4 ms·

Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though. You don’t need to disable the network, you don’t need cause a Kessler syndrome, you just need to

Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though. You don’t need to disable the network, you don’t need cause a Kessler syndrome, you just need to convince 1 billionaire that servicing a region is going to be met with force.

sigmoid10 3y ago
>Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM early warning system on the planet. And since Starlink is not one system but thousands, trying to disable their backbone functionality would seem like a nuclear first strike. Yes, some countries could probably do it. But you can't do it without being seen, so the risk and possible ramifications are infinitely higher than for undersee cables.
- bilbo0s 3y ago
  One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM warning system on the planet. Most of the world's great powers don't need to fire a missile into space to take out a satellite. They've already lifted that capability into orbit. I don't believe any of those powers would take out satellites willy nilly. I think it would take open direct military conflict. At the same time though, I didn't believe any of them would 'cross the Rubicon' with respect to undersea pipelines and internet cables either without direct open military conflict. So, yeah. Gonna be fun times in the future I guess?
  - 4gotunameagain 3y ago
    > They've already lifted that capability into orbit. source ?
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM early warning system on the planet. Rockets go into space all the time without triggering accidental nuclear war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_1408 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_1408 IIRC was blown up in an ASAT weapons test without any advance warning; nukes headed to DC/Moscow have a very different flight path than one looking to hit a Starlink node.
  - sigmoid10 3y ago
    Of course they don't trigger nuclear war, that wasn't the point. The point is that they trigger detection systems. We know exactly what happened to Kosmos 1408, including all actors and events, down to every minute. We even have a Wikipedia article listing all those details that you were able to dig up easily. Compare that to the undersee cables that got cut, where we will probably never know exactly what happened. If we cought someone red handed while destroying critical infrastructure, that would be a pretty good casus belli.
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      > If we cought someone red handed while destroying critical infrastructure, that would be a pretty good casus belli. We're not going to go to war because someone openly took out a Starlink node to send Musk a message. Not unless we were already going to do it for other reasons.
      - serf 3y ago
        I find that hard to believe. It's not that it's a message to Elon; that would be a message of air supremacy to the entire world. There is no way that wouldn't provoke a pretty drastic reaction of some sort from groups that seek to hold the title of 'owners of the sky'.
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        Case in point: Russians have taken down US drones in recent months. https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/us-military-video-drone-russian-jet/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/us-military-video-dr... No war. We send a grumpy note to their ambassador and just consider it a minor acceptable consequence of obliterating significant chunks of their armed forces in a proxy war elsewhere.
        sigmoid10 3y ago
        These US drones were operating in a theatre of war. Things would turn sour very quickly if they shot down civilian critical infrastructure far away from active warzones.
bryanlarsen 3y ago
It'll take a lot more than 1 missile to disable Starlink. I suppose 1 missile aimed at Hawthorne California might do it.
- arethuza 3y ago
  You don't need to disable the system in a technical sense, you just need to persuade management/ownership that it might be a good idea to take the hint.
rospaya 3y ago
> Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though I think one Elon Musk can make more damage to the service than one missile.
perihelions 3y ago
It's a distributed, self-healing satellite constellation: it'd take thousands of very expensive [a] missiles to dismantle it. That's one of the features that makes it so attractive for militaries. See, for example, Chinese military thinking in response to Starlink. They're fully aware they currently have no way to disable it (kinetically). Supposedly, they're putting a priority on figuring ways to do that, in a war. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3178939/china-military-needs-defence-against-potential-starlink-threat https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3178939/chin... (nb. this is Chinese media–based in Hong Kong) - "With more than 2,300 satellites – and counting – in orbit, Starlink is generally believed to be indestructible because the system can maintain proper functioning after losing some satellites." - "The unprecedented scale, complexity and flexibility of Starlink would force the Chinese military to develop new anti-satellite capabilities, according to Ren and his colleagues." [a] Here's what the US used for its anti-LEO-satellite test. Wikipedia says these cost about $10 million each. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3
- aunty_helen 3y ago
  Such an engineer take. There’s an xkcd about this that involves a wrench. Let me explain, “the Russians shot one of our satellites out of orbit and say they will continue if we keep providing internet to …, let’s stop” is much more likely than “1 down 2300 to go! Whoop”

sigmoid10 3y ago

>Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM early warning system on the planet. And since Starlink is not one system but thousands, trying to disable their backbone functionality would seem like a nuclear first strike. Yes, some countries could probably do it. But you can't do it without being seen, so the risk and possible ramifications are infinitely higher than for undersee cables.

