Back To The Future: SDI 2.0
Keith’s note: SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative aka “StarWars”) is back – but it is now called “Golden Dome”. It is equally sad, annoying – and weirdly fascinating – to watch all of the older male space fans trying to relive the fantasies of the old SDI days of their youth – once again under-estimating the space-related infrastructure and continued, ever growing, funding that will be required to make it actually work. Meanwhile, their main guy eviscerates, guts, dismembers – pick your word – funding for America’s space agency and the other science-oriented agencies that ally with NASA to make America the leader in space science, exploration, and utilization. This is not going to end well. Every other nation will simply surge ahead of us in space while we are once again distracted and in disarray back on Earth.
3 responses to “Back To The Future: SDI 2.0”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Today, unlike in the early 1980s, the capability exist to shoot down ballistic missiles carrying warheads. The Israelis prove it on a daily basis, often many times in a day. Trump’s Golden Dome will serve the same purpose as the Israeli Iron Dome, but on a larger scale and with some of the anti-missile capabilities coming from space satellites. In the not too distant future energy weapons (death rays) will be able to be used in place of kinetic kill weapons.
You’ve posted two things I think are very wrong recently, and I think I’ll focus on this one since it’s a bit simpler. Point by point:
1) The Iron Dome does not shoot down ballistic missiles.
2) The Iron Dome is completely unsuitable for US defense needs. It exists, we could buy it right now (we buy it for Israel). We don’t because
2a) It targets weapons fired from 2 to 43 miles away, a threat space not pertinent for the US
2b) The US already has a number of defense weapons that fill the equivalent role of targeting non-ballistic missile attacks and are at least as capable as Iron Dome. In fact, Israel is not solely defended by, and cannot solely rely on, the Iron Dome. During Iran’s attack last year US Standard Missiles were part of the defense
3) The US has demonstrated the ability to shoot down individual ballistic missiles which could protect from a missile or two fired from a country North Korea or possibly even a nuclear Iran, but has no capability to protect against a mass exchange of nuclear warheads, or more optimistically, even a single missile using MaRVs. Even though technology has possibly progressed to entertain the idea of a space-based energy weapon (and I am being very generous to your suggestion) the countermeasures to all these defenses have been, and continue to be, very simple and cheaply attainable by adversaries: More warheads, and make ’em wiggle. Or just blow the satellites up before launching with ASAT missiles. The problem with reviving a 40 year old idea is that everyone else has ALSO been thinking about these ideas for 40 years and are a step past you.
Yeah, and the Israeli’s et al only had to defend an area the size of New Jersey. MAD and more Aegis cruisers probably make more sense than Golden Dome. Although, if you had a directed energy battle station capable of downing ICBMs in flight you would think that capability would provide some defense against ASATs launched against it. That just leaves you having to deal with decoys, MRVs, plasma shields, etc .
I am surprised that they are not talking about drone defenses. It seems like it is only a matter of time before a non state actor/proxy launches an attack (energy grid, nuclear storage, ATC radars?)