4 ms·

> satellite communications will be unreliable due to heavy use of anti-satellite weapons > agile orbital launch capabilities to quickly replace satellite attri

> satellite communications will be unreliable due to heavy use of anti-satellite weapons > agile orbital launch capabilities to quickly replace satellite attrition losses. Once you reach Kessler syndrome / collisional cascading, the problem is no longer anti-satellite weapons, it's just lots of damaging space pollution in orbit - at this point, launching more satellites won't help anymore. EDIT: on another note, this also reflects the Mutual Assured Destruction/ICBM situation - you don't destroy my things, I don't destroy your things - it only works if both parties have things to loose. Anti-satellite weapons are the most dangerous in the hands of countries with low amounts of spacecraft.

nradov 4y ago
Concerns about Kessler syndrome won't stop combatants from using anti-satellite weapons. When national (or regime) survival is at stake, they will shoot down adversary satellites and worry about cleaning up the mess later. Kessler syndrome is mainly only a concern in higher orbits anyway. In lower orbits there's enough atmospheric drag that anything not periodically boosted will re-enter within a few years. Combatants will have to consider satellites to be expendable anyway so they'll go ahead and launch replacements even if expected lifetime is very short. Even in if there's a lot of debris in orbit, it will take a while on average for any individual satellite to get hit. This is absolutely nothing like MAD. Satellites have to be destroyed one at a time, and that involves little or no loss of human life or national infrastructure. In fact, I predict that if the USA gets into a major shooting war with China or Russia, satellites will be among the first targets on both sides.
- ElectricalUnion 4y ago
  > Concerns about Kessler syndrome won't stop combatants from using anti-satellite weapons. When national (or regime) survival is at stake, they will shoot down adversary satellites and worry about cleaning up the mess later. This is a sad truth, people will shot first, and then when their own satellites get mass destroyed by the remnants of "the enemy satellites" they will notice something had gone terribly wrong. And once such condition is reached up, clearing up the mess is nearly impossible without international coordination on a very expensive project. > Kessler syndrome is mainly only a concern in higher orbits anyway. LEO satellites (most of them, specifically most military satellites) are very vulnerable to Kessler syndrome. > Even in if there's a lot of debris in orbit, it will take a while on average for any individual satellite to get hit. If it takes a while for it to get hit, then you haven't reached Kessler syndrome yet. > This is absolutely nothing like MAD. Satellites have to be destroyed one at a time Until they all suddenly turn collectively into space junk, because too much space junk is floating in space. > that involves little or no loss of human life or national infrastructure. I think that the very expensive satellites humans put in orbit is considered part of the national infrastructure.

nradov 4y ago

Concerns about Kessler syndrome won't stop combatants from using anti-satellite weapons. When national (or regime) survival is at stake, they will shoot down adversary satellites and worry about cleaning up the mess later. Kessler syndrome is mainly only a concern in higher orbits anyway. In lower orbits there's enough atmospheric drag that anything not periodically boosted will re-enter within a few years. Combatants will have to consider satellites to be expendable anyway so they'll go ahead and launch replacements even if expected lifetime is very short. Even in if there's a lot of debris in orbit, it will take a while on average for any individual satellite to get hit. This is absolutely nothing like MAD. Satellites have to be destroyed one at a time, and that involves little or no loss of human life or national infrastructure. In fact, I predict that if the USA gets into a major shooting war with China or Russia, satellites will be among the first targets on both sides.

ElectricalUnion 4y ago
> Concerns about Kessler syndrome won't stop combatants from using anti-satellite weapons. When national (or regime) survival is at stake, they will shoot down adversary satellites and worry about cleaning up the mess later. This is a sad truth, people will shot first, and then when their own satellites get mass destroyed by the remnants of "the enemy satellites" they will notice something had gone terribly wrong. And once such condition is reached up, clearing up the mess is nearly impossible without international coordination on a very expensive project. > Kessler syndrome is mainly only a concern in higher orbits anyway. LEO satellites (most of them, specifically most military satellites) are very vulnerable to Kessler syndrome. > Even in if there's a lot of debris in orbit, it will take a while on average for any individual satellite to get hit. If it takes a while for it to get hit, then you haven't reached Kessler syndrome yet. > This is absolutely nothing like MAD. Satellites have to be destroyed one at a time Until they all suddenly turn collectively into space junk, because too much space junk is floating in space. > that involves little or no loss of human life or national infrastructure. I think that the very expensive satellites humans put in orbit is considered part of the national infrastructure.