It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump directing Pentagon to set up "Space Force" as a "separate but equal" branch of the military

page: 15
41
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2018 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Just got my DD-214 Alumni shirt now I want a Space Force Door Gunner one.





posted on Jun, 25 2018 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

I forgot to add a secret to it also.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:29 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

While the satellites do at times make the use of land base about obsolete, however, what good is a satellite if it is taken out by say a nut or a screw that rips it to shred, or being rendered inert by a solar event? So if the satellites are a gamble, and the sure thing are land bases, and observation then it pretty much means that it is the only real way to keep an eye on what all is in the air and in space. And if we look at Operation Fishbowl, the idea of the satellites, simply means that in the event of a war, they are a target and I do not think that it would be beyond the thought of any nuclear power, of launching a weapon into space and knocking out said satellites, thus violating the Space Treaty.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:32 PM
link   
There's nothing in the treaty that prevents you from taking out a satellite as is. Satellites are vulnerable, but between a wide variety of networks and the ability to deploy small, ad hoc replacements, it would be extremely difficult to zap them all. There are built on redundancies. You've got Milstar/AEHF, EHF, TDRS, DSCS, WGS, GBS, etc all serving as relays. You have agreements with commercial operators to buy/hijack their bandwidth as/when needed. We don't need ground stations, although there are a few. There are even some floaty things that have enough bandwidth to serve as relay in a pinch. Do you know what using a groundstation as a relay to another groundstation does? It makes your signal vulnerable to interception and jamming. Why would you possibly want to do that? Especially when it's completely unnecessary.

There are already "screws and solar events" occuring. You never notice. Do you know why? Because there is so much built in redundancy the signal is routed through a different relay. End of story. They schedule a replacement mission with a satellite already sitting in storage (sometimes already mated to a bus even).

There are hundreds of satellites serving as relays right now. Several hundred. You can laze or otherwise kill or incapacitate a sat (some are more vulnerable than others), and it reduce your monitering ability, but will never hurt your relay system. Just one system (TDRS) has nine satellites in geoshnch at thd moment. You know how many the mission requires? Three. Wiith the right two you can cover over 80% of the globe. You're only limited by bandwidth (which is why there are so many other systems). So what are the other six doing? Just hanging out ready to step in line if there is something wrong and one goes offline. TDRS (and several others) are geostationary, so it's a lot less vulnerable and a lot less crowded than other constellations, but there are hundreds of satellites ready to relay data at the flip of the switch.



edit on 26-6-2018 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics
 
41
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join