Re:Sky skimmers: The race to fly satellites at the lowest or...
by uSoldering on Tuesday February 11, 2025 @10:09PM
(#43021405)
I am voicing my opinion in which I believe in strongly, nothing more.
Re:Sky skimmers: The race to fly satellites at the lowest or...
by BalloonsInVLEO on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @01:07AM
(#43022382)
We already have fully autonomous space drone swarms armed with nuclear warheads, we just keep them underground/underwater because...humans are weird.
Re:Sky skimmers: The race to fly satellites at the lowest or...
by rsynnott on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @07:01AM
(#43024478)
I mean... okay, but no matter how much you believe in it, it doesn't make any sense. This would offer no advantage over conventional satellites for this application (ie it would be similarly terrible for it).
Are you thinking of something like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment#2003_Unite...
Again, you probably wouldn't bother with VLEO for that, too much extra complexity with no obvious advantage vs VLEO.
Re:Sky skimmers: The race to fly satellites at the lowest or...
by zardo on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @05:30PM
(#43030470)
> Why all the complexity of VLEO and drones? What could you that’s impossible with other, simpler, already-extant weapons systems?
Assuming the tech works, you can move the sat to any orbital plane, making it significantly harder for an adversary to track all of your vleo assets.
But I don’t understand the point. Satellites already fly indefinitely and can drop payloads of kinetic energy weapons. Why all the complexity of VLEO and drones? What could you that’s impossible with other, simpler, already-extant weapons systems?