bilbo0s 3y ago
One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM warning system on the planet. Most of the world's great powers don't need to fire a missile into space to take out a satellite. They've already lifted that capability into orbit. I don't believe any of those powers would take out satellites willy nilly. I think it would take open direct military conflict. At the same time though, I didn't believe any of them would 'cross the Rubicon' with respect to undersea pipelines and internet cables either without direct open military conflict. So, yeah. Gonna be fun times in the future I guess?
- 4gotunameagain 3y ago
  > They've already lifted that capability into orbit. source ?
ceejayoz 3y ago
> One missile going into space will trigger every single ICBM early warning system on the planet. Rockets go into space all the time without triggering accidental nuclear war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_1408 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_1408 IIRC was blown up in an ASAT weapons test without any advance warning; nukes headed to DC/Moscow have a very different flight path than one looking to hit a Starlink node.
- sigmoid10 3y ago
  Of course they don't trigger nuclear war, that wasn't the point. The point is that they trigger detection systems. We know exactly what happened to Kosmos 1408, including all actors and events, down to every minute. We even have a Wikipedia article listing all those details that you were able to dig up easily. Compare that to the undersee cables that got cut, where we will probably never know exactly what happened. If we cought someone red handed while destroying critical infrastructure, that would be a pretty good casus belli.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    > If we cought someone red handed while destroying critical infrastructure, that would be a pretty good casus belli. We're not going to go to war because someone openly took out a Starlink node to send Musk a message. Not unless we were already going to do it for other reasons.
    - serf 3y ago
      I find that hard to believe. It's not that it's a message to Elon; that would be a message of air supremacy to the entire world. There is no way that wouldn't provoke a pretty drastic reaction of some sort from groups that seek to hold the title of 'owners of the sky'.
      - ceejayoz 3y ago
        Case in point: Russians have taken down US drones in recent months. https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/us-military-video-drone-russian-jet/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/us-military-video-dr... No war. We send a grumpy note to their ambassador and just consider it a minor acceptable consequence of obliterating significant chunks of their armed forces in a proxy war elsewhere.
        sigmoid10 3y ago
        These US drones were operating in a theatre of war. Things would turn sour very quickly if they shot down civilian critical infrastructure far away from active warzones.

bryanlarsen 3y ago

It'll take a lot more than 1 missile to disable Starlink. I suppose 1 missile aimed at Hawthorne California might do it.

arethuza 3y ago
You don't need to disable the system in a technical sense, you just need to persuade management/ownership that it might be a good idea to take the hint.

rospaya 3y ago

> Starlink is always 1 missile away from being turned off though I think one Elon Musk can make more damage to the service than one missile.

perihelions 3y ago

It's a distributed, self-healing satellite constellation: it'd take thousands of very expensive [a] missiles to dismantle it. That's one of the features that makes it so attractive for militaries. See, for example, Chinese military thinking in response to Starlink. They're fully aware they currently have no way to disable it (kinetically). Supposedly, they're putting a priority on figuring ways to do that, in a war. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3178939/china-military-needs-defence-against-potential-starlink-threat https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3178939/chin... (nb. this is Chinese media–based in Hong Kong) - "With more than 2,300 satellites – and counting – in orbit, Starlink is generally believed to be indestructible because the system can maintain proper functioning after losing some satellites." - "The unprecedented scale, complexity and flexibility of Starlink would force the Chinese military to develop new anti-satellite capabilities, according to Ren and his colleagues." [a] Here's what the US used for its anti-LEO-satellite test. Wikipedia says these cost about $10 million each. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3

aunty_helen 3y ago
Such an engineer take. There’s an xkcd about this that involves a wrench. Let me explain, “the Russians shot one of our satellites out of orbit and say they will continue if we keep providing internet to …, let’s stop” is much more likely than “1 down 2300 to go! Whoop”