4 ms·
So what happens when you intercept and blow up an ICBM in the atmosphere? Not good things, I think.
by JohnMakin 2y ago
So what happens when you intercept and blow up an ICBM in the atmosphere? Not good things, I think.
- sargun 2y agoDepends on where it blows up, but if you hit it at its apogee, a lot of it will burn up in the atmophere.
- phkahler 2y ago>> if you hit it at its apogee, a lot of it will burn up in the atmophere. Having several pounds of plutonium burn up in the atmosphere just means it will be spread over a very wide area which is much worse than a chunk of it falling somewhere.
- 8372049 2y agoPu-239 is not particularly dangerous, however. It can cause cancer if inhaled in sufficient quantities — which doesn't need much, but is unlikely if it's scattered in the atmosphere. U-235 is basically harmless.
- CapitalistCartr 2y agoIf it's in the boost phase, it's over the enemy's country. If it's in reentry, it's only the RV (Reentry Vehicle). So some kg of Uranium or Plutonium gets scattered about, but that's it. Much better than vaporizing half a city.
- Retric 2y agoLight might in theory reach an ICBM in boost, but anything you launch is going to need to go through its own acceleration phase to possibly hit the ICBM. Further your ignoring submarines and early proximity detonation on the nukes. The most likely result of building such a system is an early nuclear EMP clearing orbit before the nukes get through anyway.
- throw9474 2y agoThe NAS study seems to think kinetic interceptors can reach the booster in minutes but yes it requires a kick stage for the delta V.
- Retric 2y agoThat seems optimistic in any sort of realistic scenario. The everything works perfectly and there’s one ICBM and nobody modifies anything as we start launching all this stuff into orbit, then maybe. How many satellites do you need to reach that kind of coverage? And how many interceptors per satellite to hit everything from one or more nuclear subs launching from the same location near a major city. How long does it take you to react without risking false positives making the system useless etc. The problem just gets ugly fast.
- forgot-im-old 2y agoThat study said 1600 satellites are needed in a Delta Walker configuration (same as Starlink, but Starlink has more satellites already). The number of interceptors per satellite was unclear but this USAF captain said "composite rocket motor and micro-missile system capable of fielding a rocket pod of 100 interceptors at a cost of approximately $60,000 per micro-missile" https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Wild-Blue-Yonder/Article-Display/Article/2673038/cots-and-space-based-missile-defense/ https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Wild-Blue-Yonder/Article-Di...
- Hayvok 2y agoIf you mean the subsequent detonation of an ICBM in the atmosphere, I think we are in uncharted waters there. The expert discussions of what effect the atmosphere-EMP would be is fascinating/horrifying to read.
- 8372049 2y agoAn intercepted warhead would highly likely not explode.
- throwup238 2y agoI mean... It's better than the ICBM warhead detonating. Really any of the nuclear material will just disperse into the atmosphere relatively harmlessly, especially if it's somewhere over an ocean. Plutonium in seawater measures in the parts per billion anyway.
- hollerith 2y agoThe adverse effects are trivial compared to the other possible effects of an ICBM launch.
- Cody-99 2y agoThe plutonium, uranium, and other high explosives fall back to earth. Pretty tame compared to what happens if you fail to intercept!
- temporalparts 2y agoNothing notably bad happens. Nuclear explosions are highly sensitive and engineered events. If you destroy the ignition mechanism, then it will become a dud. FWIW, there has been a number of nuclear explosion tests in our atmosphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
- pajko 2y agoThe first few ICBMs are expected to be detonated in the atmosphere to cause an EMP wave to kill the communication, including nearby satellites. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse
- georgeg23 2y agoStudies I've seen are not so clear that an EMP would kill many satellites. They would raise radiation levels 10x over normal for few months, but most Starlink satellites would be fine (as seen in the last solar CME event).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- verdverm 2y agoThe US tested a nuke in space, dubbed Starfish Prime It took out 3 satellites initially (there were very few at the time) > In the months that followed, these man-made radiation belts eventually caused six or more satellites to fail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects
- 8372049 2y agoPu-239 and U-235, the most common elements in nukes, are not very radioactive. Both alpha decay, meaning they're only really dangerous if inhaled as dust (or if they fission, obviously). Pu-239 has a half-life of around 24k years iirc, while U-235 is over 700 million years.