4 ms·

Does Kessler syndrome also mean ICBMs become nonviable?

• Dylan16807 9mo ago
  No. It's not a wall. The risk from going through a dangerous orbit is much much less than the risk from staying there.
  • goku12 9mo ago
    That depends on how you define risk. If it means the probability of a collision, then you'd be correct. But if a collision does happen, the consequences will be worse than being in the same orbit. Based on an oversimplified model, debris in orbit is likely to have low relative velocities with respect to an intact satellite in the same orbit, since a large deltav would change the orbit. (It's not as simple as this, but it's good enough in practice.) This is actually what asat weapons take advantage of. They usually don't even reach orbital velocity, just like ballistic missiles (of course, there are exceptions like the golden dome monstrosity). The kill vehicle just maneuvers itself into the path of the satellite and lets the satellite plough into it at hypervelocity.
• gpderetta 9mo ago
  I remember a short story about Canada preventing total global annihilation in WWIII, by deliberately triggering Kessler syndrome. My google-fu is failing me though.
  • iberator 9mo ago
    I would love to read it:)