Cheap at twice the price. The basic concepts were laid out during President Reagan's term. It will be based on grid coverage. Each space sensor will cover a grid, and target tracking will be handed off to the next grid sensor depending on direction of travel. A few interceptor types have been revealed. At present, the threat is primarily from HGVs. Or suborbital missiles. Destruction of foreign missiles during the boost phase was already possible during the Cold War. Three years to deploy the system is feasible.
 
Last edited:
If you think we can have this operational in three years, I have a bridge to sell you.
"Can" is certainly possible. "Will" or "politically practical" are other matters entirely.

None of the tech is really all that new and challenging; it's largely a matter of getting enough of it and launching enough of it. SpaceX and Starlink have shown that launching *thousands* of satellites in just a few years is certainly doable. No reason F9 cadence couldn't be scaled up to 2 or 3 launches a day... you'd just need to build more launch sites and more vehicles and infrastructure. Expensive, but what has been done once before can be done four or five times more if you're willing to pay.
 
I believe the current administration is moving very quickly and is willing to pay. Trillions of dollars of investments have come in and since national defense is the first priority for any country, it is an imperative.
 
None of the tech is really all that new and challenging; it's largely a matter of getting enough of it and launching enough of it. SpaceX and Starlink have shown that launching *thousands* of satellites in just a few years is certainly doable. No reason F9 cadence couldn't be scaled up to 2 or 3 launches a day... you'd just need to build more launch sites and more vehicles and infrastructure. Expensive, but what has been done once before can be done four or five times more if you're willing to pay.
The main bottleneck would likely be kinetic interceptors production. I rather doubt that they are made on hundreds-per-month basic.
 
I believe the current administration is moving very quickly and is willing to pay. Trillions of dollars of investments have come in and since national defense is the first priority for any country, it is an imperative.
Trillions!? You are drinking some serious kool aide. I'll believe it when I see it, and I aint seen that Golden Dome money yet.
 
The main bottleneck would likely be kinetic interceptors production. I rather doubt that they are made on hundreds-per-month basic.
Sure. But how fast are Starlink sats made now? Granted interceptors would doubtless cost more, but there's no fundamental reason why you can't ramp up production rates to however fast you want. And of course, the hypothetical was "operational in 3 years," not "FULLY operational." Might take another 5 to get fully implemented.

All it takes is:
1) Money
2) Oversight with enforcement
3) more money.
 
A system designed to protect large cities and the US's silos could be obtained more cost effectively than a nationwide defense system that protects every square inch of the country, requiring significant R&D of upwards of a trillion dollars to implement. From a politic perspective, in order not to destabilize the MAD theory, that appears to have been adopted by most nuclear responsible nations, a defense system that protects major cities, which are the targets for most bad actors, and the US's silos, using an Iron Dome-type system, and the current ABM systems already in place would be a better all-round system in my opinion.
Considering that the more immediate nuclear threat to the nation is from non-nation state bad actors that could smuggle across an open border a WMD device into a city or cities to create carnage for the benefit of their own radical politics. No space-based system could stop such a threat.
For silos all they'd really need is a couple HEDI-type missiles at each silo. You don't have to intercept everything. You just have to increase the number of warhead they other guy has to launch to ensure success.
 
Sure. But how fast are Starlink sats made now? Granted interceptors would doubtless cost more, but there's no fundamental reason why you can't ramp up production rates to however fast you want. And of course, the hypothetical was "operational in 3 years," not "FULLY operational." Might take another 5 to get fully implemented.
It could be done, of course, but currently it would clearly be a bottleneck - escpecially considering that Army and Navy need them too.
 
It could be done, of course, but currently it would clearly be a bottleneck - escpecially considering that Army and Navy need them too.
Having the Army and Navy buying in on the system, so long as they're buying the same system and not friggen' tinkering, would make things cheaper through economies of scale. If they went with different systems but used the same launch systems... then at least that aspect would get cheap as hell.
 
Having the Army and Navy buying in on the system, so long as they're buying the same system and not friggen' tinkering, would make things cheaper through economies of scale. If they went with different systems but used the same launch systems... then at least that aspect would get cheap as hell.
Theoretically, EKV's from anti-missile missiles should work fine as space-to-space projectiles. The problems may be with long-therm orbital storage. The typical EKV is not designed with long-term vacuum and zero-g conditions in mind. And while the first problem could be solved by storing EKV in nitrogen-filled pressurized container, the second one (zero-g) may require complete redesign.
 
Trump Dome! Is it really necessary to study every single word of the emperor so meticulously?
 
I'm not sure how you can justify stealing everybody's IP who works with you (and even those who don't, if you can get your hands on it). That's the biggest complaint.
I can't quite understand what the abbreviation "IP" means in what you said. Could you please explain it?
 
. And while the first problem could be solved by storing EKV in nitrogen-filled pressurized container, the second one (zero-g) may require complete redesign.
Having worked on KV design back in the day, microgravity is not much of a concern. The divert/propulsion system stands a good chance of being a solid propellant gas generator which could give a rats ass about microgravity.
 
Intellectual Property.

However individual Chinese people should not be tasked with explaining the sins of their government. Its not like they voted it in.

The US AI companies have completely disregarded IP and copywrite completely for their LLM's. Stolen at will.

So maybe not exactly the sins of the US government yet the sins of corporate America, with zero Govt oversite.

As above when others do it, it is a travesty, yet when the US does it nothing to see.

Regards,
 
The US AI companies have completely disregarded IP and copywrite completely for their LLM's. Stolen at will.

So maybe not exactly the sins of the US government yet the sins of corporate America, with zero Govt oversite.

As above when others do it, it is a travesty, yet when the US does it nothing to see.

Regards,
Absolutely agree with this. Meta pirating insane amounts of ebooks for training without any sanction is... eyeopening.
 
Yet the simple difference is that China laid the ground rules for any foreign company to operate in China a long time ago.

Give us everything and operate under strict oversite and you can proceed, if not thanks for coming. Bye

Guess what, they all did it with their ears pinned back...................all because billions of people meant billions of dollars on the table.

Money over anything, that is the US way now, a very sad state of affairs that will not end well.

Regards,
 
Last edited:
Yet the simple difference is that China laid the ground rules for any foreign company to operate in China a long time ago.

Give us everything and operate under strict oversite and you can proceed, if not thanks for coming. Bye

Guess what, they all did it with their ears pinned back...................all because billions of people meant billions of dollars on the table.

Money over anything, that is the US way now, a very sad state of affairs that will not end well.

Regards,
I think this is the greedy nature of the bourgeoisie. As long as there is profit, they can sell the rope that hangs themselves. Guess what? In China, many people think that continuing to invest in India and transfer technology to them after the China-India border conflict is treason, especially since the Modi government likes to confiscate the profits of foreign capital for strange reasons. But there are still a lot of Chinese enterprises building steel plants, cement plants and fertilizer plants in India (lol).
 
Yet the simple difference is that China laid the ground rules for any foreign company to operate in China a long time ago.

Give us everything and operate under strict oversite and you can proceed, if not thanks for coming. Bye

Guess what, they all did it with their ears pinned back...................all because billions of people meant billions of dollars on the table.
Completely agree with this, it was obvious from the start and everyone was happy to hand over the family jewels for a quick buck. And now everyone complains that China is a rival to the west! No shit! If you hand someone all your knowledge they can't be expected to continue being your lap dog.
 
I believe the current administration is moving very quickly and is willing to pay. Trillions of dollars of investments have come in and since national defense is the first priority for any country, it is an imperative.
Let's circle back on this, as well as the operational readiness state of the Qatari AF1, in January 2029 then, shall we? Somehow the big beautiful border wall of Trump I vintage comes to mind, but perhaps that just petered out because Mexico didn't come through with the financing...
 
