As seen in recent conflicts Starlink has proven highly resilient but this advantage will not remain one sided. China has already begun deploying its own megaconstellations which will gradually present a significant threat. While kinetic options such as high altitude nuclear detonations or direct energy lasers exist they are absolute last resorts. Therefore this discussion is limited to Electronic Warfare solutions capable of protecting large geographical areas while enduring high levels of attrition.
>>65327932there's going to eventually be a war and one side will be losing and will launch anti satellite missiles and completely fuck up everything in orbit for decades
>>65327947Meh not if it's a proxy war
>>65327947It doesn't take decades for LEO debris to be dragged into the atmosphere
>>65327959He didn't say "the next war", he said "a war". If a proxy war won't bring it about, then he's not talking about any proxy war.
>>65327932blow up a few, uncle kessler will take care of the rest.
>>65327970Would a few dozen nukes detonating in orbit be enough to cleanse the debris and be feasible?
>>65327975No.
>>65327975No, once the entire constellation turns into shrapnel the entire sphere will be covered.Nukes already do very little in space, they do even less against widely spread material.
>>65327975Anything larger than a bb at 28,000mph is going to knock bits off the next thing it hits.You could try to vaporise everything in orbit but that would probably have a negative effect on the planet below.
>>65327975It depends if its within 500km it would only take short few years to deorbit everything.
>>65327975The only solutions area) wait until they come down, thankfully it'll only take a decade or so for LEO satellites, not centuriesb) pour billions into cleanup tech like laser brooms
>>65328004c) use orbits that aren't fucked up. Flying through the debris actually is possible, just staying there would get you sieved.
>thread about EW>all discussion is about kinetic options
>>65328014How would you do it then?Hardmode: no permanent disabling because anything uncontrolled will eventually be a kinetic hazard
>>65327975Is this the real cause of the great filter?
>>65328014Because it barely works against sats. That's a field with a strong defender's advantage.>beam-forming/directional gain>cryptographic frequency-hopping>sampling techniques and error correction being able to pull tiny signals out of the noise>topography and LEO being close
>>65328014What the fuck is there to discuss about EW nigga are you trying to bait some spook into leaking US secrets? >Uhhhhh we use a jammer >No because i counter jam youEW is so complicated and specialized you'd have to be retarded to think you could get more than a couple posts worth of discussion out of it>Cue some retard saying "ackshually its very simple if your not an idiot"
>>65328080It IS simple if you’re not an idiot.Just jam harder lmao.
There's two option. Jam the downlink or the uplink. If you want to jam downlink you have to go high like using drone or ballon carried jammers to blind the user terminal though it can only jam about few dozen square km so you would need many of them. Jamming uplink sounds more effective since it can knock out the satellite from hearing most of the user terminals but there's a problem with phased array antenna that starlink uses. They can null your signal direction so you need far powerful expensive jammer to bypass the nulling depth of the satellite which leaves it vulnerable to SEAD not mention there's multiple satellite pass through you. now there's a way though if you can make thousands cheaper less powerful jammer and do a distributed attack against each of passing satellites it could break its adaptive nulling. Plus it makes them withstand attrition by not putting all the eggs in a single basket.
>>65328073It's a good filter for midwits. Kessler syndrome is as real as your horoscope
>>65328330Also if you really needed to get out and Kessler syndrome was real(it assumes objects are more ridged than they really are for simplicity) you could just use nuclear pulse propulsion to launch huge objects with sufficient volume to shield them from the worst effects. Frankly throwing nukes out the back of a ship to putput into orbit is a solution to all sorts of shit. Its only libtards(cuckservatives included) and various other faggots who've stymied it for decades.
>>65328342>>65328073see >>65328009 It makes an orbit unusuable, not impassable.
>>65327975No but simply waiting a year or two would most likely do it. The lighter the piece, the faster it decelerates and part of the reason people miss for doing LEO constellations is the air drag is much higer than above.>How can EW fight Starlink ec.I thought it was already doing that in Ukraine and Iran?
>launch large and dense object>use an orbit retrograde with debris>impacts will create smaller debris which are more effected by drag>impacts will lower the periapsis of debris to get more dragKessler defeated. Just ram it all with a giant space plow. It wouldn't be an instant solution but it would be faster than waiting for nature to run its course.
>>65328349There isn't enough material in the earth's crust to render higher, more stable orbits unusable. Learn 2 volume of a sphere. Anything launched into LEO is coming down in a month unless you station keep so that's a complete non issue. Then there's orbital velocity itself, an object in an orbit that matches you travels the same speed as you. Speeding up or slowing down creates an ellipse, which raises or lowers your apogee making any chance of contact infinitesimally small to the point of being a rounding error in the risk assessment. Finally, these explanations always seem to rely on satellites exploding into massive spherical debris fields because they're full of explodium for some reason. Why doesn't the iss violently explode from every micro meteor impact?
>>65327932>How can ew fight against LEO network constellation?Not very well. Attempt to jam both ground and space.
Space based jammer constellation
>>65328693If you slap a ball in pool with the white ball hard enough, the white ball recoils right back. The smaller the object, the closer it's speed is to the original so all you do is reverse its orbit and make it a little bit slower.
>>65328702>sphericalNobody assumes these. And also nobody says every satellite needs to be obliterated in a single collision.If you have a megeconstellation you get a cascade, which can cascade back into itself and shred the larger remaining parts.>There isn't enough material in the earth's crust to render higher, more stable orbits unusable. Learn 2 volume of a sphereInteresting orbits like GSO only occupy a thin shell.Also, orbits intersect. It's not like you need to fill each inclination or even altitude with some separate set of shrapnel.>Speeding up or slowing down creates an ellipse, which raises or lowers your apogee making any chance of contact infinitesimally small to the point of being a rounding error in the risk assessmentAnd simultaneously makes it intersect with more orbits.Also, risk accumulates with time, that's my point. Flying through is minimal risk, staying there means one of the chaotic orbits will intersect yours eventually, and then your mass will add to the debris.
>>65327965It wouldn't be more than a few years for starlink itself, but the debris from an ablation cascade goes everywhere. It won't stay at the same orbital altitude. It's not unreasonable to predict it could hinder orbital launches for decades.Stuff much higher up, notably GNSS satellites, would be fine except for the delays launching replacements for oldest sats in their constellations.
>>65328785You don't really get fully elastic collisions at high velocities. Small pieces would just penetrate into the larger body, like the ISS occasionally getting pierced.>>65328785>make it a little bit slower.which would deorbit it.>>65328693Ah yes, the ultra-low-perigree osmium sphere of doom.
>>65328807The orbit almost never changes at the point of intersection. So when your debris explodes it's orbit might change but it's most likely going to keep the same altitude at the end where the collision happened. Worst case scenario it picks up so much speed it takes a while to slow back down again since it will slow down at one end which will reduce the altitude at the other end of the orbit.>>65328818>which would deorbit it.Deorbit it slightly faster*
There's a softkill option. Just fry the goddamn satellite. It's not even illegal to neutralise satellites the only problem was space debris. No debris mean you are good to go.
>>65327932Starlink already claimed the best possible altitude. Other networks can try to mimic the performance of starlink, but it will be worse in comparison and susceptible to advantaged EW by the US.
