So, the opening salvo between any superpowers would clearly be

>>34488035
>o, the opening salvo between any superpowers would clearly be to shoot down all their satellites. No GPS

That one's a lot easier said than done. GPS orbits at 12,550 miles. You're not shooting down a GPS satellite without a kill vehicle that goes at least that high.

File: sukhoi-jump_gizmodo.jpg (41KB, 700x556px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 700x556px

>>34488059
Every superpower has the weapons, and vehicles capible of delivering them. They fly at their flight ceiling, and launch said missile, also there are land based ballistic missiles designed for this exact purpose.

>>34488081
Great. Actually hitting it is something else entirely.

File: Dont laugh.gif (3MB, 286x258px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 286x258px

>>34488035
>He fell for the whole 'Satellites are real' myth.

>>34488081
No one has demonstrated an Earth based, anti-satellite kinetic weapon that reaches beyond the altitudes of Low Earth Orbit.

>>34488098

Can't you just send a nuke up there and then detonate it when it gets close?

You wouldn't have to have spot on accuracy and the EMP would just knock out the satellite.

At the rate we're going, wouldn't it just be 'bot on 'bot fighting? AI running a million scenarios & outcomes to choose the next target while we're standing in line at McDonald's watching the chef-bot make our food? Shouldn't we be focusing on real threats like "near Earth objects"?

File: 2633015.jpg (95KB, 1372x843px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1372x843px

>>34488121
You do understand that it's just any conventional carrier rocket with nuke on board, don't you? Also, Sokol Eshelon.

File: 1466157692904.jpg (113KB, 662x786px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 662x786px

>>34488135
>>34488573
>unscheduled launch
>nuclear payload
>high altitude vehicle
>no way to discern what its target is besides rough ballistic estimates of the other end of the trajectory

>>34488135
Yes!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#Aftereffects

>The weaponeers became quite worried when three satellites in low Earth orbit were disabled. The half-life of the energetic electrons was only a few days. At the time it was not known that solar and cosmic particle fluxes varied by a factor 10, and energies could exceed 1 MeV. These man-made radiation belts eventually crippled one-third of all satellites in low Earth orbit. Seven satellites failed over the months following the test, as radiation damaged their solar arrays or electronics

>>34488661
you don't need missiles for that

>In addition to reconnaissance equipment, Almaz was equipped with a unique 23mm Rikhter (factory index 261P or 225P) rapid-fire cannon mounted on the forward belly of the station. This revolver cannon was modified from the tail-gun of the Tu-22 bomber and was capable of a theoretical rate of fire of 1800-2000 (up to 2600) rounds per minute. Each 168 gram (ammo 23-OFZ-D-R ) or 173 gram (ammo 23-OFZ-G-R) projectile flew at a speed of 850 m/s relative to the station. The cannon had a supply of 32 rounds and was tested at the end of the mission, when the station was operating in unmanned mode. To aim the cannon, which was on a fixed mounting, the entire station would be turned to face the threat.[7] The Almaz series remain, to this day, the only armed, crewed military spacecraft ever flown.

and that shit was in the 60s/70s

File: 1476467742651.jpg (258KB, 953x953px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 953x953px

>>34488885
And the Almaz Stations orbited in LEO, where all Manned Space Stations do. GPS Satellites are positioned in orbits an order of magnitude higher than any manned station. You're not shooting them down with a gun.

Besides, the 23mm on the Almaz Stations were for "Self Defense" and required the entire station to be aimed at a target. Not to mention, the recoil caused the whole place to bounce around like fucking mad and every test firing was conducted remotely, with the crew aboard the visiting Soyuz.

>>34488573
>You do understand that it's just any conventional carrier rocket with nuke on board, don't you?
The only time I've read something about such weapons, the missile didn't carry any explosive, only the kinetic force of the impact was used.
Also it was not an hypotetic project, it was an actual 3 (iirc) stages rocket already built and tested.

>>34488081
The highest satellite weapon ever tested was 865km.

Try getting more than hearsay knowledge before you post.

>>34488081
Looks like a ejection seat test with a poor Photoshop job replacing the seat with a rocket. I don't get it.

>>34488793
>>34488135

That is a fucking excellent way to find yourself on the receiving end of a Trident II D5, or a Minuteman III

>>34489088
Imagine a runaway gun happening with THAT.

>>34488035

>Are tank commanders, pilots, and officers capible of operating without GPS?

yes they're given that training in basic I think

op now you got me sitting in my room trying to remember when I first learned how to use a compass

>>34488573
>You do understand that it's just any conventional carrier rocket with nuke on board, don't you?

There are not very many launch vehicles with the requisite performance to reach very high altitudes. North Korea's ICBM only got a quarter of the way there and that launch trajectory was *optimized* for altitude.

>>34492833
>Saturn V took us to moon
>we can’t shoot down satellites they’re too far

Is /k/ this stupid?

>>34492957
The point isn't a matter of technical possibility as much as the rockets needed to do it being Fuck-Huge. Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles would be inadequate launch vehicles.

>>34492957
Oh sure, just let me dust off the Saturn V sitting in the corner of my garage.

>>34492957
>A geostationary orbit, geostationary Earth orbit or geosynchronous equatorial orbit (GEO) is a circular orbit 35,786 kilometres (22,236 mi) above the Earth's equator

>35,786 kilometres

>>34488035
Can F-35s double as a GPS system for handheld devices and other weapons?

>muh sensor fusion

>>34488035
Yes. I work on F-15s and our pilots always carry maps of the area they're flying in.

>>34489485
>The only time I've read something about such weapons, the missile didn't carry any explosive, only the kinetic force of the impact was used.
Because actual nuclear explosion will fry a shitload of property in space. No one is mad enough to test it. Kinetic interception is an US meme based on their desire to put interceptor into standard VLS. They're kinda small for that kind of things. So, payload of that interceptor is enough ONLY for that complicated and expensive warheads. Russian and Chinese are not limited by such thing. Low-orbit satellites can be shoot down with current (China) and next-gen (Russia) ground based missiles. And no one cancelled hunter satellites like Kosmos-2499 and stuff.

>>34493479
We actually did test it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKvvrNrCOnw

>>34488121
Chinese DN-series ASAT. Specifically the DN-2 and 3.

Google it.

>>34493507
Unfortunately this one is set to music, but it's the shortest video that shows the best available footage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEILIf8VkgI

>>34493507
Golden times when common sense and Greenpeace didn't stand on a way of science and progress.

>>34493531
That's a low-earth-orbit observation and communications satellite killer. It still can't hit assets positioned in mid and high earth orbits.

>>34493531
Defense officials disclosed to the Free Beacon that the DN-2 test was initially planned for last fall, but was delayed by the Chinese over concerns that the test would upset President Barack Obama’s reelection bid.


While details of the DN-2 are not known, U.S. officials said it is expected to be a high earth-orbit interceptor capable of destroying strategic navigation, communication, or intelligence satellites by ramming into them at high speeds.

The DN-2 is said to be capable of hitting targets in high-earth orbit between 12,000 and 22,236 miles above earth. Many military, intelligence, and commercial satellites orbit at that altitude.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/china-conducts-test-of-new-anti-satellite-missile/

>>34493563
>>34493558

A validated DN-2 ASAT system would provide the Chinese military with the capability to "degrade or severely damage the U.S. Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) system," he said.

>>34488081
Shitty photoshop is shitty.

>>34493575
The launch vehicle in the article actually looks big enough for the job.

>>34493563
>The DN-2 is said to be capable of hitting targets in high-earth orbit between 12,000 and 22,236 miles above earth.
lmao see you in 3 days when your "interceptor" finally reaches a milstar sat

>>34488135
>EMP would just knock out the satellite.
I often wonder if it actually would. Aren't satellites rated for much more than what a nuke can deliver in terms of EMR?

>>34488035
They still teach celestial navigation in the Navy.
For a while they dropped it, saying "We've got GPS now! Nobody needs sextants and star charts anymore!".
Then they realized that it's rather trivial to jam GPS signals, so they re-introduced celestial navigation, mentioning that "You can't hack a sextant".

All commercial ship captains are required to learn it as well.

>>34493015
>would be inadequate launch vehicles
No. The kill vehicle can be really lightweigt, and doesnt need to achieve orbit, just GEO altitude

>>34493644
It also needs to hit the thing or carry a warhead that can.

>>34493662
Which requires advanced targeting and attitude control systems, neither of those has to be heavy. I didn't say its easy, just that it doesnt take a big rocket to do so.

>>34493687
The GPS satellite only needs to make a relatively minor course correction to put it out of range of a missile attack unless there is a significant delta-V capacity in the vehicle to compensate for satellite counter-maneuvering. We have a global network of photometery satellites specifically to detect ballistic missile launches.

>>34493712
the rocket equation is a bitch. It's cheap and easy to increase the deltaV of a lightweight kill vehicle by a few dozen m/s, a heavy sattelite has limited resources. GEO sattelites are slow targets and can't "maneuver out of the way". They also got low thrust engines optimized for efficiency

>>34493778
All of what you said is true. What the Geo sat does have is a fairly significant amount of time to use its limited thrust maneuvering engines to create a small course adjustment that will change its position several thousand kilometers from where the kill vehicle was initially targeting. The later in flight the rocket attempts to make the course correction, the harder it will be to pack the delta-V needed to hit it.

>>34493832
but it should be easily possible to adjust to the GEO sats maneuvers in real time (or close to it, considering its burn time for significant course changes will be measured in minutes that should be enough). Tracking sattelites in space isn't that hard.

>>34488035
As a civilian in high school I learned how to use a sextant and charts. Nowadays for military guys it's easier to do. You take your sighting, plug in the numbers and it does the math for you. If you had to you can still look at a paper reference and compute by hand. US and UK land troops still get issued paper maps and still practice with them.

I could literally find a slide rule and keep going if my calculator bit the dust.

I would think arty and cruise missiles would take the biggest hit. But my understanding a lot of land attack weapons use topo maps as a backup. Any FO/Arty types on that could answer that?

Inertial navigation systems are a thing and were long before GPS.

>>34488035
They exist.
Ground and aerial backup stations to replace gone and jammed GPS satellite signals.

File: ConstellationGPS.gif (485KB, 240x192px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 240x192px

>>34488035
GPS orbits are high up. No puny aircraft launched ASAT can touch them.

>>34488661
stupid oatmeal poster

>>34488035
The opening salvo would be:
1) Taking down the satellites which can be done with lasers nowadays
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/778100/China-developing-lasers-destroy-enemy-satellites-futuristic-light-war-militarise-space

2) Followed be EMP bombs
http://mil-embedded.com/news/raytheon-emp-missile-tested-by-boeing-usaf-research-lab/

We won`t watch the beginning of WWIII. We will be in the dark.

Land nav is still taught. The technology known as GPS was implemented by the USA we share the tech with the world.

>>34488059
This.

And we don't know how many dark backup satellites the military has up there.

>>34494692
And anti-sat missiles are a really dumb tactic because:
A: All relevant sides have the capability
B: Nobody wants a debris cascade
C:Jamming satellites is trivially easy

>>34493640
Brazilian-fag here, can confirm that in our Navy, servicemen are also taught celestial navigation as well.

>>34494907
I certainly hope so that prudence reigns over belligerence at the end of the day, but one thing that concerns me are failed states such as the Norks, ruled by lunatics with more rhetoric than common sense.

>>34488035

It would be easier to launch a ton of minisats into LEO and spoof GPS signals than it would be to hit GPS satellites in geosynchronous orbit. And by "easier", I mean "next to impossible rather than totally impossible".

The GPS satellite network is safe.

>>34495011
Easier just to blast out a signal on that freq and shout over the weak signal from the sats.

>>34493609

This.

It takes those satellites a long time to get up to that altitude. By that time, everybody will know what's up. The intended targets will be known. Backup systems will be readied and retaliatory strikes will have already been launched.

Knock out half of the GPS network and very little happens. It only takes LOS of three satellites to get an OK GPS fix.

Meanwhile, ICBMs, SLBMs, cruise missiles and bombers will be raping the guts out of any nation stupid enough to try that shit.

Went through US Army Basic Training in 2004, went through map reading, judging distance based on stride, compass, basic land navigation.

Pretty sure most decent soldiers could handle being without GPS in emergencies.

>>34495057

That's what I said.

>>34492957
>A sword can cut a man in half
>we still can't cut bullets out of the air with them

This is your retarded logic. Go fuck yourself.

>>34492957

I hope to fuck this is bait.

Have you ever seen a Saturn V? It's the size of an office building.

>>34495096
No, I mean you can do it without launching anything. A company trying to set up a terrestrial wireless internet service like 5 years ago nearly took down all GPS service in the US by trying to use cheap satellite bandwidth in an adjacent band.

>>34493465

Probably not, but I can almost guarantee that a Global Hawk can.

>>34495149

Yeah, the Iranians probably spoofed one of our drones like that.

Of course, any system radiating on that frequency in a combat zone where we have air assets is going to get its shit pushed in.

>>34488035
I don't know about the Americans but everyone in the Canadian Forces is taught land nav with Map and Compass. Army officers have to do a ton of it in their phase training. I do have a question for all the AF types though: if shit hits the fan and satellites start getting hit how capable will air forces be? I know a ton of their shit is GPS guided and I'm wondering how functional it will be without satellites.

>>34495179
The drone actually had a self destruct mechanism programmed in.

I say "self destruct mechanism" but what I mean is "if you lose contact and you're about to run out of fuel, dive bomb into the ground"

This is why people generally think that it just had a battery failure.