Why don't space weapons exist?

Why don't space weapons exist?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

They do, we just don't have the security clearance to know about them!

Because of the outer space treaty which prevents putting weapons of mass destruction in space.
This would not prohibit precision weapon platforms, but for all we know they don't exist yet.

DDoS protection & mitigation

You guys are all fucking stupid if you think space weapons don't exist lol

Because nobodies fighting in space.

Because they are not necessary. A decapitation strike is already impossible due to long range stealth bombers and nuclear submarines. Space weapons would be a more expensive solution to a problem that's already solved

Because there's no niggers in space.

Rent is too high

kek

Because long-range stealth bombers are cheaper.

What site are we raiding?

Collecting dead sattelites to use as mass weapons became obsolete when drones became weaponised. Mi6 and NSA only need eyes in the sky as drones can more effectively kill using less money. Space weapons exist, but they are launched from the ground on suborbital missions (ICBM). Incidentally ICBM's can be repurposed as extreme bunker busters if released singly and overflight trajectory data are cleared with Moscow/Washington planners. No missions have yet required overflights of American or Russian territories/interests. The payload weights can be moderately increased with modern controls, a longer duration primary battery of Less mass, and still reach worldwide targets from Wyoming, Oklahoma. The brains of ageing ICBM's are ridiculously complex and weighty. Thanks to modern mil-spec radiation hardened processors ICBM's can be repurposed as tactical bunker busters. Shielding a 1,8 x 5,5m can of explosives from liftoff stresses and re-entry was nontrivial, requiring tests on an island donated by the UK to the US.

This guy gets it

carrying the arms race to space, to our own orbit was insanely counterproductive. enough junk in our orbit and we can kiss our satellites goodbye.

>bring a weapon to space
>shoot with it
>SPACE WEAPON

They can crash satellites into other satellites.

Because you touch yourself at night.

I had a similar thought once, not weapons though.

Space fireworks, viewable from alot of the world at once, massive explosions happening way out in space, colourful clouds would appear to be traveling so slow from earth.
It would last ages too....

After the usa tried to launch biological weapons into space in the 1970s and got caught doing it, due to the launch failure and the consequent reasonably-well-contained outbreak inside the CONUS, an international treaty was signed by country's that didn't want to be poisoned accidentally by the incompetent usa to outlaw space weapons.... In theory.

Fireworks in space would look like tiny dots.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Space is big and 100miles away at least....
What are you planning to make these fireworks from? 200tonnes each?

this
Also, OP fails to define what a weapon is within this context.
Does it have to be designed as a weapon to be used as one?

damn space jews

>implying it doesn't

Not conventional fireworks you tard,

A big explosions- space type equivalent

It just wouldnt work as a conventional firework design

What this guy said + downing/de-orbiting enemy satellites

(1) Hawks. Nationalistic political leaders that either divvy people into groups or wedge groups further apart if seperations already exist. Such nationalistic view inhibits the global approach needed for such endeavours as no one country has the knowledge capital to create shit like this.

(2) Doves. With a "we're all one people" approach to global politics, there's no will to create such a device.

Because nobody's invented any space targets to shoot

the cost would be fucking huge, no only making a explosion that size but getting it up there
0/10

These guys get it. Also, the sheer expense of getting shit up there. Really not worth it at the moment. Conventional weapons work just as well. "Rods from god" would be easiest type space weapon to design, but what's the point if it's cheaper to send a UAV with some missles on it.

we already have a huge problem with space debris

Almost 2017 and still thinking space exist.. Lol

your analysis leads me to belive your a woman, theres no logic to it.

It would be expensive? theres been no big scale space firework design tendered... but you've decided its expensive?! And making explosions in space is piss easy, its a vacuum, youd get the effect of a firework really easily by releasing a small pressurised container of even coloured powder and literally pic a gas because the explosive decompression of that container in space sending the coloured powder out at incredible speed, covering a large area.

People like you are the reason we dont evolve, never exploring, always have a cant-do attitude

>Firearms are not necessary. You can already kill a man from a distance with a longbow. Guns are a more expensive solution to a problem thats already solved.

Thats you. Thats how you sound like.

No need for fancy space weapons, just capture an asteroid and drop it.

>implying we don't have space weapons

Newton's Third Law.

Firing a weapon system on a space platform would violently recoil the space platform, destabilizing it.

>theres been no big scale space firework design tendered... but you've decided its expensive?!

unless you have a way of making fireworks BIGGER than our current land based ones weigh a fraction of what they would, then yes, its expensive. you should look up the cost of putting a kilo of mass into orbit

the cheapest thing to get into space ( the falcon heavy) still took 2,200$ per pound
and to even see it it would have to be super fucking bright. at the darkest part of night

Big doesnt mean heavy

neck-beard found

the same effect as the moon in different places around the earth,

So long as the colourful cloud was not in the earths shadow, it'd work

us/china?

ok, more massive then.

if you want an explosive visible from orbit, its going to need to have a bigger bang.

please find a powder that fucking glows and is super light
You are the reason society is falling apart

It's massively expensive to get a kg of mass into LEO, let alone thousands of kgs needed for WMDs. And in LEO it needs a source of propulsion to keep it in orbit, otherwise it crashes back into earth. It doesn't take a genius to work out that tons of highly radioactive materials being dispersed into the atmosphere during burn-up is not desirable.

Additionally, the exotic materials which are used to boost modern weapons have half-lives which mean that there is a constant programme swapping out components as they degrade. To service this in LEO is simply not possible.

Fuck just space weapons. When are we going to get space fighters. I want to see a machine gun strapped to the space shuttle.

if it wasnt in earths shadow, it would be in daylight, a load of really diffused coloured powder wouldnt be very visible at all during the daytime.