Last edited:
Trillions of dollars of investments have come in....
Billions of dollars has been promised, I don't think much has been built yet.
Who is going to man chip foundries that work with extremely specialized machines? I don't think many Taiwanese are happy to go to the USA where the can be grabbed of the streets and being imprisoned in some far away country for the rest of their lives... The people who can work those machines are all highly trained engineers ( Master of Engineering, not machine operator-level of engineer ) Now there are barely enough, what about 5 years down the line when all those libtards are in jail. You know those liberals that went to college and all became critics of the regime? Oh yeah, those liberal colleges will all be closed, because it was a nest of enemies. So yeah, that gives the investors confidence that the USA will become a technological powerhouse....

More on topic: I have read analyses that states that enemies wouldn't use ICBM to attach the USA but low observable hypersonic cruise-missiles that would barely be visible and launched close to US soil. The golden dome system would be useless in such a case. It would even be possible to launch missiles from inside the US, hidden is some container or from a warehouse. Either smuggled-in in pieces, or build from locally sourced parts ( domestic terrorists). Technologically a golden dome could be built these days, but it would become pretty ineffective very soon...
 
It would even be possible to launch missiles from inside the US, hidden is some container or from a warehouse. Either smuggled-in in pieces, or build from locally sourced parts ( domestic terrorists). Technologically a golden dome could be built these days, but it would become pretty ineffective very soon...
In that case, the Golden Dome would have proven itself to have been *fantastically* useful. An attack of short-ranged missiles launched within the CONUS would necessarily be a very limited strike, with extreme risk of failing due to prior discovery. So Golden Dome has forced the enemy from a mass ICBM launch that could result in the complete elimination of the US, to instead a risky, very limited attack with limited damage potential while leaving the attacker open to massive retaliation.

Golden Dome wins.
 
Any serious attempt to develop a missile defense layer impenetrable to Russia and China would be destabilizing and could lead to nuclear armageddon.
1. What's the stable state?
2. Why would it be destabilizing?
3. If the defense is impenetrable, wouldn't a nuclear armageddon be impossible by definition?
 
It is a useful as dropping a 3 million bomb on a 10 dollar tent...
Sure it will prevent raining down ICBMs, but then again who has ICBMs? Russia, why should they attack their vassal state... Trump will get a spanking next time he is in Moscow by daddy Putin. Saves them a lot of money replacing those ICBMs..
China? Trump is more then capable enough in destroying the USA by himself.... China has to sit and wait and laugh often...
Iran? If anything that Iran has are enough people that are willing to blow themself up, they don't need to use their few ICBMs... Besides they hate Israel more...

The golden dome is also a distraction, it is not about denying access from space, but to space.
If I was an evil genius with more money then sense (alas....) I would launch 50,000 satellites into space and tell the world to cough up money to get into space or they might bump into one of my satellites. I would call it ' access to a database with safe flight-paths for space-access'. The reason being that some satellites are barely visible from the ground and there could be any number of tests of various weapons at any one time that might hit any rocket not authorized to be there. Ofcourse everyone would laugh at the idea, but no rocket makes it into space without me knowing.... Ofcourse there will be people that criticize me and my golden dome... Oops, a satellite drops onto their home... A projectile hits their car or helicopter.... Or maybe as they stand in line waiting for a hotdog...

Oh, they idea that golden dome only 1 time costs a few trillion is laughable. The network has to be maintained, continuously. StarLink looses about 100 satellites a month.... A much bigger network needs even more replenishment flights to keep the numbers constant...

You don't need a mass attack to bring down a country, especially the USA... It would take actually very little to bring the current government to its knees... The incompetence would do far greater damage then any action of an "enemy".
 
Mutually Assured Destruction led to a stalemate during the Cold War. If they launched their ICBMs, we'd launch ours. MAneuverable Reentry Vehicles or MARV, were developed during the Cold War. The only difference with reacting to a reentry vehicle arriving from orbit is now, the threat is a maneuverable vehicle at sub-orbital altitudes. Look-down radars were developed during the Cold War. Satellites could see through cloud cover. So, aside from deploying interceptors in orbit, the basic technology exists.

All of the possible enemy launch scenarios have been gone through. A cargo ship carrying a cruise missile with a warhead, to smuggling in the components. The required nuclear material is hard to come by. A covert assembly site with a mobile launcher? Sure, but the chance of discovery is high.
 
