3 ms·
> You can shoot it down with a missile. Obviously a bad idea, but frying it with some sort of high powered electromagnetic pulse would seem the smartest option
by nutjob2 4mo ago
> You can shoot it down with a missile.
Obviously a bad idea, but frying it with some sort of high powered electromagnetic pulse would seem the smartest option with plausible deniability.
I wonder if the US already has such weapons in orbit.
- raverbashing 4mo agoKessler event oops, you know. I guess I know someone with several disposable satellites, I wonder if they could be bothered (but I guess not)
- stef25 4mo ago> frying it with some sort of high powered electromagnetic pulse would seem the smartest option with plausible deniability Realistically, how many people could do this ?
- picofarad 4mo agoIf you gave me a million dollars, I could do it. Someone else would have to aim it, but it shouldn't be that hard to do.
- mkj 4mo agoFrom what distance? I would have thought $1M wouldn't go far
- thesuitonym 4mo agoThis is not something individuals should be doing.
- jldugger 4mo agoBut it's also not really plausibly deniable if there's only one actor with the means and motive to do it.
- M95D 4mo agoI assume that satellites have protection against that - because of solar flares.
- colechristensen 4mo agoX37-B it's a tiny robot space shuttle launched by the military. Why WOUDLN'T one of its possible payloads be an electronic warfare package? Go up to an adversarial satellite, do some signals intelligence capturing things, have a jamming package, or a stronger EM output to fry circuits.