A new US military wargame series began by simulating a nuclear weapon in orbit

Post content hidden for low score. Show…
A nuclear explosion in space would render the northern hemisphere unusable for decades so this is pretty inconsequential.
Do you think those in power right now are really thinking of the future, beyond their own mortal bodies? At least does it feel like they considering the future, beyond their immediate wealth?

Edit: I should have not skimmed through, and my cynical position of the current administration cloud my reading, and I deserve the downvotes I got.

That said, simulations, analysis and simulation of external threats is important, especially when trying to establish countermeasures. My concern is any nuclear countermeasure is potentially putting an equivalent WMD, originally intended for defence, within arms reach of any potentially unstable leader. These countermeasures need to balance our needs for deterrence, with a measured response and avoiding potential knee jerk triggering, especially since many scenarios risk leading to total annihilation of the "civilised" world.

If we move the risk to be purely orbital we also risk destroying all the orbiting infrastructure we take from granted (navigation, localisation, weather monitoring, communications, etc), just from a chain reaction , as described as part of the Kessler Syndrome.
 
Last edited:
Upvote
7 (11 / -4)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

Tomcat From Mars

Ars Centurion
281
Subscriptor
One should never forget the lesson of Starfish Prime. But of course, DJT is a poor student.

What are you talking about? He was a good student, he even said so himself.

Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart —you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.
--Donald Trump, Sun City’s Magnolia Hall in South Carolina (July 19, 2016)
 
Upvote
17 (17 / 0)
A nuclear explosion in space would render the northern hemisphere unusable for decades so this is pretty inconsequential.
Nothing about this statement is remotely correct.

The majority of the destructive power of a bomb is in the blast wave, and there is none in space. The gammas and x-rays are all blocked by the atmosphere, albeit with knock-on effects like EMP and Christophos effect, but these are not a danger to humans. EMP is a concern, but over the last 50 years our grids have become better at handling it, not because of EMP threats, but just general upgrades.

Starlink would be gone, and that would be bad, and GPS would be down for a bit, and that would be also be bad, but whatever convinced you of the "unusable for decades" is just wrong.
 
Upvote
27 (29 / -2)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…
The detonation of a nuclear weapon in low-Earth orbit would likely destroy or incapacitate thousands of satellites

I wish the article explained by what mechanism this would happen. The direct blast wouldn't be large enough to take out satellites over a large volume. Maybe the debris cloud?
 
Upvote
2 (3 / -1)
Do you think those in power right now are really thinking of the future, beyond their own mortal bodies? At least does it feel like they considering the future, beyond their immediate wealth?
Can we please stop upvoting virtue signalling replies that ignore the massive holes in the OPs?
 
Upvote
3 (3 / 0)
I wish the article explained by what mechanism this would happen. The direct blast wouldn't be large enough to take out satellites over a large volume. Maybe the debris cloud?
Most of the energy from a detonation is in the from of x-rays, which are not stopped in space. So that's mechanism number one. The second is charged particles being trapped.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)

markgo

Ars Praefectus
3,885
Subscriptor++
I can see the Russians detonating several of them at lower altitudes over Ukraine.
Fry all the drone and unmanned systems electronics. Eliminate Ukraine's current advantage.

Then bring in troops from outside the EMP radius, and march through the de-fanged Ukrainian defense lines.
Wouldn’t work on unpowered drones on the ground with even the most minimal of shielding, which is where the vast majority are all of the time. Not to mention the nasty impacts of airbursts across a significant portion of the globe.
 
Upvote
2 (2 / 0)
What are you talking about? He was a good student, he even said so himself.


--Donald Trump, Sun City’s Magnolia Hall in South Carolina (July 19, 2016)
This is why I say anyone who thinks Trump is/was less senile than Biden should read a transcript rather than listen to his speeches. Charisma and confidence carry a lot of otherwise unintelligible speech.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)
Can we please stop upvoting virtue signalling replies that ignore the massive holes in the OPs?
You were right to call me out for my comment. It was ignoring the main body of the article. I really need to learn to move away from the knee jerk reactions, that is probably impacting many of us in this period.
 
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)

AdamM

Ars Praefectus
5,937
Subscriptor
This is why I say anyone who thinks Trump is/was less senile than Biden should read a transcript rather than listen to his speeches. Charisma and confidence carry a lot of otherwise unintelligible speech.

The crazy thing is Trump’s rambling isn't even new. He was clowned on regularly during his first term for rambling.

The greatest accomplishment of Trump’s second term was Republicans going “no you are!” to accusations of Trump being a moron and gaslighting everyone into thinking Trump’s rambling is actually eloquence.

I to this day do not know how anyone can listen to a Trump speech and not go what the fuck are you talking about.
 
Upvote
6 (6 / 0)

afidel

Ars Legatus Legionis
18,207
Subscriptor
Nothing about this statement is remotely correct.

The majority of the destructive power of a bomb is in the blast wave, and there is none in space. The gammas and x-rays are all blocked by the atmosphere, albeit with knock-on effects like EMP and Christophos effect, but these are not a danger to humans. EMP is a concern, but over the last 50 years our grids have become better at handling it, not because of EMP threats, but just general upgrades.

Starlink would be gone, and that would be bad, and GPS would be down for a bit, and that would be also be bad, but whatever convinced you of the "unusable for decades" is just wrong.
Jesus, anyone who thinks a nuclear blast in space isn't going to result in an all out nuclear exchange is delusional.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)

Cthel

Ars Praefectus
10,169
Subscriptor
Nothing about this statement is remotely correct.

The majority of the destructive power of a bomb is in the blast wave, and there is none in space. The gammas and x-rays are all blocked by the atmosphere, albeit with knock-on effects like EMP and Christophos effect, but these are not a danger to humans.
[snip]
Well, until you get to Dr Teller's Project Sundial 10 gigaton "skyburner" bombs.

Having the sky converted into a radiant heat source capable of igniting flammable materials like trees, plants and people at a distance of 150km is definitely a danger to humans.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)

wildsman

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,724
You were right to call me out for my comment. It was ignoring the main body of the article. I really need to learn to move away from the knee jerk reactions, that is probably impacting many of us in this period.
I congratulate you on your self awareness - it is rare in this day and age. Sadly no one is immune to kneejerk reactions - otherwise they wouldn't be kneejerk :)

And I should also apologise for my rather blunt reply.

Comment sections can sometimes have a social-media-like tendency to entice us to post - I find that a lot of times we are all better off exercising a little bit of restraint.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)