4 ms·

>> Did we build this so we can nuke anybody on the planet at any time? This was actually a concern with the space shuttle! I suppose it could be a concern for

>> Did we build this so we can nuke anybody on the planet at any time? This was actually a concern with the space shuttle! I suppose it could be a concern for any spacecraft that can carry a payload into orbit. I’m not sure what value there’d be in dropping one or two nukes on an enemy. Any nuclear capable power would not be disabled by a few nukes going off, they’d know who dropped they nukes, and they could retaliate. If we had 10K nukes in orbit and could synchronize them to blanket a country & disable its nuclear response capability, maybe that would be worth something if the other side didn’t also fill space with nukes (which they would).

bryanlarsen 2y ago
> it could be a concern for any spacecraft that can carry a payload into orbit. No, it's only a concern for spacecraft with significant cross range capability, like Shuttle and X37B. All other spacecraft have predictable trajectories, like ICBM's. The upcoming generation of hypersonics are worse: they are significantly harder to detect on top of speed and maneuverability.
- dingaling 2y ago
  Cross-range applies within the atmosphere, not in orbit. Once in orbit, spaceplanes have no less predictable orbits than anything else with fuel and restartable motors. For the X-37 to deliver on a surprising vector it would have to sacrifice itself by deorbiting and manoeuvring, which I suppose is feasible. But modern MaRVs also have some re-entry cross-range and HGVs considerably more.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    If you read TFA you'll see that the x-37b does have "cross-range" capabilities in orbit. It has enough fuel for some orbit changes, as reported in previous news, and in this instance it uses aerobraking to alter its orbit significantly at the cost of very little fuel.
triactual 2y ago
It would be for indefensible decapitation strikes. A world leader who would launch a surprise first strike is almost certainly narcissistic enough to be susceptible to blackmail by a threat on their own life. A world leader who is not concerned with their own life but that of their countrymen will likely not launch a surprise first strike and so MAD still works.

bryanlarsen 2y ago

> it could be a concern for any spacecraft that can carry a payload into orbit. No, it's only a concern for spacecraft with significant cross range capability, like Shuttle and X37B. All other spacecraft have predictable trajectories, like ICBM's. The upcoming generation of hypersonics are worse: they are significantly harder to detect on top of speed and maneuverability.

dingaling 2y ago
Cross-range applies within the atmosphere, not in orbit. Once in orbit, spaceplanes have no less predictable orbits than anything else with fuel and restartable motors. For the X-37 to deliver on a surprising vector it would have to sacrifice itself by deorbiting and manoeuvring, which I suppose is feasible. But modern MaRVs also have some re-entry cross-range and HGVs considerably more.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  If you read TFA you'll see that the x-37b does have "cross-range" capabilities in orbit. It has enough fuel for some orbit changes, as reported in previous news, and in this instance it uses aerobraking to alter its orbit significantly at the cost of very little fuel.

triactual 2y ago

It would be for indefensible decapitation strikes. A world leader who would launch a surprise first strike is almost certainly narcissistic enough to be susceptible to blackmail by a threat on their own life. A world leader who is not concerned with their own life but that of their countrymen will likely not launch a surprise first strike and so MAD still works.