News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why America Needs India’s Rockets by mthiesen on Thursday November 03, 2016 @04:23PM (#12867599)
A typical liquid fueled satellite launching platform would make a very poor ICBM. Liquid fueled rockets can't be stored fully fueled. The fuel is extremely volatile and slowly seeps out of the tanks. This means you have to store it empty, adding a huge launch delay.

ICBMs use much more stable fuels so they can sit in a silo for years on end. This requires totally different engines and fuel tanks.

tldr: You can't just stick a nuke on top of a liquid fueled rocket and use it like an ICBM.

Re:Why America Needs India’s Rockets by dangerbird2 on Thursday November 03, 2016 @05:07PM (#12867966)
Some liquid fueled rockets can be used more-or-less effectively as an ICBM. Despite being extremely volatile, rocket engines powered by hypergolic and room-temperature liquid fuels/oxidizer mixes can be stored fueled in silos for long periods of time. The notable example of this is the Titan II (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-25C_Titan_II) whiched served as the primary ICBM for the U.S. for 20-odd years (with some mishaps)
Re:Why America Needs India’s Rockets by mthiesen on Thursday November 03, 2016 @07:22PM (#12869009)
Yeah, I may have spoke too soon. After reading up on the India's PSLV rocket, it doesn't appear to use any cryogenic fuels or oxidizers. Maybe it could be used as an ICBM...
Re:Why America Needs India’s Rockets by rtkwe on Thursday November 03, 2016 @04:36PM (#12867712)
You can't use it as a deterrence/defensive ICBM because of the liquid fuels but it's still very viable as an offensive ICBM because you could just fuel it up when you're about to launch. It's not particularly practical but it's a viable make due if you've been unable to design a more normal ICBM.