Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 64,127
Probably not. For space-based interceptors to give you good coverage, you would need a huge swarm of them, because it does you no good to have an anti-ballistic satellite in an orbit far away from the missile you're trying to hit. And you don't have time to reposition satellites for an ICBM intercept either. More likely is weapons to disable/destroy enemy satellites. When you're targeting another satellite, you have time to hunt it down, so it's much easier to get effective coverage.Probably an ICBM interceptor prototype of some kind, either energy or kinetic. Assuming it actually went up at all.
That depends. Low-earth orbits decay on their own relatively quickly, you don't really need to worry about Kessler Syndrome. For example, at Starlink altitudes, you might get a chain reaction, but it would mostly clear up within a year or two.using anti-satellite weapons is, of course, very much a nuclear option, as the debris from such an attack would damage other satellites indiscriminately, potentially causing a Kessler Syndrome that would take out most satellites.
There are a few possible options for anti-satellite weapons. Some of them will produce debris, but that's not a hard requirement. There are ways to disable or degrade a satellite without breaking it apart. An EMP could fry its communications, a laser might blind or otherwise disable it, but you don't necessarily even need to damage it. If you simply block the view of a spy satellite, or hell, cover the solar panels with a trash bag, it's not going to work anymore. Both China and the US have been very interested in satellites that can navigate around other satellites (ie, approach them at a slow speed, not just slam into them) for a reason.A high energy laser could blind a satellite without producing debris.
Last edited: