4 ms·

Could a country (or a continent) in theory remove satellites hanging above their area? What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace?

by thdrdt 6y ago

guerrilla 6y ago
How does this work at sea? I don't know much about how aggressive (or not) "freedom of navigation" operations really are. They don't appear to be too friendly in the Strait of Hormuz or the South China Sea. However it is supposed to work and however it does work at sea, is the situation similar for space? > What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace? I imagine the US would consider it an attack and retaliate (maybe economically, militarily, or covertly) against the "attacking" country.
zo1 6y ago
There are international treaties that govern some of this stuff. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty (Which I think is for further out than orbit) You can find out more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law
sreevisakh 6y ago
There is a very important distinction between airspace and plain space. Violation of a country's airspace is a wilful act (unless of course you're lost). But you will inevitably have to fly over another country if you want to be in orbit. Even geosynchronous slots are limited to the equator (GSO insertion also requires phasing). This doesn't prevent countries from claiming 'aerospace' and destroying invading crafts. However, other countries could do the same and space exploration will be a non-starter for humanity as a whole. This is probably the reason why countries agreed to space treaties allowing overflight - and it will probably remain the same. Of course, this logic doesn't apply to suborbital flights. Any country with the means will probably just shoot down unauthorized objects on suborbital trajectory into their airspace.
kanox 6y ago
There is absolutely no way to do this. These are low-orbit satellites and they will eventually "fly over" every point on the Earth up to their maximum inclination. Only geo-stationary satellites are "hanging above an area" and suffer from high latency because of the speed of light. Legally speaking "airspace" does not extend beyond the atmosphere. There are treaties for this, otherwise almost all satellites would need approvals from almost all governments.
gpm 6y ago
> What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace This is basically unthinkable. Attempting to knock down all the satellites that ever fly above your country would mean knocking down every non-geostationary satellite that ever reaches your latitude (or any latitude farther from the equator than you). Satellites are a key part of how we all know if anyone else is launching nuclear bombs or doing anything else so stupid. In the event that a country tried this I would expect that the foreign reaction would be very extreme. In the event that a country succeeded I would put the odds of nuclear war at above 50% and of conventional war at near 100%. On the flipside you might almost get away with knocking down a few satellites with relatively minor reactions (at least compared to war, and if you had some good justification), as long as you don't try and knock them all out...

Could a country (or a continent) in theory remove satellites hanging above their area? What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace?

by thdrdt 6y ago

Could a country (or a continent) in theory remove satellites hanging above their area? What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace?

guerrilla 6y ago

How does this work at sea? I don't know much about how aggressive (or not) "freedom of navigation" operations really are. They don't appear to be too friendly in the Strait of Hormuz or the South China Sea. However it is supposed to work and however it does work at sea, is the situation similar for space? > What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace? I imagine the US would consider it an attack and retaliate (maybe economically, militarily, or covertly) against the "attacking" country.

zo1 6y ago

There are international treaties that govern some of this stuff. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty (Which I think is for further out than orbit) You can find out more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law

sreevisakh 6y ago

There is a very important distinction between airspace and plain space. Violation of a country's airspace is a wilful act (unless of course you're lost). But you will inevitably have to fly over another country if you want to be in orbit. Even geosynchronous slots are limited to the equator (GSO insertion also requires phasing). This doesn't prevent countries from claiming 'aerospace' and destroying invading crafts. However, other countries could do the same and space exploration will be a non-starter for humanity as a whole. This is probably the reason why countries agreed to space treaties allowing overflight - and it will probably remain the same. Of course, this logic doesn't apply to suborbital flights. Any country with the means will probably just shoot down unauthorized objects on suborbital trajectory into their airspace.

kanox 6y ago

There is absolutely no way to do this. These are low-orbit satellites and they will eventually "fly over" every point on the Earth up to their maximum inclination. Only geo-stationary satellites are "hanging above an area" and suffer from high latency because of the speed of light. Legally speaking "airspace" does not extend beyond the atmosphere. There are treaties for this, otherwise almost all satellites would need approvals from almost all governments.

gpm 6y ago

> What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace This is basically unthinkable. Attempting to knock down all the satellites that ever fly above your country would mean knocking down every non-geostationary satellite that ever reaches your latitude (or any latitude farther from the equator than you). Satellites are a key part of how we all know if anyone else is launching nuclear bombs or doing anything else so stupid. In the event that a country tried this I would expect that the foreign reaction would be very extreme. In the event that a country succeeded I would put the odds of nuclear war at above 50% and of conventional war at near 100%. On the flipside you might almost get away with knocking down a few satellites with relatively minor reactions (at least compared to war, and if you had some good justification), as long as you don't try and knock them all out...