China's Space Program Thread II

[TheRathalos]

Chatter about Golden Dome is getting stronger which might have a space based interceptor component to it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Does anyone know (or would speculate) what China would do if US were to suddenly decide to launch thousands of space based interceptors which builds a reliable missile defense safety net? US has the launch capacity, specially with Starship in future.

1) Build an equivalent system (hint: launching them isn't the hard part, launch wasn't considered to be the main bottleneck of brillant pebble and a reasonable expansion of America's 80s launch capabilities could have been enough)

2) Fry them from the ground or from space.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Any kind of space based kinetic interceptor is a terrible idea anyway from an outdated mindset, in the future serious space warfare will only ever be done with directed energy weapons (or particle beams).

 

[BoraTas]

That's because these missiles are essentially space launch vehicles themselves.

Let me come up with a hypothetical architecture. There are 3 kinds of space assets.

1. Low Earth (400 km) flying bullets/impactors (made up of say 2 m diameter stainless steel) with minimal orbital correction and orientation thrusters to help the bullets/impactors just change orientation and fall down to earth at heavy terminal velocity.
2. Sensor Network in LEO, MEO, and GEO to detect launches. All kinds of sensors.
3. Communication Network built of relays and communication satellites in LEO, GEO to provide an orbital internet of sorts.

They are expensive because of the kill vehicle. The boosters should be cheap, looking at the prices of even bigger BM boosters. Especially a space based interceptor is going to need a lot of extra divert. 2 m diameter stainless steel part is hard to understand because kinetic energy impactors should be light.

This system can serve as global prompt strike platform as well, since the kinetic bullets made of stainless steel descending would have enough kinetic energy to take down buildings with precision (system like "rods from god"). Or an interception system because any launch that's detected can trigger hundreds of those bullets to descend targeting the system.

It won't be able to do both. If you want heavy interceptors that can survive in the atmosphere you are crippling the system.

You have fiber lasers with power level above 200 KW, not pulse but continuous wave (Raycus). Imagine having 1000 of those in LEO, ten of these can have power of more than 1 MW. No risk of attenuation by atmosphere. Power required is momentary, 10 second of engagement would not drain more than few kilowatt hours. Modern battery can provide discharge rate above 30C, meaning they can provide huge power from smaller energy capacity. But you would need a large constellation for tracking objects at high resolution.

Sorry but that is back of the napkin sci-fi engineering. This is how a land based multi-hundred kW system looks like.

 

[madhusudan.tim]

They are expensive because of the kill vehicle. The boosters should be cheap, looking at the prices of even bigger BM boosters. Especially a space based interceptor is going to need a lot of extra divert. 2 m diameter stainless steel part is hard to understand because kinetic energy impactors should be light.

It won't be able to do both. If you want heavy interceptors that can survive in the atmosphere you are crippling the system.


Sorry but that is back of the napkin sci-fi engineering. This is how a land based multi-hundred kW system looks like.

View attachment 164921

Defeatist mentality. Across the ocean, they are optimistic that they can loft thousands of 100 tonnes class payloads for MARS mission. A starship class vehicle, when optimized for large payload delivery would be so much significant, strategically. This is unfortunately not calculated yet in the strategically equation. Few trillion dollars is nothing, if strategic needs are considered, looking at AI infrastructure spending. I expect all kinks to be sorted out in 4-5 years timeframe. I hope there are competitors as well. But we will see.

 

[Virtup]

I don't see how the Golden Dome could change the strategic equation for many reasons:

1) Achieving the ability to have hundreds or thousands of heavy space-based interceptors that can accurately track and intercept ballistic missiles from the boost phase would require astronomical amounts of money, money that the US is already struggling to find for its day to day military needs (R&D, procurement, maintenance, etc.).

2) The required satelites would be huge, easy to track, jam or destroy. I mean what's stopping Russia from frying them with an improved peresvet system, even during peacetime? No nation would want to have a weapon system taking a stroll above their land. It's equivalent to saying that a strategic bomber has the right to fly above you at any time if its altitude is more than 100 km. It makes no sense to me.

3) There are already delivery systems that negate whatever advantages the golden dome might theoretically provide, such as the nuclear powered cruise missile or the nuclear powered deep-sea torpedo. All Russia or China have to do is continue to improve them and manufacture them in far greater numbers. At that point economy of scale will take over and make them cheaper. We also shouldn't forget about strategic bombers. They were deemed inferior to ballistic missiles in the past, but they're still pretty good, especially if they were made to be stealthy or hypersonic or both.

4) Strategic balance can be restored by simply building and deploying an equivalent system. Something that China can easily do and Russia would be able to do if they designate it as a priority. But that would also mean that warfare would have to fully transition to the space domain, with counter-interceptors and counter-counter-interceptors. Eventually culminating in space fighter planes. But that's a can of worm I'm not sure the US would be willing, or could afford, to open.

 

[madhusudan.tim]

I don't see how the Golden Dome could change the strategic equation for many reasons:

1) Achieving the ability to have hundreds or thousands of heavy space-based interceptors that can accurately track and intercept ballistic missiles from the boost phase would require astronomical amounts of money, money that the US is already struggling to find for its day to day military needs (R&D, procurement, maintenance, etc.).

2) The required satelites would be huge, easy to track, jam or destroy. I mean what's stopping Russia from frying them with an improved peresvet system, even during peacetime? No nation would want to have a weapon system taking a stroll above their land. It's equivalent to saying that a strategic bomber has the right to fly above you at any time if its altitude is more than 100 km. It makes no sense to me.

3) There are already delivery systems that negate whatever advantages the golden dome might theoretically provide, such as the nuclear powered cruise missile or the nuclear powered deep-sea torpedo. All Russia or China have to do is continue to improve them and manufacture them in far greater numbers. At that point economy of scale will take over and make them cheaper. We also shouldn't forget about strategic bombers. They were deemed inferior to ballistic missiles in the past, but they're still pretty good, especially if they were made to be stealthy or hypersonic or both.

4) Strategic balance can be restored by simply building and deploying an equivalent system. Something that China can easily do and Russia would be able to do if they designate it as a priority. But that would also mean that warfare would have to fully transition to the space domain, with counter-interceptors and counter-counter-interceptors. Eventually culminating in space fighter planes. But that's a can of worm I'm not sure the US would be willing, or could afford, to open.

It can extract tax from vassals, like the one butcher agreed to pay 1 T as a protection money. You are naive how much more it can extract if any need arises.

 

[Virtup]

It can extract tax from vassals, like the one butcher agreed to pay 1 T as a protection money. You are naive how much more it can extract if any need arises.

No it cannot. The said vassals themselves are already struggling with tanking economies and social unrest. You can't give something you don't have. And even if the US could get through problem 1), what could it do for the other 3 problems? There's no way the US could outpace China in space weaponry, especially on a large sale. They don't have the necessary economy, industrial capacity or talent pool.

 

[jli88]

No it cannot. The said vassals themselves are already struggling with tanking economies and social unrest. You can't give something you don't have. And even if the US could get through problem 1), what could it do for the other 3 problems? There's no way the US could outpace China in space weaponry, especially on a large sale. They don't have the necessary economy, industrial capacity or talent pool.

Are you serious? The payload quantity US sends is like >5x China already. This gap will stay as it is, since China doesn't have anything like starship in plans currently.

 

[vincent]

Easy solution to counter the Golden Dome: placing nukes in orbit.

 

[Tomboy]

Easy solution to counter the Golden Dome: placing nukes in orbit.

In what sense? GD is literally interceptors in orbit, it could also target satellites.

 

[vincent]

In what sense? GD is literally interceptors in orbit, it could also target satellites.

Nukes place in higher orbits than GD satellites? Put a deadman trigger in the system, the moment two or three get destroyed, the rest will be fired. Put sensors on the satellites, when threats against them re detected, they’ll fired.