> > You don't have to be a space opera science fiction reader to have > heard about space warfare or space-to-planet bombardment ... or do > you?
Let me add Jerry Pournelle's idea of a THOR space defense system summarized below http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/mega.html (I have mentioned this on the list a number of times, with some fair criticism). This was written in '94. Let me note that the GPS systems of today are dirt cheap, as well as the telemetry and tracking technology. Note the last line before the summary- "Space supremacy can be used as a powerful instrument of international blackmail." . I am not talking about the US being the blacklister. It only takes multi-stage rockets to implement this technology. I don't think that a Missile Defense System can defeat this. Our only defense is to knock them out of orbit before they are used (hence my mention of this in this thread). Moreover, space supremacy can probably be converted to air and sea supremacy. As an example for discussion, consider the system this author has described under the name "THOR". Thor consists of orbiting steel rods perhaps 20 feet long by one foot in diameter. They contain minimal terminal guidance capability, and a means of locating themselves and their targets through GPS. They can strike fixed targets with CEP approaching 25 feet. Few elements of air and naval power are invulnerable to bombardment by kinetic energy weapons from space. No ship can withstand the impact of 20 feet of steel rod at velocities greater than 12,000 feet per second. Airfields won't fare much better. The major cost of Thor and other more likely space bombardment systems is the launch cost. Thor also requires intact GPS and space observation systems. Costs of both are driven largely by launch costs. A great many potentially decisive weapons come to mind given low cost access to space. Low cost access to space is a matter of technological development, not of breakthroughs. It takes about the same amount of fuel to fly a pound from Los Angeles to Australia as it does to put that pound in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). There is no intrinsic reason why space lift costs should exceed airlift costs by more than a small multiple, if at all. The United States is not the only nation capable of developing systems capable of routine economical access to (LEO), nor is there any reason to suppose that every nation that develops that capability will be devoted to peace. Space supremacy can be used as a powerful instrument of international blackmail. In summary: spacepower will be as decisive in 20 years as airpower was in 1940, and development of key space technologies is as important for our future as development of aircraft technologies was in 1920. A vital element of future spacepower will be capability for routine and economical access to space. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