1. What's the stable state?
2. Why would it be destabilizing?
3. If the defense is impenetrable, wouldn't a nuclear armageddon be impossible by definition?

1. The stable state is the status quo of mutually assured destruction
2. It would be destabilizing because there would be no more mutually assured destruction, just unilateral destruction possible by the side with the defense (blue team) against the side without the defense (red team).
3. Red team would have to threaten to launch a counter-force strike prior to the defense going into effect. The hope would be that the threat of nuclear annihilation would convince blue team not to finish the defenses. As blue team constructs the defenses, red team would eventually reach a point of "use it or lose it" with regard to their nuclear arsenal. A counter-force strike by red team would be prudent as it would reduce the number of warheads available for blue team to use on red team. Once blue team has an impenetrable defense, red team is at their complete mercy, and must bend to their will or else take nuclear weapons to the face. Let's imagine, however, that blue team constructs the defenses without incident, no nuclear use by either side. Blue team later learns that red team is working on 1) their own defenses, and 2) nuclear delivery systems able to penetrate blue team's defenses. Faced with possible future annihilation, blue team will be incentivized to strike now while it is still safe and effective to do so.
4. In reality, golden dome will never be fully constructed, as it will be far too expensive, and China (and perhaps even Russia) will be able to keep MAD intact by keeping their offensive capabilities ahead of any golden dome developments.

The game theory of MAD has been studied for many many decades. The US and the Soviet Union signed treaties limiting missile defense development, as such development could be destabilizing. We're fortunate that golden dome is merely a grift to redistribute wealth from the average American taxpayer to the Silicon Valley robber barrons, and not an effort with a legitimate chance at acheiving its stated aims.
 
More on topic: I have read analyses that states that enemies wouldn't use ICBM to attach the USA but low observable hypersonic cruise-missiles that would barely be visible and launched close to US soil.
First of all, hypersonic and low-visibility did not exactly mix well. Second, any attack that required pre-positioning the missiles close to enemy territory is by definition more complicated and prone to failure than the one that you could launch from home. Third, if your enemies could actually sneak something as big and hard to move as hypersonic cruise missile container INSIDE your country, then you are basically already defeated and have little options but surrender.
 
Either smuggled-in in pieces, or build from locally sourced parts ( domestic terrorists).

...Yeah, a hordes of secret agents in Fedora hats would sneak inside USA, carrying in their pockets the rocket fuel camouflaged as sigars, and plutonium camouflaged as glowing paint on grandfather clocks.
 
The US AI companies have completely disregarded IP and copywrite completely for their LLM's. Stolen at will.

So maybe not exactly the sins of the US government yet the sins of corporate America, with zero Govt oversite.

As above when others do it, it is a travesty, yet when the US does it nothing to see.

Regards,
Its especially amusing as the industrial revolution was "exported" to the USA by way of a Briton stealing a bunch of his employers blueprints and traveling to Boston.
 
Its especially amusing as the industrial revolution was "exported" to the USA by way of a Briton stealing a bunch of his employers blueprints and traveling to Boston.
If you're referring to Francis Cabot Lowell, he didn't steal a single diagram. He (born in Massachussetts, not a Briton) was allowed to tour British factories (I believe simply as a visitor, not an employee) and simply memorized how the power looms were designed, sailed back to the US and made his diagrams *here.*
 
If you're referring to Francis Cabot Lowell, he didn't steal a single diagram. He (born in Massachussetts, not a Briton) was allowed to tour British factories (I believe simply as a visitor, not an employee) and simply memorized how the power looms were designed, sailed back to the US and made his diagrams *here.*
No, I expect he was referring to Slater the Traitor who was very much British, although didn't travel to Boston. You're right that he didn't steal a single diagram physically as he carried the information in his head, not being allowed to take any of his notes and indeed I believe it would have been illegal to export any of the technical knowledge of the mill operations. That f*cker did it twenty years before your man stole more ingenuity.
 
Last edited:
No, I expect he was referring to Slater the Traitor who was very much British.
Huh. So, ok, he was indentured to the mill as a child - more or less enslaved - and learned the system he was chained to. He then emigrated to the US as soon as he could, taking with him the training that he was forced to learn.

Yeah, not really seeing him as the bad guy here.
 
Huh. So, ok, he was indentured to the mill as a child - more or less enslaved - and learned the system he was chained to. He then emigrated to the US as soon as he could, taking with him the training that he was forced to learn.

Yeah, not really seeing him as the bad guy here.
You could also see it as the guys parents dying (edit: father), being taught a trade, knowledge and a job for life but put whatever spin you like on to it. Fact is it was still stolen IP.
 
You could also see it as the guys parents dying (edit: father), being taught a trade, knowledge and a job for life but put whatever spin you like on to it. Fact is it was still stolen IP.
If his family indentured him into the life, the knowledge was forced upon him. It's like claiming someone stole a tattoo that you forced on them; or a child soldier stealing the knowledge of how to operate an AK-47; or an American sailor, kidnapped by the Royal Navy and forced to work on their ships (see: War of 1812), stealing knowledge of how the Royal Navy does things.

Random reminiscence: when I was employed by United Tech in the early 2000's, I worked occasionally on missile defense systems. And was rather stunned when *Russian* contractors sat in on some of the meetings with Air Force guys. I can't call it stealing if we let them in, they learned stuff, and they went home and used what they learned without absconding with documents they weren't supposed to have.
 
If his family indentured him into the life, the knowledge was forced upon him. It's like claiming someone stole a tattoo that you forced on them; or a child soldier stealing the knowledge of how to operate an AK-47; or an American sailor, kidnapped by the Royal Navy and forced to work on their ships (see: War of 1812), stealing knowledge of how the Royal Navy does things.
It is not at all. He knowingly and willingly took the knowledge. The US were after it and he took the bait.
US entrepreneurs were desperate to acquire the machines - in newspapers they offered bribes to English workers for their knowledge.
Samuel Slater could not resist.

English Factory Worker

Samuel Slater has been called the "father of the American factory system." He was born in Derbyshire, England on June 9, 1768. The son of a yeoman farmer, Slater went to work at an early age as an apprentice for the owner of a cotton mill. Eventually rising to the position of superintendent, he became intimately familiar with the mill machines designed by Richard Arkwright, a genius whose other advances included using water power to drive his machines and dividing labor among groups of workers.

Sneaky Departure
In 1789, Slater emigrated to the United States. He dreamed of making a fortune by helping to build a textile industry. He did so covertly: British law forbade textile workers to share technological information or to leave the country. Slater set foot in New York in late 1789, having memorized the details of Britain's innovative machines.

He wasn't taken in to slavery, he was taken on as an apprentice directly by a historic industrialist.

Samuel Slater was born at or near Belper in Derbyshire on June 9, 1768, the son of a prosperous yeoman farmer. As a youth, Samuel demonstrated considerable skill as a mechanic, and in school he excelled in arithmetic.​

Apprenticeship in the Textile Trade

The Slater farm was located near the river Derwent. The first spinning mill driven by water power was built in Cromford on the Derwent in 1771 by Jedediah Strutt and Richard Arkwright, the inventor of the water-frame spinner. In 1776 they dissolved their partnership, and Strutt took over his own mill in Belper, where Slater began his apprenticeship at the age of 14.​

Although the terms of the indenture were harsh and Slater had to work hard, Strutt treated him kindly. Slater learned to operate all the machinery involved in converting raw cotton into yarn. When the machinery broke down - a frequent occurrence since the spinning industry was still in its infancy - he made the necessary repairs.​

At the end of his apprenticeship Slater concluded that the best opportunities for advancement in the textile industry were in the United States. Handicraft methods still prevailed there, since no American had yet been successful in constructing a spinning machine, and British law prohibited the export of such machines. In 1789 Slater made his way to London, where he negotiated his passage to America. He told neither his family nor his friends of his plans.

According to legend, he sailed from London disguised as a farm laborer, since British law also prohibited the emigration of skilled mechanics.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom