Golden Dome for America

Arjen said:
You hope.

Now maintain those assets for years to come, in orbit, replacing damaged assets.
How long to build up that 78,000 interceptor force, with current interceptor production struggling to replace what was used over Ukraine and near the Persian Gulf?
Click to expand...
Psst....if you want to kill Golden Dome--tell the libertarian conservatives it can only be launched by SLS--they'll instantly hate it.

$4 billion for space? Too much
$4 Trillion for Iran/Golden Shower--just right!"
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Ukraine would be interested in developing anti-ballistic missiles. If anyone can do it cheaply, it's them
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
I wonder if Ukraine would be interested in developing anti-ballistic missiles. If anyone can do it cheaply, it's them
Click to expand...

Given Ukraines semi-regular bombardment by AS-24 Killjoy ALBMs and SS-26 Stone MRBMs along with their constant shortage of PAC3 interceptor-missiles I'd say that they definitely have some sort of ABM project in the works.
 
NMaude said:
Given Ukraines semi-regular bombardment by AS-24 Killjoy ALBMs and SS-26 Stone MRBMs along with their constant shortage of PAC3 interceptor-missiles I'd say that they definitely have some sort of ABM project in the works.
Click to expand...
But none for ICBMs
 
Scott Kenny said:
Why would they need to defend against those? Russia or China are within SRBM and IRBM range, not ICBM.

So they can get away with less capable interceptors than GBI or A-135 ABMs.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that they should submit a proposal to the Pentagon.
 
Last edited:
The United States has only 132 oil refineries vs 11,000 commercial power stations. Moving our reliance for transportation from the former to the latter would make us far less vulnerable to attack at a cost much lower than Golden Dome.
 
Forest Green said:
Long range cruise missiles were '50s and '60s thinking . They weren't regarded as a reliable alternative to BMs even back then, and good look against satellite AMTI in th future. AMTI picks it up, fighter is dispatched to intercept, sonar buoy network picks up Poseidon, MPA dispatched to destroy. And by this time the agressor's country has been ash for several hours already.
Click to expand...

You don't even need a fighter. Drop anti-air missiles from orbit too. They will out perform anything you can carry on a fighter or in a Mk41 VLS cell. Long term, AAMs and SAMs will mostly be short to medium ranged rapid response weapons for killing things detected too close for an orbital weapon to intercept in time. I don't think a flying unshielded nuclear reactor is going to be that hard to detect from range.
 
A 1 megawatt pulsed laser has an effective range of 50 Km. That is easily enough to protect urban areas from nuclear missiles without the cost and vulnerability of orbital weapons platforms.
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
A 1 megawatt pulsed laser has an effective range of 50 Km. That is easily enough to protect urban areas from nuclear missiles without the cost and vulnerability of orbital weapons platforms.
Click to expand...

It will need to be in orbit, otherwise all it takes is a cloudy day to defeat it.
 
CastleBravo said:
It will need to be in orbit, otherwise all it takes is a cloudy day to defeat it.
Click to expand...
There are wavelengths of light that do an acceptable job piercing through clouds

Also, thick clouds themselves would act as a barrier. At Mach 20, even water droplets become missiles.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
The bulk of the Russian Federation's population is concentrated in and around two cities - Moscow and St. Petersburg, here's a population distribution map:

Gy5yW6GXYAAUIo9

russia.pdf

960px-Russia_Population_Density_Map_2021.png


An all out thermonuclear war would do far more damage to the population of the Russian Federation than to the USA and the rest of the West.
Click to expand...
Adding to this: Russia's industry is far more concentrated, a legacy of Soviet era planners for whom bigger was always better. By destroying just 24 plants, NATO would knock out ⅔ of Russia's output of steel, aluminum, ammonia, chlorine gas/caustic soda, hydrofluoric acid, and synthetic rubber.
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
There are wavelengths of light that do an acceptable job piercing through clouds
Click to expand...

How about wavelengths we can actually make a 1MW beam out of, and build optics efficient enough to focus and direct it? What about the optical fire control needed to hit the target?
 
CastleBravo said:
How about wavelengths we can actually make a 1MW beam out of, and build optics efficient enough to focus and direct it?
Click to expand...
We've been doing that with mid-IR for almost as long as we've had lasers at all.

CastleBravo said:
What about the optical fire control needed to hit the target?
Click to expand...
MIRACL was keeping the beam on a TOW missile in flight at a couple KM range back in the early 1980s.
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
Adding to this: the typical American home uses 30 kwh of electricity per day. If this household has 2 EVs with a combined battery capacity of 240 kwh, they would have power for 8 days with no lifestyle changes if the electrical grid gets destroyed. And if this house has rooftop solar, they can keep running indefinitely.

Green energy is national security
Click to expand...
Adding to this addition: a great majority of the fires in Hiroshima weren't caused by the blast itself, but by overturned charcoal stoves. All-electric kitchens eliminate that risk.
 
There was that directed energy weapon test at White Sands people were talking about a few days ago. SECWAR did attend, but they were mostly demonstrating Army tactical laser and NKE systems.

https://www.laserwars.net/p/hegseth-military-laser-weapon-demonstration

I don't know if this Golden Done test was the same or related, but the Newsweek article is talking about using directed energy weapons to defeat drones a cruise missiles, which is exactly what the Army lasers are designed to do. Hegseth's tweet about a test yesterday does mention directed energy weapons but nothing about the targets.
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
Adding to this: Russia's industry is far more concentrated, a legacy of Soviet era planners for whom bigger was always better.
Click to expand...
Not correct. Soviet era planners perfectly realized the problems with such hyper-concentration of population and industry, and tried to solve them by limiting population movement into big cities and building industrial facilities in the outer republics (like electronic factory in Georgia, which production was infamous for very low quality - it was forced on industrial plants as "load" (rus. "nagruzka") with normal quality production). But they were unable to achieve that, due to Moscow and Leningrad being much more prestigious and better for career-building.
 
Dilandu said:
Not correct. Soviet era planners perfectly realized the problems with such hyper-concentration of population and industry, and tried to solve them by limiting population movement into big cities and building industrial facilities in the outer republics (like electronic factory in Georgia, which production was infamous for very low quality - it was forced on industrial plants as "load" (rus. "nagruzka") with normal quality production). But they were unable to achieve that, due to Moscow and Leningrad being much more prestigious and better for career-building.
Click to expand...
Those massive factories become targets in their own right
 
Scott Kenny said:
We've been doing that with mid-IR for almost as long as we've had lasers at all.


MIRACL was keeping the beam on a TOW missile in flight at a couple KM range back in the early 1980s.
Click to expand...

Read the full conversation:

exclaimedleech8 said:
A 1 megawatt pulsed laser has an effective range of 50 Km. That is easily enough to protect urban areas from nuclear missiles without the cost and vulnerability of orbital weapons platforms.
Click to expand...
CastleBravo said:
It will need to be in orbit, otherwise all it takes is a cloudy day to defeat it.
Click to expand...
exclaimedleech8 said:
There are wavelengths of light that do an acceptable job piercing through clouds

Also, thick clouds themselves would act as a barrier. At Mach 20, even water droplets become missiles.
Click to expand...
CastleBravo said:
How about wavelengths we can actually make a 1MW beam out of, and build optics efficient enough to focus and direct it? What about the optical fire control needed to hit the target?
Click to expand...

Of course we can make a 1MW IR beam and direct it at a target within line of sight. What we can't do is make a 1MW UV beam that can pierce clouds and direct it at an obscured target.
 
Last edited:
Dilandu said:
Yes, but the general idea was that enough would survive the nuclear exchange to support the broken-backed warfare next.
Click to expand...
Serious studies found that Soviet industry was just as vulnerable as America's and that war survival was not a major factor in how and where they chose to build.
 
Dilandu said:
Not correct. Soviet era planners perfectly realized the problems with such hyper-concentration of population and industry, and tried to solve them by limiting population movement into big cities and building industrial facilities in the outer republics (like electronic factory in Georgia, which production was infamous for very low quality - it was forced on industrial plants as "load" (rus. "nagruzka") with normal quality production). But they were unable to achieve that, due to Moscow and Leningrad being much more prestigious and better for career-building.
Click to expand...
There are other explanations for that
1. They were trying to avoid Moscow and Leningrad from getting overcrowded
2. They were trying to prevent separatism by encouraging Great Russians to move to the other Republics
3. Most of all, they were building energy intensive heavy industry on rivers that had enormous hydropower resources
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
A 1 megawatt pulsed laser has an effective range of 50 Km. That is easily enough to protect urban areas from nuclear missiles without the cost and vulnerability of orbital weapons platforms.
Click to expand...
But you're then shooting down 5-10x as many targets but with less time to do it.
 
exclaimedleech8 said:
It only takes a few tenths of a second to jackhammer through the heat shield.
Click to expand...
Might not be a easy as you think. Gas pocket build-up is a big problem in laser machining, as it protects the surface and RVs are surrounded by plasma on re-entry, they're also made of materials which are very heat resistance for obvious reasons and may be relective rather than absorptive at the laser frequency being used.

You're also firing up through the thickest part of the atmosphere, which will cause more attenuation and aiming at very small, very fast moving objects. Even with speed of light engagement you need to aim over a metre in front of a 7km/s object and there maybe dozens of them coming at a city. It's also difficult to confirm destruction and below a certain altitude even airbursts are going to do damage and you may also be aiming at a bunch of penaids, since not all penaids get stripped by the atmosphere. Whereas aiming at the booster, you have a single nice big, slow target with an easy to confirm destruction rather than 10 small, fast warheads and a bunch of penaids. Liquid-fuel ICBMs are particular easy targets because they have a nice long, slow boost phase.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
You're also firing up through the thickest part of the atmosphere, which will cause more attenuation and aiming at very small, very fast moving objects. Even with speed of light engagement you need to aim over a metre in front of a 7km/s object and theirs maybe dozens of them coming at a city. It's also difficult to confirm destruction and below a certain altitude even airbursts are going to do damage and you may also be aiming at a bunch of penaids, since not all penaids get stripped by the atmosphere. Whereas aiming at the booster, you have a single nice big, slow target with an easy to confirm destruction rather than 10 small, fast warheads and a bunch of penaids. Liquid-fuel ICBMs are particular easy targets because they have a nice long, slow boost phase.
Click to expand...
No. Nuclear stockpiles these days aren't big enough to pelt a typical city with dozens of warheads.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom