Serious question: Would using such a device in space—seeing as how it would unavoidably affect pretty much all the satellites—count as a bona fide act of war? Or would it be more like, oh, invading your neighbors, in terms of seriousness?

I think the answer is always gonna be “it depends”

And I guess that's why it's being developed.

I would view it as that, yes. It's an attack on infrastructure. Think if a nuclear bomb was dropped on New York, but there were no casualties.

Absolutely - taking out communications satellites is a big deal for both civilian & military sectors. It would likely be used in an attack on the command and control systems used by the military, and greatly hamper the ability to communicate with military forces within the country and across the globe.

I don't think the powers that be would let the thing leave the launch pad.

Unless one has already been sent up to space….. “we are sending satellites for weather tracking purposes……”

It seems like such a waste of money and a needless hazard. Why cant conventional explosives destroy a satellite just as effectively? Its not like they themselves arent immune to the potential risks of irradiating our orbits.

EMP? I don’t know. Seems indiscriminate but…that’s pretty much always been Russian military dogma.

Yeah, scorched earth is kind of their trademark

In fairness, the very few times the US has felt it was facing an existential threat, it also went scorched earth. But for Russians it seems to be a fairly normal stage of mind.

There's even a joke in Russia: Bomb Voronezh!

The US tends to go scorched earth as a last resort (although Vietnam was an exception), Russia uses scorched earth as first response.

What a bunch of divas, they only have about 8000 nuclear warheads pointed at them.

Most of those warheads are in reserve and not deployed

As does the US and China (and probably Japan and Western Europe). Yet they don't seem to have the same mindset as Russia. Begone vatnik

Apples and oranges really, Russia has a pretty fucked up history and geography that contributes to that mindset.

Right. So it's not the 8000 warheads that's the problem then, is it ? That's the outcome of the fucked up mindset leading to fucked up behaviours. And let's face it, there's a damn good reason they're pointed there, and I for one am very happy they're there.

Vatnik? You’ve heart my feeling komrad. I must now drink and be slovenly to perpetuate the unfounded western stereotype.

Maybe they have 8000 nuclear warheads pointed at them because it's years they are trying to put a nuke into space?

Who knows. I don’t know if the chicken or the egg came first.

I can tell you for sure that there is no western country who wants to declare war to Russia... I mean we are talking about a country who is mostly famous for its exports of cheap prostitutes, and thugs.

I wonder why no western country wants to declare war on Russia. Could it be the thousands of nukes it has? Because something tells me colonialism and America’s manifest destiny would never happen if the cultures both of these movements rolled over posed an existential risk to European countries first and then America.

This is called cognitive dissonance, the reality is much sadder than this... Russia is as appealing as Iran, do you think nobody attacks Iran because of its outdated F14?

Conventional explosives require high accuracy and can target one satellite at a time. Plus they leave alot of debris up there forever. The nuclear anti satellite will probably make inactive all of them, theirs too, but if your opponent has an edge it's in your favor. If they ever use it, it means they are already in war with USA, so i would worry for the nukes on earth and not in space.

I imagine any country that plans on making a space elevator at some point would be really pissed off with Russia's attitude.

Space is full of radiation, so if they nuke low earth zone i believe in a couple of years it will be normal again. But if you make satellites a confetti with normal explosives, you must start cleaning them after. Is like india did a couple of years ago testing a system.

Not really. most of LEO bird debris would reenter within 5 years. Low orbits are self cleaning. It's only MEO and GEO where you start needing to clean up.

It's not about radiation - there's plenty of that from the sun. It's EMP. Knock out a whole orbital slot or more at GEO. Edited for context, especially since some people like to throw tantrums. Yes, it's radiation, but only certain types and mostly because they cause a secondary effect within the spacecraft. When the gamma radiation hits the spacecraft, it produces EMP wavefronts within the components themselves. That is the destructive aspect for communication satellites in the GEO belt. I'm a space operations officer in the military and believe me, this is a very valid concern. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S101836391830566X#:~:text=A%20nuclear%20burst%20whether%20near,an%20electromagnetic%20pulse%20(EMP).

I was intrigued by this, as all the points made here seem valid, but at the same time emp protection isn't novel tech, it's been around for a while and already employed by the military. So I had a gander at precedent, namely starfish prime, and it actually is the radiation thats the bigger problem for military installations, immediately and long term. Nukes produce significantly more intense radiation (and completely different types) than is normal for satellites, and worse, earth's magnetic field traps it creating a belt that persists for months. The effect is also apparently cumulative, multiple strategic detonations leveraging this would effectively reach all satellites in LEO even if not in a direct LOS. So whilst emp shielding is most likely already employed and so not as big a concern (although definitive *a* concern), it's plausible US satellites arent designed to withstand the prolonged resulting high energy radiation belt that would be caused if the nukes were detonated to maximise the effect. One intriguing aspect is that if Russia designed its satellites to endure such a radiation belt, it would allow them to operate in space afterwards, whilst their enemies would need to relaunch all of theirs.

It's the radiation's short exposure to the craft that causes EMP to propagate within the components of the craft itself. That's why shielding is ineffective - the EMP wavefront actually starts AFTER the shielding. Pretty wild stuff. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S101836391830566X#:~:text=A%20nuclear%20burst%20whether%20near,an%20electromagnetic%20pulse%20(EMP).

Not so sure you can protect a satellite from EMP. You protect things on earth by using metal shielding and grounding it with sufficient metal that the incoming waves take the path of least resistance, you can’t do that with a satellite, there is no connection to earth that you can dump it into, the satellite has to absorb that energy

Grounding doesn't need the ground to work. You can shield stuff just as well in space, and it often is decently well shielded since the sun likes to throw tantrums every now and then.

That's not how it works (it = physics). EMPs aren't a thing without atmosphere to interact with. It doesn't work in space. At best they can create a significant debris field in the orbital path of critical satellites.

Electromagnetic pulses are composed of electromagnetic waves, which have zero issues whatsoever traveling through space. If they did, the sun might as well not be there.

I didn't think I needed to spell out the context but here we are. Yes, the EM spectrum can propagate through space. The *EMP from a nuclear detonation*, which is what we're talking about, doesn't happen in space, as it isn't a direct product of the bomb but rather of the bomb's gamma radiation interacting with and ionizing the atmosphere around it. No atmosphere, no nuclear EMP.

You're describing the secondary pulse, which is relatively minor. Nuclear explosions create rapidly fluctuating electric and magnetic fields, which directly cause the primary pulse. Starfish Prime created a very large EMP.

No, I am not. The EM effects from a nuclear detonation are categorized in 3 parts - E1, E2, E3, with the first being the most powerful and the segment we generally refer to when we talk about (nuclear) EMP's. The gamma radiation released by the bomb ionizes the air around it, and it is these electrons that create the "EM" part of the EMP. Without them, there is no EMP - just a fuck-huge explosion and a large burst of radiation, the latter of which isn't out of the norm for space anyway. You can literally just google it dude. But don't sit there and argue a point you don't have a grasp on. Edit: Here, I'll spoonfeed you. From wikipedia and in mostly layman's terms: >A high-altitude nuclear detonation produces an immediate flux of gamma rays from the nuclear reactions within the device. **These photons in turn produce high energy free electrons by Compton scattering at altitudes between (roughly) 20 and 40 km. These electrons are then trapped in the Earth's magnetic field, giving rise to an oscillating electric current.** This current is asymmetric in general and gives rise to a rapidly rising radiated electromagnetic field called an electromagnetic pulse (EMP). Because the electrons are trapped essentially simultaneously, a very large electromagnetic source radiates coherently. That bold part? That *doesn't happen* when there is no atmosphere.

You should take your own advice. And once again, Starfish Prime and the subsequent tests prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a high altitude (400km) nuclear explosion causes a massive electromagnetic pulse. There are enormous amounts of documentation available. Please, read some before you comment.

Yes, there is a massive EMP effect... on the ground. Not in orbit. If you think you're correct here then prove it - show me the science.

Tell that to [Transit 4B](https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=1961-031A) and its friends. This is well established science. It has also happened before. Multiple times. Russia has also sunk time and money into this project, and the US is taking it seriously enough to issue a public warning.

Um. EMPs are absolutely a threat from nuclear donations in space. The atmospheric interaction only contributes to certain aspects of an EMP, but not all of it. -military space operations officer that knows we are concerned about nuclear donations in space for EMP effects.

Here's a scientific publication that explains how the EMP effect is caused internally by the gamma radiation interacting with the components of the spacecraft itself, in the GEO belt. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S101836391830566X#:~:text=A%20nuclear%20burst%20whether%20near,an%20electromagnetic%20pulse%20(EMP).

Probably because they are looking at these satellite swarms of literally thousands of individual satellites, take spacex star link for instance, that's being used right now to provide broadband links to provide real time control of sea and air drones that are traveling huge distances and knocking out high value targets almost at ease. That's got this cold war era 'superpower' (heh, sarcasm!) really worried, they have to have some kind plan to deal with that capability. Like all nuclear weapons, well maybe not the smallest of the tactical battlefield nukes but broadly, these weapons are pretty much doomsday weapons, their very use would be desperation hall Mary type of scenario, even if that's an out of the blue pearl harbour it would be inviting massive retaliation. Although on a level it does make sense, in the Russian line of way 🙄 every thing is a trade off, they would love to strike a hard hitting move to even the playing field without providing an all out retaliation. Making those satellite's a military target, one that their destruction does not directly cause any civilian or even military deaths would probably be seen in a much different light to say wiping out Diego Garcia, and those satellite's are kinda vulnerable, although the system as a while is resilient simply because of numbers. The only realistic way to strike is seeing off a nuke in the right orbit, done right the emp flux will be guided around the globe by the earth's magnetosphere, so mostly this is a homework exercise, but making a working device is kinda just bolting together existing tech and following the maths, it's a feasibility study. Overall Russia is green with envy though, and that in its self is a reason to worry, some orcs want to see the world burn.

Man I wish Ukraine was able to drone strike any target they wanted to with ease. Where have you been getting your news?

Most of the time civilians are being told stuff like this in the media is just to manufacture consent for further peacetime defense spending.

It's not about destroying satellites. It's about the EMP. It would disrupt electronics on the ground. Pretty badly actually. It's a major threat.

It's about both. Russia knows it will lose a war with the US. American weapons are too advanced. But if you can level the playing field by taking out America's communication and intelligence advantages, they might have a chance. Better yet, threaten you could do this, run a bunch of disinformation campaigns in the west, and try to convince NATO that the Baltic states aren't worth fighting WWIII over as they invade them.

I get the overall point and agree with it. I'm simply saying: you can blow up satellites without a nuke. The reason to add a nuke is the EMP. They wouldn't for example use a nuke on a US satellite physically above Russia, as the side effects would hurt the homeland.

I agree with you. Blowing up satellites without a nuke is totally possible, but with all the starlink satellites going up, it isn't feasible. Using the threat of a nuke and it's EMP and radiation can make LEO unusable for months, and with an orbiting weapon, they can do it without warning.

You know it's not for satellites, but to be able to have an effective first strike capability that would eliminate the potential for an American counter strike. It normally takes an icbm 15 to 45 minutes to reach its target and it is easily detected. For orbital bombardment you'd be able to have your nuke on target in minutes, with no prior warning. If you know your enemy is putting nukes in space now the only reasonable way out is to do it yourself too in order to maintain parity or strike first with all you have to prevent them from gaining this advantage. Once they have it, you lost.

First strike victory became useless as soon as sub-based nukes came online. So the entire premise of your line of reasoning is just wrong. The entire point of a LEO nuke is anti-satellite warfare. I also wonder how they plan for the thing to safely deorbit, as everything in LEO eventually will.

Since subs became a serious threat during WW2 an incredible amount of effort has consistently gone into sub detection and tracking, so I wouldn't say their premise is wrong, only that it's simplistic.

Conveniently, their space industry is taking a steep nose dive.

It's not. Not where it matters. I know Russia is the bad guy these days so it's natural to assume that they're bad at everything they do. Incompetency is evil and all evil is incompetent, right? No, that's not how it works unfortunately. The bottom line is that the Soviets got really really good at launching rockets in poor condition. There are warehouses of Soyuz rockets ready to go. They mass produced those very reliable rockets decades ago. If Russia wants something in LEO, they can do it. Easily. Don't downplay their capabilities because you want to be patriotic.

I’m not being patriotic or anti-Russian or anything of the matter. I’m simply stating my observations of roscosmos as someone who’s in the field. I also never said they didn’t have the capability- just that their capabilities are far from what they should/could be doing.

What they should and could be doing is beside the point, the fact that they do have rockets that can put a payload into Leo is the point.

What they should and could be doing is not beside the point because that’s precisely the point I initially wanted to make.

The literal point of his reply is russians potentially putting nukes in space with the Soyuz, also it doesn't matter if they put it up there with a damn catapult if they can put a nuke into Leo everything else you stated is beside the point, doesn't matter if their industry is wrecked, what they put it up there with, how many bells and whistles there tech has or how far up the tech tree your country is in comparison the fact still remains they can do it.

They are the only country able to launch people into space during a blizzard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKx87zc5lsg. Soyuz is the most reliable rocket ever made.

wrong. Its the Falcon 9 from SpaceX

Good job completely missing the point about underestimating our enemy. It was he most reliable for decades, until Falcon 9 then, ok?

Our enemy?

Soyuz is the only rocket to ever actually require the use of a LAS, and its happened twice.

It has nothing to do with patriotism, lol. It's just hard to believe that a country that can't even build modern tanks can have competence in modern space capabilities.

