Science:
News ToolsReg Shops |
The Register » Science » US doesn't need orbital battlefleet - pundit1900s style space-dreadnought arms race would be BadPublished Tuesday 6th November 2007 13:44 GMT In almost every instance, Arming the Heavens comes down against space-based kit to do each of the given jobs, suggesting either that the task isn't necessary, isn't doable or that terrestrial gear could do it more cheaply. The only space kit which gets a qualified thumbs-up is cheap decoy satellites among which useful American comms, nav and spy birds could hide from enemy sat-kill strikes. The full text of the report is available here (128-page pdf) for those interested. It looks as though jobs in the future US Space Navy* may remain hard to come by for a while, based on Kosiak's analysis. Very right and proper, no doubt, but still mildly depressing for the science fiction buffs among us. ® *Past and present-day astronauts/cosmonauts usually have to spend a long time aboard cramped orbital structures such as Mir and the ISS in order to make their launch costs worthwhile. Assuming that any large human presence was required by the US space forces of the future, their lifestyle would probably be far more like being in the navy than being in the air force. On the other hand, if the people spent their time mainly at ground stations, a better name might be US Space Force/Aerospace Force etc. 9 comments posted — Comment period finished Options for getting them back again remain unclear at presentPosted: 14:15 6th November 2007 Kosiak's distinctionPosted: 14:24 6th November 2007 The real reason...Posted: 14:50 6th November 2007 Nukes? Who needs them?Posted: 14:56 6th November 2007 US Space Navy! "If you aren't an Illegal Alien, you have nothing to fear"Posted: 15:39 6th November 2007
Track this type of story as a custom Atom/RSS feed or by email.
|
|
Top 20 stories • All The Week’s Headlines • Archive • Search