"Destabilising" Russian Space Threat

[Byeman]

I think the problem for Russia is that the U.S. is about to orbit a brand new space architecture that gives it a huge information overmatch, on top of its existing superior ISR and communication capabilities. The U.S. has launches for ~200 Tracking and Transport layer satellites in the next ~15 months on the books, and the NRO likely will add 100-200 of its Starshield based platforms in the same timeframe. The capability that brings, along with the resilience of such a large constellation, required an asymmetrical response.

Huh? Not even a 10th of that amount.

 

[Forest Green]

These are not predictions, I'm reading the manual: universities in May 1968, the oil crisis of 1973, peace talks in Paris after losing the Vietnam War... I hope that at least this time there will be no terrorism at the Olympic Games, because it is also in the manual.It's all in the history books and newspaper archives.

Well, we've gone off track here, the US isn't physically involved in Ukraine, so that makes it fundamentally different to the Vietnam War, unless you replace the US with Russia in the Vietnam analogy.

 

[edwest4]

Well, we've gone off track here, the US isn't physically involved in Ukraine, so that makes it fundamentally different to the Vietnam War, unless you replace the US with Russia in the Vietnam analogy.

The U.S. is helping to fund the war in Ukraine. Just like Vietnam, President Kennedy was willing to send money and equipment but no ground troops. Same thing with Ukraine.

 

[Forest Green]

The U.S. is helping to fund the war in Ukraine. Just like Vietnam, President Kennedy was willing to send money and equipment but no ground troops. Same thing with Ukraine.

Yeah, and the USSR and Chinese were helping fund/supply the NVA during the Vietnam War, so the analogy still works better the other way around.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Well, we've gone off track here, the US isn't physically involved in Ukraine, so that makes it fundamentally different to the Vietnam War, unless you replace the US with Russia in the Vietnam analogy.

I find the current situation fascinating, history never repeats itself in the same way, even if they try to redirect it. The weaknesses of the Western world are the same as they were in 1968: middle-class families making great sacrifices to pay for their children's college, divided Europe, and the United States with the same old racial problems. Russia's strategy is also the same: to amplify already existing problems in order to disguise its weakness. I wonder what will happen this time: Twenty years of terrorism and fifty years of socialism followed by the fall of the wall? A new Russia that is more integrated into Europe? A new isolationist America? At least one thing hasn't worked as it did in 1973: oil isn't going up in price.

 

[Justo Miranda]

To quote Niels Bohr:
'It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future'.

The Germans knew that Niels Bohr was going to be flown from Sweden to Scotland in a BOAC De Havilland Mosquito Mk. VI and sent two Fw 190 A-5/U2N fighters from the Aalborg-based Nachtjagdkommando 190 to intercept him. The scientist spent most of the trip almost unconscious due to lack of oxygen, unaware that the Mosquito's crew had orders to throw him into the sea if his plane was intercepted. When, years later, someone told him how close he had come to dying, he realized that the predictions of both sides had failed.

 

[Forest Green]

I find the current situation fascinating, history never repeats itself in the same way, even if they try to redirect it. The weaknesses of the Western world are the same as they were in 1968: middle-class families making great sacrifices to pay for their children's college, divided Europe, and the United States with the same old racial problems. Russia's strategy is also the same: to amplify already existing problems in order to disguise its weakness. I wonder what will happen this time: Twenty years of terrorism and fifty years of socialism followed by the fall of the wall? A new Russia that is more integrated into Europe? A new isolationist America? At least one thing hasn't worked as it did in 1973: oil isn't going up in price.

You talk about Western problems as if Russia has none. You think it has no racial problems or poverty? They do it's just that protests tend not to be allowed. Divided Europe? Not really, there's Orban being Orban and that's about it. The only real similarity with 1968 is that Russia is invading and annexing a European country again, last time it was Czechoslovakia, this time it's Ukraine. In 1968 it took less than 2 days, this time its over 2 years and counting.

