During the second gulf war, Iraq uses modified scud missiles, filled with ball bearings, and fitted with better guidance systems, to destroy a U.S. IMINT satellite…..
What effects does this have?
What effects does this have?
Other than that?That single event will remove all doubt about the legitimacy of invading Iraq, it would be a flagrant violation of the terms of the 1991 `surrender` where Iraq has no missiles with range greater than 150km or something equally small.
That single event will remove all doubt about the legitimacy of invading Iraq, it would be a flagrant violation of the terms of the 1991 `surrender` where Iraq has no missiles with range greater than 150km or something equally small.
Or, to stick to the OP better, Saddam manages to secretly rebuild the supergun and uses it in 2003?
I think OTL the inspectors did find some missiles banned by the treaty just before the war began and that didn't neuter the antiwar movement.
And how far up are military satellites? If they're less than 150 km, a missile capable fo killing them wouldn't violate the cease-fire agreement.
Frankly, I thin its ASB. There's a big difference between a missile on a low parabolic reaching targets 150 km away, and a missile reaching orbit. I don't believe the SCUDS even came close to being able to reach that high.
I think OTL the inspectors did find some missiles banned by the treaty just before the war began and that didn't neuter the antiwar movement.
Heck, I'm no fan of Saddam and I wondered if something that small was worth a war.
And how far up are military satellites? If they're less than 150 km, a missile capable fo killing them wouldn't violate the cease-fire agreement.
They don't, and they don't have the targeting systems needed for ASAT work to boot.
Space is BIG, and just throwing some chaff into space and expecting it to hit a military satellite is like dropping a single mine into the middle of the Pacific and expecting it to hit an aircraft carrier.
And how far up are military satellites? If they're less than 150 km, a missile capable fo killing them wouldn't violate the cease-fire agreement.
I don't think they're that low. In fact, I don't think it's physically possible to sustain an orbit that low. The Space Station is what, 350 km up? Even Sputnik got no lower than 200 km in its few months of flight before reentry. Anything at 150 km is going to reenter too soon to be useful.
Navigation satellites for GPS are at a high orbit 20,000 or so km above the earth's surface.
So unless Saddam built a satellite-launcher between 1991 and 2003, anything in Low Earth Orbit or higher is safe.
According to The Space Review (here), Saddam did have an orbital launch vehicle program in the 1980s based on clustering smaller missiles together. But given that the second and third stages constituted a nuclear missile delivery system, I have a hard time seeing this program come to fruition.
The Planet stops rotating due to the massive ASB assault.
If ASAT was that simple, the ICBM would never have been fielded.
The Planet stops rotating due to the massive ASB assault.
If ASAT was that simple, the ICBM would never have been fielded.
get a rudimentary guidance system, fill the nose with ball bearings, and you have a basic antisatellite missile, able to target spy satellites, if you can reach high enough. ASAT warfare isn't about getting to orbit, it's about getting to the altitude.....which can be accomplished with a ballistic suborbital trajectory
It's more complicated than that because (snip)
I think the reason that ASAT fell out was that the ICBM got MIRVed, and decoyed, and for every ASAT kill vehicle, you needed one rocket....
thus multiplying the defensive needs until they were massive