In general, one has either to build its own capabilities up to the level similar to the opponent's, which isn't an option for Russia in this case, or to bring down the opponent's capabilities to the one's own level, and that is the only option that at least somewhat plausible for Russia here. So, it is pretty logical that the satellites are going to be the first priority target as much as it is possible for Russian capabilities.
- praveen9920 6y agoI'm actually surprised to see that India is in race of developing anti-satellite weapons.
- fuoqi 6y agoJudging by the article the system in question simply was maneuvering near another Russian satellite and got really close to it. It didn't fire any projectiles to destroy it or anything like that. So I don't understand why it caused such fuss, apart from the routine nurturing of the Russian scarecrow. Yes, such systems could be used for military purposes (e.g. for inspecting US spy sattelites or for interfering with their work), but also can be used for civilian as well (e.g. refueling, safe deorbiting, and even some day repairs). It's far easier and more reliable to destroy enemy satellites using ground based systems, after all you just need to create a field of ballistic debris which can be slower than first cosmic velocity, so it will be cheaper than satellite. So I highly doubt purpose of the system is satellite destruction.
- myopenid2 6y agoUseful for shooting down Starlink satellites.
- buzzert 6y agoHighly recommend watching 007 Goldeneye for a fictional take on this situation. Fantastic movie.
- myopenid3 6y agoUseful for shooting down Starlink satellites.