New Anti-satellite Weapons?

[Sanchez]

Hi, Folks. I thought the unconfirmed news should bring up some interesting discussions about future space techs but not contest with US ases.

If we remember China has so far demonstrated directly or indirectly three types anti satellite techniques: laser, missile and parasite satellites (as shown in SZ-7 launch). Now the so-called "paint spraying" tech is the fourth story. Interesting!

China is doing everything to develop asymmetric weapons to defend China's interests in Asia. The results are promising.

PS
China's first 4G fighter is under testing now. We would hear leaks soon if the maiden flight has been a success or failure!

 

[Sanchez]

True...But complemented by the ASM-135 we will be able to station an anti-satellite capability on land as well as sea. If there is a miss, we can leapfrog at least once, more like twice, in any 24 hr period.

US military is completely dependent on satellites. Without C4IR US armies are not at all superior to PLA.

 

[Thomas]

US military is completely dependent on satellites. Without C4IR US armies are not at all superior to PLA.

All major countries of the world are dependent on satellites including China. The U.S. has retained a very robust anti satellite capability. But has no wish to wage such a warfare. The reason is once countries start blowing up each others satellites. The resulting debris will endanger all future space flight for all countries. The loss of satellites would also economically harm all the countries of the world.

it is true the U.S. does depend on satellites more then most countries. But that doesn't mean the U.S. can't wage warfare without them. Some of our weapons will not be quite as accurate . but they will still hit their targets.

 

[faithfulguy]

US military will still be the most advanced with or without satellite. Its more advanced with satellite though. As for fighting with China, US definitely can prevent China from take over Taiwan if it chooses to. But China can escalate it into WWIII, which can kill millions of American civilians. China would be wipe out in this case. I just don't see US protect Taiwan if Taiwan deliberately provoke China such as openly declare independence.

In any case, I do not see US attack China or Russia like how it would attack Iraq or Afghanistan. If US won't even recognize Taiwan and the sole government of China, US won't protect Taiwan unless there is sufficient reason to convince the public that nuclear exchange with China over Taiwan is a core US interest.

 

[Sanchez]

All major countries of the world are dependent on satellites including China. The U.S. has retained a very robust anti satellite capability. But has no wish to wage such a warfare. The reason is once countries start blowing up each others satellites. The resulting debris will endanger all future space flight for all countries. The loss of satellites would also economically harm all the countries of the world.

it is true the U.S. does depend on satellites more then most countries. But that doesn't mean the U.S. can't wage warfare without them. Some of our weapons will not be quite as accurate . but they will still hit their targets.

First it's a thread to discuss a piece of news on Chinese space defence might. It's not about the US capability. Secondly US muscle looks harmless because you can't even fire a tomhawk or make a phone call to your captains on sea. Of course you may still be able to wage a war. But it may only be possible at Cuba.

 

[Thomas]

First it's a thread to discuss a piece of news on Chinese space defence might. It's not about the US capability. Secondly US muscle looks harmless because you can't even fire a tomhawk or make a phone call to your captains on sea. Of course you may still be able to wage a war. But it may only be possible at Cuba.

lol, you can stop your nationalist diatribe now. It is in the interest of all parties to not wage a space war. The loss of satellites would harm the economies of all countries of the world including China. China also depends more and more on satellites in it's military as well.

 

[Sanchez]

US military will still be the most advanced with or without satellite. Its more advanced with satellite though. As for fighting with China, US definitely can prevent China from take over Taiwan if it chooses to. But China can escalate it into WWIII, which can kill millions of American civilians. China would be wipe out in this case. I just don't see US protect Taiwan if Taiwan deliberately provoke China such as openly declare independence.

In any case, I do not see US attack China or Russia like how it would attack Iraq or Afghanistan. If US won't even recognize Taiwan and the sole government of China, US won't protect Taiwan unless there is sufficient reason to convince the public that nuclear exchange with China over Taiwan is a core US interest.

We are not talking about the overall military tech and power of US military. It's about a conflict close to Taiwan strait or attack on Chinese coast. How can US mobilize a formidable force to prevent Chinese without C4IR advantages?

