The militarization of space

[T.Neo]

From what I read, its 1 mil a seat though...

No garuntee that would actually happen... knowing these things, in all likelihood it is hot air and will never come to fruition.

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

I think that's being a little over-skeptical. Sure, being skeptical is a way to be confident in knowledge, but taking it too far is another story. I believe it will happen, but likely the price will be ramped up.

Back to the real topic, didn't NASA say something about a moon colony in the somewhat far future? That is a giant leap for militarization of space right there.

 

[T.Neo]

I think that's being a little over-skeptical. Sure, being skeptical is a way to be confident in knowledge, but taking it too far is another story. I believe it will happen, but likely the price will be ramped up.

I don't really think so... it is the general occurance of this sort of thing?

Could it happen? Might it happen someday?

Will it happen by 2015? I have very, very large doubts... doubts around the size of the Moon's semimajor axis.

Back to the real topic, didn't NASA say something about a moon colony in the somewhat far future? That is a giant leap for militarization of space right there.

I don't really see how that is a "giant leap" for space militarization... any more than research bases in Antarctica have led to Antarctic wars...

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

I don't really see how that is a "giant leap" for space militarization... any more than research bases in Antarctica have led to Antarctic wars...

A research base is vastly different from an actual city. If such a moon colony were developed, it would become a target for capture, to own such a place. reasons may be varied.

 

[HAL9001]

Space is a big place - I think there will be the one or the other* war, but at the whole it will be peacefull - ust as erarth

* I don't know if this is correct english, I translated from German word for word...

 

[T.Neo]

I can't really think of a reason for a city on the Moon, it may be a place for a lot of industry (and therefore have a permanent manned presence), but it isn't really a place you'd want to live in... partially because of the low gravity, partially because some resources are scarce.

The gravity issues and also location issues are reasons for why actual colonies in space itself- constructed from lunar materials- might be a better option than some regards, than cities on the Moon. But we really don't know how the human body would react to lunar gravity over long periods.

I can't really see why someone would want to take over a lunar outpost/colony/whatever for no reason whatsoever... it would be a bit silly, to be honest.

 

[tori]

A lunar manufacturing outpost that posseses a mass driver for launching sats to GEO would be an attractive target to take over, for example.

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

I can't really think of a reason for a city on the Moon, it may be a place for a lot of industry (and therefore have a permanent manned presence), but it isn't really a place you'd want to live in... partially because of the low gravity, partially because some resources are scarce.

The gravity issues and also location issues are reasons for why actual colonies in space itself- constructed from lunar materials- might be a better option than some regards, than cities on the Moon. But we really don't know how the human body would react to lunar gravity over long periods.

I can't really see why someone would want to take over a lunar outpost/colony/whatever for no reason whatsoever... it would be a bit silly, to be honest.

Reasons I can see leading to "colonies" beyond Earth are research, search for ET, tourism, escape of some sort (pilgrimage, escaping persecuution, etc.) and the novelty of it.

 

[fsci123]

Reasons I can see leading to "colonies" beyond Earth are research, search for ET, tourism, escape of some sort (pilgrimage, escaping persecuution, etc.) and the novelty of it.

Well titanium would be a pretty good resource on the moon considering that on the moon it has a maria percentage of 3.06% while on earth it is 0.44%...
Helium 3 can be found at the highest concentration 1%... which currently sells ~$4000 a gram... Thorium is also found on the moon which could provide some type of nuclear fuel until fusion becomes reliable... Beamed Energy could become profitable... Trees may also grow taller on the moon due to low gravity and near-continuous sunlight at the poles... A super power could have a tactical advantage to fire tungsten rods over broad areas of enemy countries like 1000km across... So...

 

[hribek]

Militarization of space has been a reality for decades. Military satellites, military missions, military personnel aboard spacecraft. It is also not prohibited in any way I know of.

However, it is not the same thing as weaponization of space.

Most closely related articles of the Outer Space Treaty (which is the basic foundation for space law) are Articles IV and VII.

Space Law FAQ

Status of international agreements (who signed what)

I havent noticed anything in the above that would say you shouldn't put a laser gun in space, for example. (I'm not sure, might have missed it.) However, I'm sure that if you do any of the sort and break anything with it anywhere, the damaged party can have its state sue the state responsible for launching this object.

As for wars in space: if you check how things work, you will realize that the greatest threat is space itself. It is a very hostile environment.

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

As for wars in space: if you check how things work, you will realize that the greatest threat is space itself. It is a very hostile environment.

Space is kindest to those adapted to it. Us Earthlings are not among those blessed with natural life in space, so we have to settle for bad shows and cheesy scripts while the astronauts and cosmonauts have all the fun :lol:

 

[Ghostrider]

As for wars in space: if you check how things work, you will realize that the greatest threat is space itself. It is a very hostile environment.

Less so than the depths of the sea, yet we've been merrily torpedoing each other in subs for a long time.

 

[Hielor]

Less so than the depths of the sea, yet we've been merrily torpedoing each other in subs for a long time.

Sorry, but I'm going to have to say "no" to this one.

In a sub, you're never more than a few minutes from an unlimited supply of fresh air, and if you need supplies brought to you they can be ferried from the nearest landmass by air with just a few hours' notice.

 

[Sky Captain]

A war in space certainly can happen if two nations with spaceflight capability start a war. spy and comunication sattelites are valuable military assets especially in warfare so both sides would try to destroy them.

 

[T.Neo]

Reasons I can see leading to "colonies" beyond Earth are research, search for ET, tourism, escape of some sort (pilgrimage, escaping persecuution, etc.) and the novelty of it.

Sadly, the "novelty of it" is not reason enough, or else we would already be there.

Research is a reason for a base, not a colony. Same goes for search for extraterrestrial civilisations; you can place radio telescopes on the farside (it's a good place for them), but... you are not going to find aliens on the Moon. :uhh:

Earth is big. Very big. If you want to escape persecution (like millions of people around the world today), you can just go... across a border. Or across an ocean. You don't need to go hundreds of thousands of kilometers.

A lunar tourist resort would be nice... but it would be extremely costly.

Well titanium would be a pretty good resource on the moon considering that on the moon it has a maria percentage of 3.06% while on earth it is 0.44%...

Doesn't matter, since it is inexorably cheaper to get to here on Earth, than it is on the Moon...

Helium 3 can be found at the highest concentration 1%... which currently sells ~$4000 a gram...

1%? Where?

You do realise that even at 1%, it wouldn't make economic sense to mine it with modern abilities?

Also, when you inject a large amount of something into the market, the price will go down... not that any near-term operation would introduce that much He3 into the market. Either you bring back a small amount (which isn't enough to pay for the mission), or you ship back a large amount, the price goes down, and you're back to square one.

Thorium is also found on the moon which could provide some type of nuclear fuel until fusion becomes reliable...

Thorium is also found on Earth, like Titanium, where it is far easier to get at. It is also concentrated in several minerals here.

Beamed Energy could become profitable...

Beamed energy on the Moon makes no sense, because the Moon moves in the sky relative to Earth, and rises and sets. GEO-based powerplants can be constructed and launched from the Moon, but this is also... difficult.

Trees may also grow taller on the moon due to low gravity and near-continuous sunlight at the poles

This is an interesting prospect, but sadly I cannot see any practical reason for it...

A super power could have a tactical advantage to fire tungsten rods over broad areas of enemy countries like 1000km across... So...

Various problems aside, I cannot see how that correlates to lunar colonisation...

That's another problem with an orbital weapon. You're entirely subject to orbital mechanics and deorbit windows and timing like that.

That's the difference even with a suborbital weapon... in that case, you are essentially putting the weapon on its own 'orbit', that will take it directly to the target...

Maybe Rods from God could be adapted as a suborbital weapon system? :hmm:

As for wars in space: if you check how things work, you will realize that the greatest threat is space itself. It is a very hostile environment.

That depends. The sort of stuff you'd be subjected to in a space war makes the usual problems in space (insolation, vacuum and radiation) seem very small by comparison...

Sorry, but I'm going to have to say "no" to this one.

In a sub, you're never more than a few minutes from an unlimited supply of fresh air, and if you need supplies brought to you they can be ferried from the nearest landmass by air with just a few hours' notice.

I would have to agree, military subs only go down what, 100, 200 meters?

While you might have more problems with pressure and convection, subs don't really have a problem dealing with them.

A war in space certainly can happen if two nations with spaceflight capability start a war. spy and comunication sattelites are valuable military assets especially in warfare so both sides would try to destroy them.

Any ASAT-capable power with a shred of intelligence would know the risks of starting a satellite-destruction trend like that... it could create clouds of debris that could take out friendly satellites, and lead to dangerous Kessler syndrome.

 

[Sky Captain]

Any ASAT-capable power with a shred of intelligence would know the risks of starting a satellite-destruction trend like that... it could create clouds of debris that could take out friendly satellites, and lead to dangerous Kessler syndrome.

There are ways how to disable sattelites without smashing them in million peaces. For example a ABM laser mounted on 747 could easily disable low orbit sattelites without creating clouds of debris.

 

[Ghostrider]

In a sub, you're never more than a few minutes from an unlimited supply of fresh air, and if you need supplies brought to you they can be ferried from the nearest landmass by air with just a few hours' notice.

I was thinking more in terms of what the environment can do to you and your structures. If you have a hull breach in space, all you do is vent air. That's it. If you have a hull breach on a submarine and lose buoyancy, you will go down and in open seas, the pressure will crush you flat. If you have a fire on a spacecraft you can still vent atmosphere and snuff it, a fire in a submarine is serious business.

 

[T.Neo]

There are ways how to disable sattelites without smashing them in million peaces. For example a ABM laser mounted on 747 could easily disable low orbit sattelites without creating clouds of debris.

I'd be wary about that. If the physical damage causes any fragments to spall off of the target, it is contributing to the debris prbolem.

Also, an ABL is expensive, not everyone has one, and it is... cumbersome...

I was thinking more in terms of what the environment can do to you and your structures. If you have a hull breach in space, all you do is vent air. That's it. If you have a hull breach on a submarine and lose buoyancy, you will go down and in open seas, the pressure will crush you flat. If you have a fire on a spacecraft you can still vent atmosphere and snuff it, a fire in a submarine is serious business.

Venting air is a big problem. Not only can it lead to... well... lead to you dying from vacuum exposure, but many things inside a spacecraft aren't designed to operate in a vacuum, from electronics to food.

Besides, most space weapon effects would not "give you a hull breach", but rather... destroy your spacecraft. And you. Even if it causes partial damage, it can take out many vital systems.

Once you've patched a small hull breach, you also need to refill the inside of the ship with air, which is also not easy... The 900 m^3 ISS would need about a ton of air to refill it.