The US Space Force

Last edited:
Last edited:
www.defensenews.com

Orbit Fab ships first satellite refueling ports to Space Force

The company's RAFTI port is designed to be installed on satellites to allow them to receive propellant either in space or on the ground before launch.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

www.defensenews.com

Space Force sends Congress $1 billion list of unfunded projects

The list includes $846 million in classified projects.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

breakingdefense.com

SPACECOM wants $1.2B in FY25 for 'unfunded priorities,' most classified - Breaking Defense

The SPACECOM list includes almost $704 million for three unnamed classified programs, as well as $90 million to fund a trio of classified Navy electronic warfare-based "counterspace" capabilities.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

breakingdefense.com

Space Force, IC's battle over commercial ISR reignites as appropriators add fuel - Breaking Defense

More than a dozen sources tell Breaking Defense that tensions between the NGA and Space Force are rising on commercial ISR, with White House officials watching closely.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
Last edited:
What will protect those assets? Isn't now the time to dust off Dyna-Soar?

maxresdefault.jpg
 
How long for Iran proxy and alike to be able to shoot Low earth orbit satellites? Do you think these kind of groups would not crave shooting one or littering low orbits with debris of several?
 
TomcatViP said:
How long for Iran proxy and alike to be able to shoot Low earth orbit satellites? Do you think these kind of groups would not crave shooting one or littering low orbits with debris of several?
Click to expand...
Dynasoar would do nothing to stop that.
 
TomcatViP said:
How long for Iran proxy and alike to be able to shoot Low earth orbit satellites? Do you think these kind of groups would not crave shooting one or littering low orbits with debris of several?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but they will likely make a lot of enemies that way. There is no realistic way of stopping someone from trashing low earth orbit; if the Iranians want to just boost ten tons of ball bearings or fishing weights into orbit that is a goal they can achieve now.
 
Josh_TN said:
Perhaps, but they will likely make a lot of enemies that way. There is no realistic way of stopping someone from trashing low earth orbit; if the Iranians want to just boost ten tons of ball bearings or fishing weights into orbit that is a goal they can achieve now.
Click to expand...
Did you actually try to calculate, how ridiculously small sector of orbit those ten tons of ball bearings could block?
 
Dilandu said:
Did you actually try to calculate, how ridiculously small sector of orbit those ten tons of ball bearings could block?
Click to expand...

I am presuming that the original post by TomcatViP was concerning the knock on effect of multiple satellites being disintegrated in orbit, causing a cascading effect of debris in LEO (Kessler Syndrome). Engaging even a dozen satellites out of a constellation of hundreds would have rather negligible direct effect, but ultimately numerous follow on collisions over time might produce a more permanent problem. So if that is the long term goal of a rouge state, for example Iran, then there is no need to target specific satellites. They would only have to send a cloud of projectiles in a counter orbit to one satellite, or ideally an orbital plane with multiple satellites, to likely achieve a hit eventually. Starlink should provide all the feeder stock anyone could hope for. This would not threaten a proliferated constellation immediately, but if things snowballed it might ultimately threaten it over time.
 
Josh_TN said:
I am presuming that the original post by TomcatViP was concerning the knock on effect of multiple satellites being disintegrated in orbit, causing a cascading effect of debris in LEO (Kessler Syndrome). Engaging even a dozen satellites out of a constellation of hundreds would have rather negligible direct effect, but ultimately numerous follow on collisions over time might produce a more permanent problem. So if that is the long term goal of a rouge state, for example Iran, then there is no need to target specific satellites. They would only have to send a cloud of projectiles in a counter orbit to one satellite, or ideally an orbital plane with multiple satellites, to likely achieve a hit eventually. Starlink should provide all the feeder stock anyone could hope for. This would not threaten a proliferated constellation immediately, but if things snowballed it might ultimately threaten it over time.
Click to expand...
Kessler syndrome is greatly overestimated. It basically means that the most heavy-used orbits would become less economically useful due to expected work time of satellites decreasing significantly (due to increasing probability of hitting the debris). And on low orbit it would be only a temporary effect anyway; due to atmospheric friction, most of debris would rather quickly deccelerate and burn.
 
Dilandu said:
Kessler syndrome is greatly overestimated. It basically means that the most heavy-used orbits would become less economically useful due to expected work time of satellites decreasing significantly (due to increasing probability of hitting the debris). And on low orbit it would be only a temporary effect anyway; due to atmospheric friction, most of debris would rather quickly deccelerate and burn.
Click to expand...

There’s still hundreds of fragments from the last Russian ASAT test being tracked, and I believe some are expected to stay up for decades. I cannot speak to the probability of a cascading effect, but it certainly seems like were that to happen, low earth orbit would have drastically increased collision hazards for a generation or two.

But in any case, it is unlikely there is any cost effective or politically acceptable way of stopping direct ascent KE weapons or other intentional orbital shrapnel from being deployed. The best deterrent IMO is too make any such effort meaningless in the short term: there is no point in launching kinetic attacks if it is not going to significantly degrade your opponent’s capabilities during a conflict.
 
preventing or mitigating such nuisances would need a platform up there ready to intervene.

There is a favorable factor here, however: rogue actors that might potentially have the means and intend to disrupt LEO are not scattered all across the globe. At any time, there would be one or two locations where such actions might be attempted. Hence, we can define a patrolling area where to enforce satellite protection.
Ideally, the enforcer is a vehicle that is multi-tasked across a vast range of missions and pre-deployed on-orbit to hasten operational delay upon an alert. Cross range and the ability to dive into the atmosphere to proceed with kinetic intercept of an ascending kill vehicle inside the atmosphere would seem more appropriate than a ground based system.

Retriving damaged satellites and collecting debrits would be a plus for a sister vehicle, that could be a civilian asset.
 
TomcatViP said:
preventing or mitigating such nuisances would need a platform up there ready to intervene.

There is a favorable factor here, however: rogue actors that might potentially have the means and intend to disrupt LEO are not scattered all across the globe. At any time, there would be one or two locations where such actions might be attempted. Hence, we can define a patrolling area where to enforce satellite protection.
Ideally, the enforcer is a vehicle that is multi-tasked across a vast range of missions and pre-deployed on-orbit to hasten operational delay upon an alert. Cross range and the ability to dive into the atmosphere to proceed with kinetic intercept of an ascending kill vehicle inside the atmosphere would seem more appropriate than a ground based system.

Retriving damaged satellites and collecting debrits would be a plus for a sister vehicle, that could be a civilian asset.
Click to expand...

The nature of orbital mechanics means that the only way to “patrol” a particular part of the earth’s surface is to be at an altitude so high as to be useless for low earth orbit. So whatever defense mechanism you are envisioning would still have to have more or less global coverage.

But the other problem is that even if an organization had a physical method for shooting down direct ascent KE weapons or unauthorized space launches (and that is pretty much just a fantasy right now anyway), how is it going to be politically acceptable to simply fire on other countries’s rockets?
 
Byeman said:
DEW as in Distance Early Warning? That already exists.
Click to expand...
Direct Energy Weapon.

Other news:

www.defensenews.com

Space Development Agency may hire companies to tow defunct satellites

SDA satellite are designed to deorbit, but the agency is exploring commercial services as a backup option.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

www.defensenews.com

Space Force to upgrade sensors for in-orbit testing, training

Through a partnership with other Pentagon agencies, STARCOM plans to install new space domain awareness sensors on satellites in orbit as soon as 2025.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
Last edited:
www.spacewar.com

Mynaric Accelerates Space Communication with CONDOR Mk3 Production

Berlin, Germany (SPX) Apr 04, 2024 - Mynaric, a leader in scalable laser communications solutions (NASDAQ: MYNA) (FRA: M0YN), has reached a key moment with the start of volume production of its flagship CONDOR Mk3 optical communication
www.spacewar.com

www.spacewar.com

ATLAS Integrates DoD antenna into Hybrid Space Architecture

Los Angeles CA (SPX) Apr 04, 2024 - In a significant advancement for space communications technology, ATLAS Space Operations has successfully integrated a Department of Defense (DoD) antenna into its Freedom Software Platform, marking
www.spacewar.com

www.spacewar.com

SwRI advances space sustainability with new in-space refueling craft

Los Angeles CA (SPX) Apr 02, 2024 - Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) is embarking on a pioneering $25.5 million project under the Space Mobility and Logistics (SML) initiative, funded by the U.S. Space Force. This venture, in colla
www.spacewar.com
 
Last edited:
@Forest Green : I understand that Troposcatter is an atmospheric communication device, probably using tropopause reflection for beyond LOS (BLOS) communication.
It's a substitute to satellite com, hence probably not related to the Space Force.
 
www.spacewar.com

Sierra Space Ghost Advances to Flight Testing, Promising 90-Minute Global Delivery

Los Angeles CA (SPX) Apr 09, 2024 - Sierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company and next generation defense-tech prime, building a platform in space to benefit life on Earth and protect the freedom of economic activity in th
www.spacewar.com

bobbymike said:

Global Counterspace Capabilities Report | Secure World

swfound.org swfound.org
Click to expand...
Isn't SM-3 direct ascent? I would have thought the quantity of them would class as significant?
 
Forest Green said:
www.spacewar.com

Sierra Space Ghost Advances to Flight Testing, Promising 90-Minute Global Delivery

Los Angeles CA (SPX) Apr 09, 2024 - Sierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company and next generation defense-tech prime, building a platform in space to benefit life on Earth and protect the freedom of economic activity in th
www.spacewar.com


Isn't SM-3 direct ascent? I would have thought the quantity of them would class as significant?
Click to expand...

