TheMalcontent
patreon
Russia-United States Flash Report for 14 FEB 2024 17:30 PST - What About An EMP Antisatellite Weapons?
🕑 Added 2024-02-15 01:34:54 +0000 UTCOne thing that didn't make our list was space-based nuclear EMP, electromagnetic pulse weapons, to disable satellites. We didn't consider this because it is a really bad idea.
In the 1960s, the United States did five nuclear tests in or at the edge of space. The most famous one was 1962's Starfish Prime. A 1.4-megaton nuclear warhead was lifted to 400 kilometers (250 miles) above Earth near Johnson Atoll and detonated. The EMP was much stronger than anyone expected.
The blast immediately disabled three satellites. Nine hundred miles away in Hawaii, telephone and electrical systems were damaged, and the blast lit up the night sky. AM and shortwave radio were impacted for days. Most of the sensors meant to observe Starfish Prime were destroyed. A new radiation belt was created around Earth that lasted for five years, destroying six more satellites.
Nine satellites? That isn't so bad. In 1962, there were less than 125 satellites in space and fewer than 25 were operational. Starfish Prime wasn't even trying to be an EMP weapon. After the United States completed the five tests, it was concluded that using nuclear weapons in space was a really bad idea.
For starters, there is no way for a radiation belt to differentiate between a U.S. satellite and a Soviet one. The ability to readily and repeatedly change the orbit of a low-earth orbit satellite is only in Hollywood movies. Forget microchips and communications antennas; the EMP will destroy the solar panels.
There's another problem with a space-based EMP weapon. Unlike on Earth, there is nothing to dissipate the energy of the pulse. A focused EMP weapon targeting a satellite is going to keep traveling and hit any other satellite in its path.
It would be like using a chainsaw to do brain surgery on a mouse. It will work, but it is going to be very messy, with a lot of collateral damage.
This does require the Kremlin to realize all of these things in the first place and conclude, "This is a really bad idea," and Moscow is lacking in the self-reflection department.
It can't be ruled out, but why create a nuclear-based antisatellite EMP weapon when you already have a peer-level proven conventional system?
What's most important is that any weapon system, kinetic or nuclear, placed in space is bad.
Comments
It would be a space version of Agent Orange. With different long term fall out. However if you are going to be in a need peer conflict with NATO then removing the orbital assets would be a good first move. This ignores second and third order effects on neutrals or less than hostile states. As I think about it if you knew you were going to do it then your recovery period could be pretty short. Edit: After reading the NYT today it appears that this whole process has been worked through and the US is working on exactly those counter measures.
Also, slim, but possibly concider a non unclear space weapon like the "Rods of god" but a more modern version with inertial navigation or something