 

[Josh_TN]

Huh? Not even a 10th of that amount.

Your mileage may differ.


my edit (ON ORBIT):

0 Transport 20 York Space Systems, Lockheed Martin
0 Tracking 8 SpaceX, L3Harris

my edit (TO ORBIT INSIDE THE NEXT YEAR-ish):

1 Transport 126 York Space Systems, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman
1 Tracking 35 L3Harris, Northrop Gumman, Raytheon
1 Demo 12 York Space Systems

my edit (ON CONTRACT FOR ORBIT BY THE END OF 2027)

2 Transport 72 Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin
2 Transport 100 York Space Systems, TBA
2 Transport 44 (approx.) TBA
2 Tracking 52 (approx.) TBA
2 Demo 20 (approx.) TBA

SDA Awards Deal to York for 62 More LEO Satellites

The Space Development Agency (SDA) awarded a $615 million contract to York Space Systems for 62 satellites for its PWSA constellation.

www.airandspaceforces.com

known Falcon 9 SDA launches explicitly associated with Tranche 1 vehicles:


September 2024[379] F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Tracking layer T1TL-B[380] Polar LEO SDA

October 2024[379] F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Tracking layer T1TL-C[380] Polar LEO SDA

November 2024[379] F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Tracking layer T1TL-D[380] Polar LEO SDA

December 2024[379] F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Tracking layer T1TL-E[380] Polar LEO SDA

Q4 2024[379] F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T1TR-C[380] Polar LEO SDA

~2025 F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T1TL-F[451][452] Polar LEO SDA
Launch is part of Phase 2 US Air Force contract awarded in 2022.
~2025 F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T1TR-A[451][452] Polar LEO SDA
Launch is part of Phase 2 US Air Force contract awarded in 2022.
~2025 F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T1TR-E[451][452] Polar LEO SDA
Launch is part of Phase 2 US Air Force contract awarded in 2022.
~2025 F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T2TL-A[451][452] Polar LEO SDA
Launch is part of Phase 2 US Air Force contract awarded in 2022.
~2025 F9 B5 VSFB,
SLC-4E SDA Tranche 1 Transport layer T2TL-C[451][452] Polar LEO SDA


The above list excludes NROL launches and several LEO launches by the SDA that are not explicit about their payloads.

List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Flyaway]

In February, White House officials asserted that Russia is developing a space-based anti-satellite system that would violate the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in orbit. They later confirmed media speculation that the system in question is a nuclear weapon. Part 1 of this article summarizes what has been revealed about the alleged weapon so far and attempts to chart academic and laboratory research on nuclear explosions in space done in Russia in recent years. It also examines a Russian satellite launch that the US believes is related to the development of the weapon. Part 2 will explore Russian work on alternative directed-energy weapon systems that would mimic some of the effects of nuclear explosions in space without having the same devastating consequences.

The Space Review: Russian research on space nukes and alternative counterspace weapons (part 1)

 

[Flyaway]

Here’s another new relevant article.

Countering constellations: Nuke the entire site in orbit!

What would a high-altitude nuclear explosion do to satellites? A review of the many damage mechanisms

satelliteobservation.net

 

[Forest Green]

One semi-passive way of countering such a device would be to posion the warhead with neutron radiation from a particle beam or such. Of course with a more powerful particle beam you could destroy the satellite, or the LV without leaving any evidence of who done it.

 

[Josh_TN]

Once semi-passive way of countering such a device would be to posion the warhead with neutron radiation from a particle beam or such. Of course with a more powerful particle beam you could destroy the satellite, or the LV without leaving any evidence of who done it.

I would think killing the electronics of such a device a lot easier than directly effecting the warhead. But probably the biggest issue is positively identifying the payload in the first place.

 

[Forest Green]

I would think killing the electronics of such a device a lot easier than directly effecting the warhead. But probably the biggest issue is positively identifying the payload in the first place.

Radiation should give it away. Need to carry out in-space inspections using nearby satellites. Intelligence may also give it away, or at least narrow it down to a select few, which would then all have to be neutroned.

 

[publiusr]

Here’s another new relevant article.

Countering constellations: Nuke the entire site in orbit!

What would a high-altitude nuclear explosion do to satellites? A review of the many damage mechanisms

satelliteobservation.net

This is another reason I liked the concept of orbital antenna farms... very large assets with huge dishes that could perhaps be moved higher up via solar thermal that can only get better:

Large Satellite – The Unwanted Blog

Scientists generate heat over 1,000 degrees Celsius with solar power instead of fossil fuel

Instead of burning fossil fuels to smelt steel and cook cement, researchers in Switzerland want to use heat from the sun. The proof-of-concept study, published May 15 in the journal Device, uses synthetic quartz to trap solar energy at temperatures over 1,000°C (1,832°F), demonstrating the...

www.eurekalert.org

Simple, rugged...just switch out breadboards.

Latency would suffer, but would be innately rad-hardened.

The article says the effects could be negligible.

If you have a big asset with heavy dishes that don't need replacing, then satellite servicing makes sense.

Space assets need to be more rugged:

Strategic Defense: Military Uses of the Moon & Asteroids (1983)

On the evening of 23 March 1983, President Ronald Reagan addressed the people of the United States from the Oval Office. Citing aggressive moves on the part of the Soviet Union, he defended proposed increases in U.S. military spending and the introduction of new missiles and bombers. He then...

www.wired.com

 

[Forest Green]

Russia accuses US of seeking to place weapons in space

Moscow (AFP) May 21, 2024 - Russia on Tuesday said the United States was seeking to place weapons in space, the latest accusation in an ongoing row that comes a day after Washington vetoed a Russian non-proliferation motion at the United Nations.

www.spacewar.com

 

[Justo Miranda]

An increase in the sun's magnetic activity is expected in the coming weeks. Fortunately, we all know that there are no nuclear weapons in orbit that could be activated by CME radiation.

 

[Dilandu]

An increase in the sun's magnetic activity is expected in the coming weeks. Fortunately, we all know that there are no nuclear weapons in orbit that could be activated by CME radiation.

If you think that nuclear weapon could be detonated by solar radiation, I strongly recommend you to go back to middle school and repeat the physics course.

 

[Justo Miranda]

If you think that nuclear weapon could be detonated by solar radiation, I strongly recommend you to go back to middle school and repeat the physics course.

Detonated? By no means, when I used the word activate did I mean that radiation could affect their re-entry systems into the atmosphere.

Carrington Event - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fortunately, those things that might fall on the Campi Flegrei or Yellowstone exist only in the imagination of Hollywood screenwriters. No one would be crazy enough to do something like that in real life.

 

[Dilandu]

Detonated? By no means, when I used the word activate did I mean that radiation could affect their re-entry systems into the atmosphere.

For what possible reason the nuclear orbital mine - and if I understood correctly, this whole tread is about such - may need any kind of re-entry system?

 

[Forest Green]

For what possible reason the nuclear orbital mine - and if I understood correctly, this whole tread is about such - may need any kind of re-entry system?

Because its host satellite was knocked off course, or maybe said event just upsets the the anti-tamper fuse, and triggers a war. It's a bad idea to be callous with space and putting a nuke in orbit is as callous as it gets.

For what possible reason the nuclear orbital mine - and if I understood correctly, this whole tread is about such - may need any kind of re-entry system?

If a nuclear weapon is put in space, who's to know the nature or intended purpose of it?

 

[Justo Miranda]

For what possible reason the nuclear orbital mine - and if I understood correctly, this whole tread is about such - may need any kind of re-entry system?

Fractional Orbital Bombardment System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Justo Miranda]

Because its host satellite was knocked off course, or maybe said event just upsets the the anti-tamper fuse, and triggers a war. It's a bad idea to be callous with space and putting a nuke in orbit is as callous as it gets.

