5 ms·

Does it account for commandeering spacex and corresponding space armament? Naval projection vs orbital projection seems like a good thing to measure.

Teever 2y ago
As I understand it SpaceX has launched 500 rockets and many of these rockets were reusable so the number of rockets that they've manufactured over the 25 years that they've been in business is far less than 500. If you take a look at page 8 of this pdf[0] you'll see that the wargames predict that hundreds of missiles will be used in the first few weeks of an engagement between China and the US over Taiwan. Page 10 will curdle your blood as you'll see that they anticipate to lose dozens of ships including two(!) aircraft carriers. Page 11 shows hundreds of losses of various aircraft. SpaceX will not save those lives and they will not be able to replace the equipment in time for a second engagement with China. Take a look at a previous comment that I wrote about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391816 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391816 [0] https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/CSIS%20Simulation%20Results.pdf https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites...
- weard_beard 2y ago
  I read your comment and the pdf and I guess my question is answered. “No, we did not consider asymmetric and possibly massively impactful scenarios like control of low earth orbit munitions deployed on a massive scale.”
  - Teever 2y ago
    I interpreted your question as asking if the US could use SpaceX's rocket manufacturing capacity to produce ICBMs that could be used to hit Chinese ships. Now that I see that this was not what you're suggesting I don't think that two years is a sufficient time frame to build, test, and deploy the kinds of weapons that you're suggesting. It seems like America is sleep walking into a horrible conflict with China and this combined with all of the soft power that America is losing in the past few months doesn't bode well for the outcome of this conflict.
    - weard_beard 2y ago
      That’s where I’d start looking for advantage.
  - hedora 2y ago
    It’s not particularly asymmetric. China has ICBMS and is upwind from the US. It’s hard to imagine non-civilization-ending conflicts where dropping space rocks on China comes into play.
    - weard_beard 2y ago
      Imagine harder.
      - Teever 2y ago
        Can you describe in greater detail what you're imagining?
        weard_beard 2y ago
        Not for free and not in the span of a post, no. I’d love to do it over 6 months for 5 million dollars with a team of 6
        Teever 2y ago
        "I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain."
        weard_beard 2y ago
        Not at all. I believe the US government has already studied this, published the outcome, and probably knows anything I or most teams of experts could. I think it’s in a drawer somewhere labeled, “For use in case of war with China under US dictator” but if we need to pretend it’s new information I’m offering my services.
        Teever 2y ago
        The question isn't whether or not the US has the technical means sitting somewhere in a drawer to do this, the question is whether or not they have the industrial capacity and political will to do this in the time frame needed to avert losing dozens of ships and hundreds of aircraft as well as the lives of tens of thousands of soldiers. The answer to that question unfortunately appears to be 'no.'

Teever 2y ago

As I understand it SpaceX has launched 500 rockets and many of these rockets were reusable so the number of rockets that they've manufactured over the 25 years that they've been in business is far less than 500. If you take a look at page 8 of this pdf[0] you'll see that the wargames predict that hundreds of missiles will be used in the first few weeks of an engagement between China and the US over Taiwan. Page 10 will curdle your blood as you'll see that they anticipate to lose dozens of ships including two(!) aircraft carriers. Page 11 shows hundreds of losses of various aircraft. SpaceX will not save those lives and they will not be able to replace the equipment in time for a second engagement with China. Take a look at a previous comment that I wrote about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391816 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391816 [0] https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/CSIS%20Simulation%20Results.pdf https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites...

weard_beard 2y ago
I read your comment and the pdf and I guess my question is answered. “No, we did not consider asymmetric and possibly massively impactful scenarios like control of low earth orbit munitions deployed on a massive scale.”
- Teever 2y ago
  I interpreted your question as asking if the US could use SpaceX's rocket manufacturing capacity to produce ICBMs that could be used to hit Chinese ships. Now that I see that this was not what you're suggesting I don't think that two years is a sufficient time frame to build, test, and deploy the kinds of weapons that you're suggesting. It seems like America is sleep walking into a horrible conflict with China and this combined with all of the soft power that America is losing in the past few months doesn't bode well for the outcome of this conflict.
  - weard_beard 2y ago
    That’s where I’d start looking for advantage.
- hedora 2y ago
  It’s not particularly asymmetric. China has ICBMS and is upwind from the US. It’s hard to imagine non-civilization-ending conflicts where dropping space rocks on China comes into play.
  - weard_beard 2y ago
    Imagine harder.
    - Teever 2y ago
      Can you describe in greater detail what you're imagining?
      - weard_beard 2y ago
        Not for free and not in the span of a post, no. I’d love to do it over 6 months for 5 million dollars with a team of 6
        Teever 2y ago
        "I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain."
        weard_beard 2y ago
        Not at all. I believe the US government has already studied this, published the outcome, and probably knows anything I or most teams of experts could. I think it’s in a drawer somewhere labeled, “For use in case of war with China under US dictator” but if we need to pretend it’s new information I’m offering my services.
        Teever 2y ago
        The question isn't whether or not the US has the technical means sitting somewhere in a drawer to do this, the question is whether or not they have the industrial capacity and political will to do this in the time frame needed to avert losing dozens of ships and hundreds of aircraft as well as the lives of tens of thousands of soldiers. The answer to that question unfortunately appears to be 'no.'