They do, they just are not advertised. Do you honestly think the thousands yes thousands of satellites in orbit are for telecom, GPS, television, and research? No many of them are space based Missile platforms and even laser platforms.

what is it going to shoot at?

...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
WTF is that

Do you even know how this works, like at all, the moon reflects light so well b/c is fucking huge and white

On point.

This is assuming satellites are armed:
-Projectile weapons shot from orbit would be disastrous—if one is shot prograde, it could hit a friendly on a later orbit, even if it were to escape Earth's sphere of influence. If it did escape, it would certainly take longer for it to enter the SOI, also making it unpredictable. If it didn't, it could hit a shooter/satellite/friendly within months. Projectile weapons also would abide by Newton's third law of physics.
-Laser weapons shot from orbit probably wouldn't damage targets on Earth, as there is an atmosphere, ozone layer, and magnetosphere protecting the Earth. As for targets in space—what's the point? There's no point in launching a satellite with a laser, when you could use an ICBM.

the moon is actually not white, a lot of moon dust is really dark

Hell if I know. Shoot the shit out of a couple enemy satellites until they get pissed off and make their own space fighter to come fight ours.

BAM....space battles

why not just use a cheaper alternative like a missile?

Space battles man....space battles.

You think Star Wars would be cool if it was just a bunch of missles being shot at each other.

Pretty sure rods from God are already in space, nearly undetectable and cause the damage of a nuke

you know star wars isnt real right?

Checked and correct

this sounds like complete bullshit, also, if you have a weapon on the level of a nuke, you announce it, its the entire fucking point of having a doomsday weapon.

havent you seen dr strangelove?

this

But they did have missles in adittion to lasers.
Maybe if we had effective laser weapons things would be different.

*grips collectors edition light saber tightly*

What do you say mate?

Remember Cod Ghosts. That proved to me that space weapons exist

I fully support laser weapons

Robotech is cool.

They do not cause the damage of a nuke. Do you know why they don't? Because tungsten isn't radioactive

kek

MFW the American navy has a real railgun but you posted a bs image

pretty sure all the major powers have ground based anti-satellite weapons that could be used against something like the GPS satellites in a time a major war.

yea I know, but didn't want to fix the gif that wasn't a gif.

Sorry lazy faggot here.

The treaty means we can not put missiles, WMDs or other major weapons in orbit of our planet.

However the treaty does not cover large rods of metal allowing for 'the rods of god' to exist and be used

Treaties are meant to be broken. After all exactly who is going to go up and inspect the payload of all satellites?

Orbital Kinetic Kill weapons could be classified as WMDs as they have the potential of devastating an entire city with 1 strick, killing millions.

A deorbiting tungsten or other similar metal rod at 2-3 KM/s has more energy than a Hydrogen bomb.

While these may be technically legal, the cost of the R&D for the accelerator and targeting systems alone would make it unfeasible for even top tier economies. (which the Russians and Americans haven't been for many years)

Resupply logistics would be very expensive and vulnerable to interception either during boost or orbital maneuvers before docking with said weapon system.

Also, a mach 2+ fighter plane can accelerate a specially designed missile to enough speed to hit a satellite at upto 250-300 KM altitude. China did that just a few years ago, and the US followed it up by swatting another sat using one of their AEGIS missile cruisers soon thereafter.

tl:dr its easier, and cheaper to nuke a fool than deal with space based systems.

you're joking right

They also have unreliable results according to tests done by the Russian government.

If you know the forces involved then you can do the math.

Keep in mind that while there is equal but opposite reactions, you are applying that force against the mass of the object. If you fire a 1kilo object out of a 10000 kilo station, the force exerted on the station will be negligible and could be corrected with reaction gyros / rcs altitude thrusters.

If i attach a gun to a wewther balloon and shoot in the upper atmosphere is it considered a space weapon?

They do. It's called "Rods from God"
It's a satellite that has heavy tungsten rods attached to it.
Once target is acquired, a rod is released to fall back to earth towards the target.
Upon impact, it's as powerful, if not moreso, than a conventional nuke, without any of the fallout.

Look it up. Shit's real.

Treaties to not weaponize space signed during the cold war

Checked

Ever heard of star wars? Not talking about the movie either.

Are there any operational weapons up there yet, or just the few test systems the Russians put up decades ago?

What a retarded post.

Starwars Missile Defense was a sham designed to force the Russians to spend even more heavily on their missile / space programs then they already were. The goal was to break their economy and it worked.

Of course it and other 80's defense programs nearly broke the US economy as well...

Reagan actually won the 'war' by spending his enemy to death

Man you need a physics education. Your colored powder is going to be completely invisible from space

you actually believe this is just a moon

Kek

...

i like you

oh my sweet summer child.

Yup, just saying

...

There are several anti-satellite based weapons lately. There is a very good chance some satellites are also carrying nuclear weapons, though not 'probably'. The reason is there are conventions against militarizing outer space and arming anything in it. Also lasers are not what sci-fi makes them out to be and the so called 'rods from god' are more akin to uber-expensive cluster bombs that don't compare to a fucking helicopter rocket barrage then they are to weapons of mass destruction.

Long bows take a life time of training to become profecient with and despite whatever anecdotes you can sight were not reliably able to pierce the heaviest armors of their day. Cross bows took little training and could pierce armor. Firearms even less and even better. So forth and so on until you've got gang bangers who can pick up an ak-47 and take out a whole crowd of people inside a building with an afternoon of practice and being shown what the three or four switches do.
Guns where an incremental improvement to long bows, and are vastly superior to long bows in every conceivable way.
What 'space weapons' we can actually manage solver nothing and could nothing better then what we already have, with the added bonus of being laughably expensive just to put in place.

Epic

Treaties were meant to be broken haha

because of you faggot

Space treaty