Insurance companies can't guarantee the survival of a dictator, but the word nuclear has done it for half a century.

 

[Dilandu]

Because its host satellite was knocked off course, or maybe said event just upsets the the anti-tamper fuse, and triggers a war.

Sigh. Do you have any understanding how nuclear weapon works? It require a series of fuzes working in perfect order to produce implosion and nuclear blast. If "anti-tamper fuse" would be activated, all you would have is a small chemical explosion and some radioactive dust on orbit.

Seriously, even by laughable standards of this particuarly laughable tread, this is too much.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Sigh. Do you have any understanding how nuclear weapon works? It require a series of fuzes working in perfect order to produce implosion and nuclear blast. If "anti-tamper fuse" would be activated, all you would have is a small chemical explosion and some radioactive dust on orbit.

Seriously, even by laughable standards of this particuarly laughable tread, this is too much.

It would be tragic if the trigger for nuclear war were a natural phenomenon, but it is a more likely option than a political decision. If Tungushka had fallen on Moscow during the Cuban missile crisis, no one would have believed astronomers

 

[Forest Green]

Sigh. Do you have any understanding how nuclear weapon works? It require a series of fuzes working in perfect order to produce implosion and nuclear blast. If "anti-tamper fuse" would be activated, all you would have is a small chemical explosion and some radioactive dust on orbit.

Seriously, even by laughable standards of this particuarly laughable tread, this is too much.

Lot of optimistic assumptions about the unknown here. Ar ethe really going to design an anti-tamper fuse that simply neutralises the satellite with a chemical explosion if it's tampered with? If so it would be fantastic, but it would also somewhat defeat the purpose of said fuse.

It would be tragic if the trigger for nuclear war were a natural phenomenon, but it is a more likely option than a political decision. If Tungushka had fallen on Moscow during the Cuban missile crisis, no one would have believed astronomers

A US bomber carrying a H-Bomb crashed in the 1950s and only a faulty fuse stopped it exploding.

 

[Forest Green]

Pentagon says Russia launched space weapon in path of US satellite

Washington (AFP) May 22, 2024 - Russia has launched a likely space weapon and deployed it in the same orbit as a US government satellite, the Pentagon said.

www.spacewar.com

 

[TsrJoe]

Would this thread be better placed in 'theoretical' or the 'bar' due to its speculative nature ?

 

[Justo Miranda]

Pentagon says Russia launched space weapon in path of US satellite

Washington (AFP) May 22, 2024 - Russia has launched a likely space weapon and deployed it in the same orbit as a US government satellite, the Pentagon said.

www.spacewar.com

spacewar?

 

[Forest Green]

Is Russia's Cosmos 2553 satellite a test for a future orbital nuclear weapon? - Breaking Defense

Breaking Defense was given exclusive space tracking information showing the unique path of the Russian system, one experts say is the reason for US government warnings about space-based nuclear weapons.

breakingdefense.com

 

[Dilandu]

Would this thread be better placed in 'theoretical' or the 'bar' due to its speculative nature ?

Long overdue, from my point of view.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Lot of optimistic assumptions about the unknown here. Ar ethe really going to design an anti-tamper fuse that simply neutralises the satellite with a chemical explosion if it's tampered with? If so it would be fantastic, but it would also somewhat defeat the purpose of said fuse.

Implosion nukes are really, really picky about how they have to be squeezed to work. Do you remember the movie "Peacemaker" starring George Clooney? At the climax, the nuke is in a city somewhere (been like 25 years since I watched it) and Clooney's character pries one of the explosive charges out of the "soccer ball". Then he and the love interest run like hell to get clear of the blast area. No nuclear boom, but one hell of a mess with plutonium dust everywhere. That's really how it'd work.

All it'd take to anti-tamper a nuke is to fire one charge in the lens out of time. even if the other charges detonated sympathetically, the implosion wouldn't be even and at best/worst it'd fizzle for a small % of the rated yield. The most likely result would be no fission at all and dust and fragments of the satellite everywhere.

A US bomber carrying a H-Bomb crashed in the 1950s and only a faulty fuse stopped it exploding.

1950s fuze, not modern PALs. Remember, the US gave the Russians PAL tech because it makes the "Rogue Officer Causing Nuclear Launch" basically impossible. And not just the assembled Permissive Action Links, but the full technical data package so they'd understand how the things work.

IIRC it's also been offered to the UK, China, India, Pakistan, and France. All the nuclear countries.

 

[bobbymike]

Clooney’s love interest was a high level government nuclear weapons physicist who was key to stopping the terrorist plot.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Clooney’s love interest was a high level government nuclear weapons physicist who was key to stopping the terrorist plot.

Sadly tells you how memorable her part was in the story...

 

[Forest Green]

Implosion nukes are really, really picky about how they have to be squeezed to work. Do you remember the movie "Peacemaker" starring George Clooney? At the climax, the nuke is in a city somewhere (been like 25 years since I watched it) and Clooney's character pries one of the explosive charges out of the "soccer ball". Then he and the love interest run like hell to get clear of the blast area. No nuclear boom, but one hell of a mess with plutonium dust everywhere. That's really how it'd work.

All it'd take to anti-tamper a nuke is to fire one charge in the lens out of time. even if the other charges detonated sympathetically, the implosion wouldn't be even and at best/worst it'd fizzle for a small % of the rated yield. The most likely result would be no fission at all and dust and fragments of the satellite everywhere.

That was a movie, but if that's how it works, then it removes all concerns about destroying it.

 

[Josh_TN]

It would not be difficult to create a fuse system that would detonate upon impact.

 

[Forest Green]

It would not be difficult to create a fuse system that would detonate upon impact.

But then you have the problem of a solar storm or debris impact setting it off. So it's damned either way.

 

[Josh_TN]

But then you have the problem of a solar storm or debris impact setting it off. So it's damned either way.

There certainly is risk involved, but presumably a satellite could have a number of systems and checks to confirm an engagement. Otherwise it seems likely that it would simply be shot down at the first opportunity once it was detected.

 

[NTKV]

There certainly is risk involved, but presumably a satellite could have a number of systems and checks to confirm an engagement. Otherwise it seems likely that it would simply be shot down at the first opportunity once it was detected.

There isn’t a nuclear-armed country moronic enough to put a nuke on a hair trigger in orbit.

The easiest way to engage it is functionally identical to a space debris impact, which could happen by complete chance.

Also, what if it goes off over your or an ally’s territory? If you deactivate it then, that’s a perfect time to destroy it. If not, you could get EMP’d.

In general, leaving nukes in space long term is a dumb idea, but it would have to be command detonated.

Overall, it being destroyed is absolutely better that it going off unexpectedly. The method of defending it would have to be threats about what you do if it is targeted or more realistically hoping people don’t realize it is a space nuke, but that does ruin the deterrence value.

All in all it’s the sort of thing that would put you on everyone’s shit list.

 

[Josh_TN]

Never the less, I consider it likely that the reports of a Russian system of this type are more likely accurate than not. Russia is being completely overwhelmed in space compared to either China or the U.S., and the U.S. is about to drastically increase its military constellation over the next year. Creating a system that would negate all of these at once is quite honestly logical for Russia.

 

[Scott Kenny]

That was a movie, but if that's how it works, then it removes all concerns about destroying it.

Yes, that really is how it works, the implosion lens is the single hardest part to get right. The slightest misalignment or mis-timing of the conventional explosives will result in a non-nuclear boom or a fizzle at best.

Never the less, I consider it likely that the reports of a Russian system of this type are more likely accurate than not. Russia is being completely overwhelmed in space compared to either China or the U.S., and the U.S. is about to drastically increase its military constellation over the next year. Creating a system that would negate all of these at once is quite honestly logical for Russia.

Leaving a nuke in orbit to do that is a Very Bad Idea.