There are 11,789 AI controlled Starlink Satellites with a mass between 2,000 and 4,000 pounds each capable of dropping out of orbit and striking anywhere on earth. And that's just dumb mass. No one really knows what's in all those satellites.
random stupidity post
Cost innefficient.Better to just use actual missile systems.
>>546190628Hackers would bear minimal cost
>>546190520>what is reentry atmospheric burn?
>>546190520Dropping a star link satellite into earths atmosphere is like dropping a paper airplane into a Blast Furnace.
>>546190520No starlink satellite could be used as the projectile, they would burn up and any surviving pieces would be utterly impossible to "aim"Anything as small as your slug in the pic isn't making it to the ground. The satellites would have to have huge payloads attached to them and they're way too small for it.
>>546190520Rods from God is sadly fake and gay.
I REALLY WANNA FUCK MY ASS ALL NIGHT
>>546190520Nigger you need a telephone pole made entirely out of solid tungsten to make any amount of damage.
>>546190764They are tied to transparent balloons at 150,000 feet. Sometimes they light the balloons up. There are videos of this.Also: transparent - trans parent
>>546190520Why would they put nearly a dozen thousand satellites into orbit just to deorbit them?
>>546191043The final maneuver if Trump lost the midterms. First clear the airspace. Force all your targets to be on the ground.
>>546190520>2000-4000 pounds eachI mean you could google things to know if you're right or not but I guess we cant expect retards like OP to ever do anythingthey're about 580 lbs btw, made of aluminum and plastic. they wont do shit to ground targets.
>>546190520that's not actually possible you brainlet. they'd just burn up, as they normally do when they're de-orbited
>>546190812The ISS is scheduled to be taken down by 2032ish. Billions spent brainstorming how to bring it down easy. Makes sense when they get things in place someone could hijak it and drop it for maximum chaos.
>>546191169580 - 800+ Kilos. If you believe the official numbers.
>>546190520At this stage, sure.Roll me a d100.
>>546190520They would mostly burn up in the atmosphere dipshit, they're made of aerospace aluminum and carry no warheads or shielding.
>>546191241No, it doesn't really because the pieces would be next to impossible to actually target. Most of the world is ocean or open plains, the damage of just bringing the satellites offline would be more effective harm than actually crashing it to the ground.
>>546190628>Cost innefficient.Cost is the least of the issues with the concept. Only someone with zero understanding of orbital mechanics could dream up a weapons platform so intrinsically flawed.
>>546192266push it down in one piece and let it hit near a nuclear power plant
>>546192816What part of you can't control it that precisely do you not get? Do you realize how small a target even a city is from space? The things aren't built to be controlled like that, there's a reason they try to deorbit shit into the ocean, because there's a huge area it COULD land. Small differences in pressure or air composition as it descends can completely throw off the math making it highly unpredictable. Not to mention how it's going to rip itself apart during reentry and they have no way of knowing what part is going to break off first let alone when it will happen exactly. If I ask you to throw a sugarcube at a target at the bottom of a 20ft pool, it doesn't matter how you try to do it it's going to dissolve before getting there.
>>546190520>the star will gorge itself on clay
Starlink is too small to impact the surface, they would burn up in the atmosphere if deorbited and don't have the velocity to get deep enough into the atmosphere anyways.
>>546193086Iran can hit a 3x3 square from 2000 miles away. Don't you think Musk has better tech?
>>546190628But you can assassinate people with ice rods leaving no trace
>>546194064You dumb cunt do you know the difference between an ICBM and a satellite being dropped from orbit?
>>546194321Can't back trace it.
>>546190520>SATELLITEShelium baloons
>>546190520Fake and gay but this is a good song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CQGva_uNd4
>>546190520i hope the jews do not rod from god me
>>546190628This Brit fuck has the strongest point in this thread. Therefore I believe he is an actual British person and not a Paki or Jeet.
>>546195794Not bad...https://youtu.be/nmEaLQSGlSI