 

[Thomas]

We are not talking about the overall military tech and power of US military. It's about a conflict close to Taiwan strait or attack on Chinese coast. How can US mobilize a formidable force to prevent Chinese without C4IR advantages?

Ships can still communicate and navigate, Aircraft will still fly. And though it is preferred cruise missiles do not require GPS to function. There is also a danger in taking out satellites connected to early warning systems. it could be interpreted as the start of a nuclear attack.

 

[no_name]

Space war has the possibility of going full nuclear. No country is willing to lose its eye in the sky to a single opponent without considering what other potential adversaries will do.

For example, satellites are needed to detect ICBM launches

 

[Sanchez]

Ships can still communicate and navigate, Aircraft will still fly. And though it is preferred cruise missiles do not require GPS to function. There is also a danger in taking out satellites connected to early warning systems. it could be interpreted as the start of a nuclear attack.

So what? Do you think US can threaten China with a nuclear attack? You must be kidding.

Space war has the possibility of going full nuclear. No country is willing to lose its eye in the sky to a single opponent without considering what other potential adversaries will do.

For example, satellites are needed to detect ICBM launches

A few nukes will not cripple China's ability to counter strike with nukes. China does not have to hit US territory. All US military installations can be targets. If a hundred nukes were to be used guess that'd be an end for all. Dare US to start a nuke war with China or Russia? I don't think so.

US can close its eyes on what China is doing. If US engages China in a military action the eyes are to be hit because China doesn't want to lose a war either.

 

[no_name]

^^ If satellite warning of ICBM launch is destroyed basically it means a third party (like russia, for whatever fancy) can launch a pre-emptive first nuclear strike. Thus US might be forced to launch it's nukes everywhere to prevent losing this capability.

 

[no_name]

Infact if US is blinded in space from its fight with china and a rogue state fires an ICBM nuke to US soil it will be mistaken as a chinese attack.

The subsequent nuclear exchange won't be pretty. Both country has second strike capabilities.

space war is a last resort, both US and Chinese leaders knows this.

 

[Sanchez]

Yes or no, no_name. I just don't like the hegemonic tones of American hawks. There will be no war between China and US.

 

[dingyibvs]

All major countries of the world are dependent on satellites including China. The U.S. has retained a very robust anti satellite capability. But has no wish to wage such a warfare. The reason is once countries start blowing up each others satellites. The resulting debris will endanger all future space flight for all countries. The loss of satellites would also economically harm all the countries of the world.

it is true the U.S. does depend on satellites more then most countries. But that doesn't mean the U.S. can't wage warfare without them. Some of our weapons will not be quite as accurate . but they will still hit their targets.

Yes, the U.S. can still wage warfare, but eliminating satellites puts the "home team" on a far bigger advantage, because their forces are much closer together and can therefore communicate much better, utilizing landlines if needed. Besides, U.S. satellite tech and numbers far exceed any other countries', so eliminating satellites for all sides would hurt the U.S. a lot more and thus be a great equalizer.

^^ If satellite warning of ICBM launch is destroyed basically it means a third party (like russia, for whatever fancy) can launch a pre-emptive first nuclear strike. Thus US might be forced to launch it's nukes everywhere to prevent losing this capability.

Russia or China can launch a preemptive first strike with or without U.S. satellites. All 3 countries' nuclear capabilities are based on counter-attacks. Having satellites means a more capable 2nd strike, but it isn't necessary. After all, nuclear deterrence was alive and well before the induction of satellite guided weapons.

 

[Thomas]

Yes or no, no_name. I just don't like the hegemonic tones of American hawks. There will be no war between China and US.

your the one that was spouting the nationalist diatribes. simply becuase someone said it wasn't in the interests of the U.S. or anyone else to conduct a war in space. And then explained the reasons why. Your understanding of U.S. military capability if there is a loss of satellites has no basis in fact as well. though there would be some loss of ability. U.S. forces would not be incapable of conducting operations. The bigger losses would be economic which would effect China as well.