Try reading the report. It talks about the ASAT potential of both SM-3 and GBI. (pg.58 ff) The report marks the US direct-ascent LEO ASAT capability as "uncertain" because it is unclear to what extent that US can or would use these weapons in an ASAT capacity.
 
Forest Green said:
www.spacewar.com

Sierra Space Ghost Advances to Flight Testing, Promising 90-Minute Global Delivery

Los Angeles CA (SPX) Apr 09, 2024 - Sierra Space, a leading commercial space-tech company and next generation defense-tech prime, building a platform in space to benefit life on Earth and protect the freedom of economic activity in th
www.spacewar.com


Isn't SM-3 direct ascent? I would have thought the quantity of them would class as significant?
Click to expand...

The current version is not really kinetically capable of LEO; that satellite was going to re-enter. Blk 1B with the 21” wide second stage will probably be an ASAT capable weapon.
 
TomS said:
Try reading the report. It talks about the ASAT potential of both SM-3 and GBI. (pg.58 ff) The report marks the US direct-ascent LEO ASAT capability as "uncertain" because it is unclear to what extent that US can or would use these weapons in an ASAT capacity.
Click to expand...
I get your point but as of 2022, 500 SM-3s had been produced. That's pretty significant. Does anyone else have 500+ ASAT-capable missiles.

Is the table on page 01-16 correct, "apogee... 2,700km,"? That was only a Block IA. Satellite apogee maybe??

1712671683026.png

Josh_TN said:
The current version is not really kinetically capable of LEO; that satellite was going to re-enter. Blk 1B with the 21” wide second stage will probably be an ASAT capable weapon.
Click to expand...
I think you mean Blk IIAs, Blk IBs still have original diameter.

It does not need to be capable of LEO itself to hit a LEO satellite. If it was, then it would likely be defined as co-orbital, since it uses the same orbit. USA-193 was destroyed at an altitude of 247km by a Blk IA. From what I understand, a satellite is a relatively easy target compared to an RV.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Is the table on page 01-16 correct, "apogee... 2,700km,"? That was only a Block IA. Satellite apogee maybe??
Click to expand...

Debris apogee, I believe. The actual intercept was around 250 km. The satellite was in a roughly circular orbit that started as 349 x 365 km and decayed down to 244 x 261 km.

en.m.wikipedia.org

Operation Burnt Frost - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
 
Forest Green said:
I get your point but as of 2022, 500 SM-3s had been produced. That's pretty significant. Does anyone else have 500+ ASAT-capable missiles.

Is the table on page 01-16 correct, "apogee... 2,700km,"? That was only a Block IA. Satellite apogee maybe??

View attachment 724986


I think you mean Blk IIAs, Blk IBs still have original diameter.

It does not need to be capable of LEO itself to hit a LEO satellite. If it was, then it would likely be defined as co-orbital, since it uses the same orbit. USA-193 was destroyed at an altitude of 247km by a Blk IA. From what I understand, a satellite is a relatively easy target compared to an RV.
Click to expand...

Yes, blk2A.

I meant that it could not intercept a satellite in a conventional LEO orbit, not that any version was capable of achieving stable orbit. The target’s orbit had descended well below the perigee of most any satellite. But the 2a probably does have enough performance to hit objects in some lower orbits.
 
Josh_TN said:
Yes, blk2A.

I meant that it could not intercept a satellite in a conventional LEO orbit, not that any version was capable of achieving stable orbit. The target’s orbit had descended well below the perigee of most any satellite. But the 2a probably does have enough performance to hit objects in some lower orbits.
Click to expand...
That's where I disagree, it absolutely can. I think you'd be surprised by how many satellites orbit below 250km, or descend below that in elliptical orbits. USA-193 was in an elliptical orbit with an apogee of 2,700km for instance. Yes, it was out of control, and that's why it was targeted. This does not imply in any way that an in control one couldn't be targeted, it's just that it doesn't make sense to target the healthy ones in a test. If anything, a decaying orbit is harder not easier to predict and guide on.

ASM-135 hit a satellite at 555km with relatively ancient technology, and a missile that likely has much less range than a Blk IIA, even when launched from an F-15 at 38,000ft and M0.9.
 
Regarding Sierra Ghost, from the article above:
Additional background on Sierra Space Ghost:

+ On-orbit time of five years, vehicles are outfitted with pre-determined supplies (a survival kit, inflatable boat, rations, weaponry, etc.) pre-staged on orbit

+ On call-up, the system re-orients and begins re-entry/targeting cycle; the de-orbit motor slows the vehicle to 7,000 meters per second


+ Gravity then captures the vehicle and it begins to re-enter Earth's atmosphere with the thermal protection shield withstanding temperatures up to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit

+ Once through atmosphere, the shield is then discarded leaving just the requested payload and a parafoil

+ At the right altitude, the parafoil is released and it steers the payload to the required area within 100 meters
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom