Supposedly we're working on capture and throw (into the sun or something) so we don't have space junk. We're weirdly sticking to being shy about weapons in space despite the treaty having been broken by russia almost immediately.

>>65078412
>Or do they have a weapon system already available for that task like the sm-3?
If the aim is just to kill satellites, the SM3 is good enough for 300-360 km.
If the aim is to disable without creating a cloud of hypersonic projectiles threathening operations in low orbit for everyone, means are limited.

>>65078412
>like the sm-3
We know that can reach at least a 247 km orbit and hit a satellite. . .but if the target was in a 300 or 400 km orbit it gets a lot more difficult.

>>65078412
If the US takes out a Chinese satellite, US satellites are on the menu for Russia (China).

>>65078429
China won't even force a blockade, they'll tuck and present like the little bitches they are.

>>65078422
>into the sun
It is massively harder to throw something into the Sun than it is to throw it out of the solar system (although we'd probably just throw it out of near Earth orbit). Solar escape velocity is like ~42 km/s while Earth is already orbiting at ~30 km/s. You only need to change velocity by 12 km/s faster to leave where as you'd need to change velocity by almost 30km/s to hit the Sun. Just chucking it out of useful Earth orbit is even easier.

>>65078422
>into the sun
It is massively harder to throw something into the Sun than it is to throw it out of the solar system (although we'd probably just throw it out of near Earth orbit). Solar escape velocity is like ~42 km/s while Earth is already orbiting at ~30 km/s. You only need to change velocity by 12 km/s faster to leave where as you'd need to change velocity by almost 30km/s to hit the Sun. Just chucking it out of useful Earth orbit is even easier.

>>65078445
>if a country doesn't immediately chimp out and start a war at the slightest setback, they're totally powerless
The russification of the board has been a disaster for the quality of discourse.

>>65078467
all you'd have to do is attach something tiny that continually produces an off axis impulse and the satellite is worthless because it would start tumbling uncontrollably and quickly saturate the targets moment control gyros and deplete its own fuel. A few kilograms of hydrazine escaping through a pinhole thruster would probably be enough, no need to toss it anywhere.

>>65078422
When I was a kid, the story going around was that the Shuttle was designed to snatch Soviet satellites from orbit and bring them back.

>>65078475
>The russification of the board has been a disaster for the quality of discourse
Nigga we've seen how the chinks operate in the Philippines sea. So your take is retarded.

>>65078496
so if this is how you measure efficiency of a navy then the whole destroyer saga in japan should tell us a lot doesnt it

>>65078476
At that point why not just trash the sensors with something?

Countries fuck with each other's satellites all the time. Even before the war in Ukraine, Russia was constantly fucking with our shit via laser interference and ecm spoopie shit and we do the same to them. At this point our launch tempo outpaces everyone else so hard that Russia and China could go hot trying to shoot our sats down all day long and we could replace them as fast as they come down. But if you wanna do some real heavy nigga shit you send this bastard up and snatch what you want.

>>65078689
the first time i read about the x37 was that it flew up and spray painted or otherwise obscured with a material the solar panels and caused them to fail.
or that it just parked itself inb etween the panels and the sun.
i always thought that was neat.

File: X-37B_OTV4_landed_at_Kennedy_Space_Center_(170507-O-FH989-001).jpg (68.7 KB)

68.7 KB JPG

>>65078715
Fugg no pic

File: chinesespy.jpg (475.8 KB)

475.8 KB JPG

>>65078412
Wait a minute...

>>65078681
The jdf could solo the chinese navy.

>>65078467
Easier to lower periapsis into the atmosphere tbqh. Even geostat is relatively easy to drop.

>>65078715
>this point our launch tempo outpaces everyone else so hard that Russia and China could go hot trying to shoot our sats down all day long and we could replace them as fast as they come down.
Dumbest shit I've read in awhile

>>65078428
That was SM-3 Block IA, too. There is now a Block II with a bigger booster in service.

>>65078485
That was something the Soviets were afraid of because the Shuttle could deploy sats. It was also a feature the Air Force wanted because the Air Force partially funded the Shuttle's development which is why a lot of the Shuttle was retarded.

>>65078689
probably great for optical sensors, harder to do with synthetic aperture radar

>>65079408
Well yes, but delta V requirements to go up further are a bitch.
Also, you'll have to get even tighter with your networking because your launch window will be smaller.

>>65079435
The shuttle could, theoretically, launch from Vandenberg, catch up to a Soviet sat the just came southbound over the pole, and have almost the whole orbit over the pacific, antartica and indian ocean to catch it, capture it or whatever.

The Soviets probalby vastly overestimated teh practical uses of this capability.

>>65078412
what development?
as for ASAT the simplest way to do it is simply bomb the enemy ground stations if you're already bombing all their shit. you need sophisticated hardware to run satellites and tight control over the encryption keys