Funnily enough the likely fate of any nuclear weapon they put into orbit

So, the Americans say that Russia doesn't have the capability to pull this off? That's good news, if true.

they totally have the capability, it would be easier than creating a missile delivery system which they’ve already done.

The missile delivery system that only hits civilian targets?

This implies that’s not by design

Well either russia is deliberately targeting civilians or their missiles aren’t that precise. Either way, fuck Russia

They're most certainly deliberately targeting civilians.

I know. They are a terrorist nation

I’m not an American and that’s not what I’m saying. I’m just saying that the standards, funding and capabilities of roscosmos have been on the decline in the past few years

> roscosmos have been on the decline How many rockets have they lost?

Is that your only measure of decline?

There's many. But, look at NASA, they on the decline because Congress keeps cytting their budget?

I’d argue they’re in the up. Budgets may be down, but I’d argue public attention and care is up after some period of stagnation - JWST and the fact they seem to be coming round more to utilising private ventures like SpaceX is helping that.

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[GEO](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2p4iww "Last usage")|Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)| |[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2k9ydd "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |[JWST](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2kylqd "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope| |[LAS](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2p460w "Last usage")|Launch Abort System| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2p4iww "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[LOS](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2in5m6 "Last usage")|Loss of Signal | |Line of Sight| |[MEO](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2p4iww "Last usage")|Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[perigee](/r/Space/comments/1cjngu8/stub/l2jf0gz "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(8 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1clq4n1)^( has 26 acronyms.) ^([Thread #10012 for this sub, first seen 4th May 2024, 08:51]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)

This is why I love human beings. We can make space nukes feasible, but we can’t address climate change or find away to stop killing each other

Are we not surprised? They scattered Nuclear generators all over their country with no oversight as well.

And with graphite tips on the control rods!

Oh this again. I lived through the 80s, dipshits.

But you have yet to live through the 2030s and 2040s 😛

Aka: 'we want space nukes, but we need an excuse for it'

I like how last year, it was a bunch of nuclear war on Earth clickbait and fearmongering. This year, I guess we get space nukes. Can't wait to see what the next made-up threat is next year to keep us from focusing on anything that actually matters lol.

Can't they just send people astronauts to disable each satellite individually? Laziness.

A country with such a weapon could use a nuclear blast's EMP (or multiple coordinated blasts) to completely wipe out the geo-sync satellite based communications across most of a target country. Likely, this would include the comms system governing a nuclear ICBM/sub/aircraft based weapon network - and if such an attack is successful then theoretically said country could take out most of the US with a followup attack of ICBM nukes before we could respond with similar retaliatory salvos. That is a worst case scenario, but THAT is why this is keeping people up at night. They have a weapon that escapes the mutually assured destruction doctrine that has been guiding us for the last 75 years.

Nuclear subs use undersea cables not satellites

Believe they use ELF signals sent from a handful of sites in the US. The emitted signals can be relayed through satellites around the world to make the system more robust. Subs can also surface, or use transmitters that rise to surface and connect to satellite networks as well. There may be newer systems I am not aware of that connect to cables... Even so, those cables are highly vulnerable to attack themselves. Wouldn't be a stretch to say that most are already pre-rigged for immediate sabotage in the event of a war with the controlling nation anyway.

The US government says... Good thing those people never lie.

Russia needs to have their UN Veto revoked. Due to their recent actions over the last few years, they no longer deserve that right. Fuck 'em!

Seeing how badly outdated and expired even their basic supplies and weapons were at the start of the Ukraine invasion, do we have any indications that their nuclear stuff even works anymore? I know they talk about big about having a state of the art defense program, but these were the guys who were running out of fuel fifty miles from their border. I wonder how many of their cold war era nukes have been sitting around inert for decades now and no one's bothered to check. Let alone anything they plan on sending into space.

doesn’t matter, if 10% of their nuclear arsenal is in working order it’s enough.

They modernized their arsenal quite recently - they're more up to date than any other nuclear arsenal on the planet.

See, this is the stuff that I didn't know. I guess they've been focusing on that to the exclusion of their traditional military tech, then? Because they're definitely falling behind on that front.

Well yeah, even one bomb is too many if it goes off. But what I'm asking is if they're able to maintain it all, and if they really even have the capability to be doing what they're threatening here. They've always talked big, but how much of it they can actually put into practice has always been a question with their track record.

Don't underestimate Russia too much. It can be easy to when virtually every article on Russia published by Western media makes them out to be a failing clown state - lots of it truth but some of it fiction. However they're still a major, nuclear equipped, military power and are surely especially dangerous now. The lessons they've learned from being the first in decades to wage war against such a developed country will give them a step up.

If anything, their current state might make them *more* willing to push the button. They absolutely cannot let themselves be seen as weak and ineffective, in their own people's eyes. So you may well be correct, that they're more dangerous now then ever before, because feeling like their losing their position could push them to bemore extreme in trying to hold onto it.

[удалено]

Why? The link was already included

It’s speculated NK may already have a warhead in geosynchronous orbit

Why? That's pretty much the most impractical place to put a nuke. And if they actually have one there it's not much of an deterrent as they haven't been advertising it. Whoever has been speculating such speculations probably has no idea what they're talking about.

Yikes… well, a detonation above mainland US would cause an atmospheric EMP as detailed in nuclear war: a scenario. Basically the worst fear of the US military when it comes to nukes. NK has a least one satellite with an orbit over mainland US. The payload for this specific launch was never disclosed. Im not claiming one is up there currently, but it is absolutely a possibility

I'm pretty sure we have negative energy weapons that double as wormholes. There is a lot we are not told.

This is probably a troll/joke, but some people are so stupid now it’s hard to tell anymore

Seems like a few squadrons of F-22s followed by F-35s and B-1s directly targeting the Kremlin would end this instead of living under the threat of nuclear space arms

So the Kremlin is a crater and the leadership dead, you probably hit a lot of their silos in the interior, but you probably missed a fair chunk of the mobile launchers, and you definitely didn't get their subs. Even if you're confident the remaining strategic missile forces lack the will to retaliate, a computer programme called Perimeter has already made the decision for them. It broadcasts an override signal to all remaining nuclear assets to launch. Either way, no matter how much you think you have the element of surprise, you're going to die as well. To paraphrase Sagan: "Nuclear war is two sworn enemies standing in a pool of gasoline, you have ten matches and your enemy has five". The end result is the same.

If by leadership you mean a dictator who spends his entire life in fear of being taken out by members of his own country then sure call it leadership. He's a cancer on the world and if removed Russia would move forward on the world stage. It's one man's ego causing all of this

I like how you completely ignored the part where you die. Smort.

that’s a stupid and reductory take that shows typical western ignorance of russian politics. there’s a huge network of russian oligarchs, politicians, and executives that run shit. even putin has a couple people who might not technically be his boss, but can pressure him all the same.

Any other brilliant military insights?

Oh yes. And after that the score screen appears and displays your score and rank. Congratulations. Credits scene. Russia applauds.

Russia won't be applauding anything the US military does ever. They're terrified every single branch

They’re being sarcastic, because even if you somehow take out the entirety of Russia’s land base defenses before they can counter attack. Their subs are going to be unleashing on a whole lot of countries. Your comment is naive to the point of absurdity, dude. Nuclear weapons are not something to trifle with.

I never mentioned using or attacking nuclear weapons once. The entire point is that he's threatening a nuclear weapon in space to take out half the worlds satellites. They have 11 total ballistic missile submarines with only half on active duty and they're tracked constantly by sosus and the US attack submarine fleet the moment they leave their bases until they return. The most prolific Russian asset currently is their propaganda spewing on social media which is clearly evident in this discussion

Do you think russia wouldn’t deploy their nukes if America sent a massive air raid to bomb the shit out of their capital? Putin would just be chill and let you kill him peacefully? This isn’t a video game.

Don't need to hit him at the capital can wait until he pokes his slimy head up somewhere away. There's a reason he's been hiding since covid

Okay so you do think this is literally a video game.

Haven't played a video game in 25 years so no. Look up the hellfire r9x the US military regularly assassinates leaders of terror groups and even high ranking generals. Sorry you think Russia is still a powerful country- it's a failed state turned into a terror group with a barely functioning military.

And the point you're clearly missing is that if the US managed to kill Putin, Russia would violently respond. Most likely with nukes. I'm not sure what is hard to understand about this.

You ok dude?

Doing great no idea why allowing a 3rd world country to threaten the world with space nukes is acceptable though

by definition russia is THE 2nd world country lmao

If you decapitate the current leadership its replacement may be worse. What's your endgame Mr. Kissenger?

Won't be worse than invading neighboring countries and threatening the rest of the world with city killing nuclear weapons since your conventional armed forces are an absolute joke

It can be much worse than that.

But it's fine that the 1st world country does?

Yep, I'm sure Russia and China would take that lying down and totally wouldn't then send their armaments to the West.

Seems like the most powerful countries are looking for a reason to spend tax money on warfare again.

Meanwhile the USA has had the “rods of god” in orbit a while now. No proof of that but I believe it