"Destabilising" Russian Space Threat

Based on article from previous page Ekipazh is just EW satellite. Just Krasukha system but in orbit. Still dangerous because orbiting below GPS and near Starlinks so the signal is at least on similar level or stronger.

Ekipazh - Space-Based Jammer

www.globalsecurity.org www.globalsecurity.org

PS. Interesting scenario is to jam Starlinks for ransom from SpaceX or triangulate terrestrial terminals for Lancets.
 
Last edited:
Hanz2k said:
Based on article from previous page Ekipazh is just EW satellite. Just Krasukha system but in orbit. Still dangerous because orbiting below GPS and Around Starlinks so the signal is at similar level or stronger.

Ekipazh - Space-Based Jammer

www.globalsecurity.org www.globalsecurity.org
Click to expand...
I imagine whatever this it’s probably specifically designed to take out something like Starlink, for that to work it would have to cripple a lot of satellites with each ‘shot’ hence the high power needs.
 
We do not really know much. I think at this point it is being confirmed as a troubling ASAT development that has not yet been deployed that would violate the Outer Space Treaty. I think those facts have been stated by various officials in Washington, assuming they are accurate.
 
In this case, I think the Russians are right. If the U.S. helps Ukraine with weapons, its attitude nullifies any previous non-aggression treaty with the USSR.
 
Justo Miranda said:
In this case, I think the Russians are right. If the U.S. helps Ukraine with weapons, its attitude nullifies any previous non-aggression treaty with the USSR.
Click to expand...
The Outer Space Treaty is not a non-aggression treaty, there is no legal basis to claim it is nullified by a terrestrial conflict.
 
This Russian Nuke in Orbit make no sense

Anti Satellite ? SpaceX send Another one in orbit fast, nuke wasted for nothing.
EMP ? try that over USA or Europa, Military Installation are protected against EMP, follow by respond by NATO...
Fractional Orbital Bombardment System ? Is Putin so insane ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Orionblamblam said:
Makes a lot more sense than using nukes to take out satellites.
Click to expand...

This system is not new and does not really bring a new capability than a ground based direct ascent could not also perform, outside perhaps being more mobile and thus having more flexible envelope. I very much doubt that system has anything to do with the current flurry of texts. Its a modernized ASM-135.
 
Orionblamblam said:
More concerning: a small nuke set off in orbit, especially LEO, would create an EMP on the surface below it.
"Whoopsie, we were just trying to take out a Starlink sat. Sorry about your national power grid!"
Click to expand...
Yes, an EMP would wreck havoc. The Russians would not use it, but Putin probably would.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3538.jpeg
    IMG_3538.jpeg
    15 KB · Views: 18
Nobody saying that it's new. Matter is that it has reached the werge of IOC.
If it wouldn't bring new capabilities, US DoD and RuMoD wouldn't invest in weapons like this for decades since 1950s.
 
Ainen said:
Only and specifically placing nuclear weapons or any other kinds of WMD in orbit is prohibited.
I.e. not just nuclear energy isn't prohibited, strictly speaking even nuclear devices aren't completely out of the question, depending on their purpose (see star wars); at very least there is a space for a debate.
Nuclear ASAT waiting on Earth is covered no more than ICBMs - co-orbital/fobs bad (though doubtful anyone will care when things will reach that point), suborbital/direct ascent is OK(no complete agreement, but a more representative PoV; in those cases IL tends to follow safe options, i.e. of lesser responsibility).

So Kirby either very specifically meant orbital WMD, or outright lied.
Click to expand...
You might want to double-check that.

Everything I have read says that the OST only bans nuclear weapons in space. You could still lift the Rods from God (orbital kinetic weapons) or nudge an asteroid to drop. The general WMD ban is a UN resolution from 1963, separate from the OST.
 
In my opinion, this whole affair is just another of the usual alarmist exaggerations that are usually published during an election year, we already lived those same fantasies with Ronald Raygun and in Germany during the Persing missile crisis. Nothing happened then and nothing is going to happen now for a powerful reason: politicians are very happy in their armchairs and they are not going to do anything that could drive them out of them.
 
Scott Kenny said:
You might want to double-check that.

Everything I have read says that the OST only bans nuclear weapons in space. You could still lift the Rods from God (orbital kinetic weapons) or nudge an asteroid to drop. The general WMD ban is a UN resolution from 1963, separate from the OST.
Click to expand...
1967 OST, art.IV, para.1:
"States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner."

Weapons of mass destruction are specifically added to the plurality.
 
Well at end, this might not have been something more than a political trick to not vote on the budget (Ukraine aid package) or finalize the law on Data access by law enforcement agencies.

We can probably move on.
 
My money was on the Nuclear powered AI dance boots

images
 
Scott Kenny said:
Which would expressly be a violation of the Outer Space Treaty.
Click to expand...
No. Only if stationed in outer space or on celestial bodies.
It can indeed serve a basis for calling for consultations under OST article IX, but IX is currently one of the weaker articles of the OST, and quite a double-edged one specifically for the US.

From the currently available data, i think this was a rather unfortunate case of fear-mongering.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
No. Only if stationed in outer space or on celestial bodies.
It can indeed serve a basis for calling for consultations under OST article IX, but IX is currently one of the weaker articles of the OST, and quite a double-edged one specifically for the US.

From the currently available data, i think this was a rather unfortunate case of fear-mongering.
Click to expand...
So what is generating an EMP large enough to effect multiple satellites if not a nuclear explosion?
 
Scott Kenny said:
So what is generating an EMP large enough to effect multiple satellites if not a nuclear explosion?
Click to expand...
Nuclear weapons aren't prohibited, regardless of their destination and/or properties.
Prohibited is stationing them in space(or on celestial bodies) in any manner. Until and unless they are - you're trying to prohibit ICBMs.

See my quote above for specific text of the relevant provision.
 
Ainen said:
Nuclear weapons aren't prohibited, regardless of their destination and/or properties.
Prohibited is stationing them in space(or on celestial bodies) in any manner. Until and unless they are - you're trying to prohibit ICBMs.

See my quote above for specific text of the relevant provision.
Click to expand...
some 200km is the rough limit for a non-orbital ASAT shot. All other ASATs have been orbital. Especially the Russian ASAT tests.
 
Scott Kenny said:
some 200km is the rough limit for a non-orbital ASAT shot. All other ASATs have been orbital. Especially the Russian ASAT tests.
Click to expand...
Suborbital tests can go many thousands of kilometers up (as most acceleration for orbital launch is done horizontally anyway).
North Koreans show that quite often.
Even Burnt Frost (by a mere early SM-3) was done well higher than 200.

Also, ICBMs are perfectly capable of putting reduced loads in orbit. They're still perfectly legal and were built in thousands.

OST doesn't prohibit payloads that can be potentially be placed in orbit - Starship can arguably place a whole F-35 loaded with nuclear bombs there, for whatever reason one may do it. The prohibition is aimed at the action (or rather, resulting status).
 
Scott Kenny said:
ome 200km is the rough limit for a non-orbital ASAT shot. All other ASATs have been orbital. Especially the Russian ASAT tests.
Click to expand...
Er, no. You could launch missile at least thousand of kilometers high, and it would still be considered suborbital, because it's trajectory did not went around the Earth, nor it would achieve escape velocity.
 
Dilandu said:
Er, no. You could launch missile at least thousand of kilometers high, and it would still be considered suborbital, because it's trajectory did not went around the Earth, nor it would achieve escape velocity.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that every Russian ASAT test involved putting the ASAT into orbit and then attacking.

Trying to hit a satellite with an suborbital missile is not easy.
 
Exclusive: Russia attempting to develop nuclear space weapon to destroy satellites with massive energy wave, sources familiar with intel say

Russia is trying to develop a nuclear space weapon that would destroy satellites by creating a massive energy wave when detonated, potentially crippling a vast swath of the commercial and government satellites that the world below depends on to talk on cell phones, pay bills, and surf the internet, according to three sources familiar with US intelligence about the weapon.

These sources gave CNN a more detailed understanding of what Russia is working on – and the threat it could pose – than the US government has previously disclosed
...

This kind of new weapon — known generally by military space experts as a nuclear EMP — would create a pulse of electromagnetic energy and a flood of highly charged particles that would tear through space to disrupt other satellites winging around Earth. The Defense Department and the intelligence community have tracked Russian efforts to develop a broad range of anti-satellite weapons, including an EMP, for years.

And there has been a stream of intelligence reporting in recent months related specifically to Russia’s efforts to develop nuclear-powered anti-satellite capabilities, according to one defense official. But Russia has recently made progress in its efforts to develop a nuclear EMP — a related but far more alarming technology.
...

It was not immediately clear whether the device as designed could impact GPS and nuclear command and control satellites, which operate in a higher orbit than the vast constellation of commercial and government satellites whizzing through low-Earth orbit. Those larger satellites are designed to be impregnable to a nuclear blast, but a former top space official at the Pentagon told CNN that “they could be vulnerable” depending on how close they were to the EMP, how old they are and how big the blast.

Experts say this kind of weapon could have the potential to wipe out mega constellations of small satellites, like SpaceX’s Starlink, which has been successfully used by Ukraine in its ongoing war with Russia.

This would almost certainly be “a last-ditch weapon” for Russia, the US official and other sources said — because it would do the same damage to whatever Russian satellites were also in the area.
Click to expand...

 
Defense Updates has just put out a video about this:


Reports have emerged that the United States has told Congress and allies in Europe about new intelligence related to Russia's latest offensive capability that could pose an international threat.
Click to expand...
The intelligence came to light after Representative Mike Turner, Republican chair of the U.S. House of Representatives intelligence committee, issued an unusual and cryptic statement, indicating a "serious national security threat."
Click to expand...
Turner had said in the statement, "I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,"
Click to expand...
The White House has now formally confirmed that this is related to a anti-satellite (ASAT) capability that Russia is developing.
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes why Russia’s new anti-satellite weapon is a concerning development for the West ?
Click to expand...
 
This is why the US officials don’t usually comment on such things.

Biden admin was working behind closed doors to dissuade Russia from testing space weapon
By Erin Banco
www.politico.com

Biden admin was working behind closed doors to dissuade Russia from testing space weapon

Administration officials say last week’s revelations might have jeopardized U.S. efforts to dissuade Russia from moving forward.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

The two people said that the administration had been worried that if the program became more widely known in Congress or in the public, that might scuttle the nascent efforts to get Russia to abort those tests. The Biden administration had also worried, they said, that if the details of the intelligence were revealed, the source of that information might dry up.
Click to expand...
The officials declined to say whether Russia had responded to the initial reachout, but did say that since the program became public knowledge last week Russia has not shown any willingness to engage on the issue.

Now, U.S. officials are increasingly concerned Russia will move forward with testing its space-based antisatellite nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...
U.S. Warns Allies Russia Could Put a Nuclear Weapon Into Orbit This Year
By David E. Sanger

Reporting from Berlin
Feb. 21, 2024, 8:47 a.m. ET

American intelligence agencies have told their closest European allies that if Russia is going to launch a nuclear weapon into orbit, it will probably do so this year — but that it might instead launch a harmless “dummy” warhead into orbit to leave the West guessing about its capabilities.

The assessment came as American intelligence officials conducted a series of rushed, classified briefings for their NATO and Asian allies, as details of the American assessment of Russia’s intentions began to leak out.

The American intelligence agencies are sharply divided in their opinion about what President Vladimir V. Putin is planning, and on Tuesday Mr. Putin rejected the accusation that he intended to place a nuclear weapon in orbit and his defense minister said the intelligence warning was manufactured in an effort to get Congress to authorize more aid for Ukraine.

During a meeting with the defense minister, Sergei K. Shoigu, Mr. Putin said Russia had always been “categorically against” placing nuclear weapons in space, and had respected the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits weaponizing space, including the placement of nuclear weapons in orbit.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
This is just plain crazy if true. There has to be plans in place to respond to it in kind just in case.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom