Rods from God is not a practical concept. This is not to say it would not work.
A x number of tonne tungsten rod in orbit, does not just drop out of space, it must be de-orbitted with a burn that will bring it initially onto a shallow atmospheric entry, the steeper the more fuel is used. A steep trajectory would require enough fuel to almost completely stop the orbit from say 27,000 Kph.
This whole weapon system is so egregiously energy inefficient with the initial launch included that it is just not practical in any way. To get a heavy object out of the atmosphere, accelerate it to 7kms per second only to slow it down again is the most inefficient delivery system possible. Have a look at the price of sending objects into space and then think about the rods from God program.
It makes no sense.
Edit:- Not to be a downer, I loved the concept until I applied knowledge of orbital mechanics to the problem, had a bit of a think about it then went..Nah.
This is not to say it would not work, but that burn to slow from 7 kilometers a second to gradually walk a vector onto a terestrial target at any sort of non shallow trajectory would be long. I guess you could use a smaller course correction and then atmospheric breaking of some sort to achieve a steeper trajectory with less fuel but I just don't overly see this whole concept as practical, especially when the tungsten is coming from earth. From space might be another matter. Anyway - food for thought.
Final edit:- Could it make sense from the standpoint of an unlimited budget and the need for ultimate deniability in singular or extremely rare circumstances - maybe/ maybe not. Who the fuck knows anything anymore.
You don't think Trump put anything in space? I always figured Musk was involved as well. But to what you're saying regarding kinetic space weapons I don't think that's whats up there - I have no clue what they're using but I feel they weaponized something even if it's just a magnifying glass to beam the sun - That's a joke I think....
A rail gun shooting a BIG ASS tungsten rod would cause the platform to need to be moved back into position and the rod will still be traveling laterally at 27,000 Kph. It sounds less practical again. Think about it, it is going sideways way faster than any speed that will be imparted by the rail gun. The rail gun is like a BB gun compared to the orbital speeds. The useage of fuel to change the trajectory is more practical in it's impracticality than a rail gun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi-BDIu_umo
Here is a vid of a railgun from 2017, note the projectile would be very small compared to the rods we are talking about. There is a reason they were looking to deploy them on surface warships. Large (huge) and power consumption (massive) and a large object with lots of mass to shoot it from that isn't going to fly off to Alpha Centuri the first time they fire it.
Rods from God is not a practical concept. This is not to say it would not work. A x number of tonne tungsten rod in orbit, does not just drop out of space, it must be de-orbitted with a burn that will bring it initially onto a shallow atmospheric entry, the steeper the more fuel is used. A steep trajectory would require enough fuel to almost completely stop the orbit from say 27,000 Kph. This whole weapon system is so egregiously energy inefficient with the initial launch included that it is just not practical in any way. To get a heavy object out of the atmosphere, accelerate it to 7kms per second only to slow it down again is the most inefficient delivery system possible. Have a look at the price of sending objects into space and then think about the rods from God program. It makes no sense. Edit:- Not to be a downer, I loved the concept until I applied knowledge of orbital mechanics to the problem, had a bit of a think about it then went..Nah. This is not to say it would not work, but that burn to slow from 7 kilometers a second to gradually walk a vector onto a terestrial target at any sort of non shallow trajectory would be long. I guess you could use a smaller course correction and then atmospheric breaking of some sort to achieve a steeper trajectory with less fuel but I just don't overly see this whole concept as practical, especially when the tungsten is coming from earth. From space might be another matter. Anyway - food for thought. Final edit:- Could it make sense from the standpoint of an unlimited budget and the need for ultimate deniability in singular or extremely rare circumstances - maybe/ maybe not. Who the fuck knows anything anymore.
^ This guy calculus’s.
bet he was in on Capture the Flag on /pol/
Unless, they have been lying to us about the cost of putting things in orbit. Or some, far cheaper, technology has been developed.
All true!
thanks for the thorough summary. wonder if its more about drone activity up there protecting satellites from being messed with
No probs. I have no doubt awesome shit is going on up there.
You don't think Trump put anything in space? I always figured Musk was involved as well. But to what you're saying regarding kinetic space weapons I don't think that's whats up there - I have no clue what they're using but I feel they weaponized something even if it's just a magnifying glass to beam the sun - That's a joke I think....
Oh I definitely feel Trump put shit in space and like you I have no clue what..
If only we knew a based rocket-fag who specializes is rapid precision deceleration of boosters that can land on a dime in the middle of the ocean...
Such a fag could accomplish much with these fabled tungsten rods.
A rail gun shooting a BIG ASS tungsten rod would cause the platform to need to be moved back into position and the rod will still be traveling laterally at 27,000 Kph. It sounds less practical again. Think about it, it is going sideways way faster than any speed that will be imparted by the rail gun. The rail gun is like a BB gun compared to the orbital speeds. The useage of fuel to change the trajectory is more practical in it's impracticality than a rail gun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi-BDIu_umo
Here is a vid of a railgun from 2017, note the projectile would be very small compared to the rods we are talking about. There is a reason they were looking to deploy them on surface warships. Large (huge) and power consumption (massive) and a large object with lots of mass to shoot it from that isn't going to fly off to Alpha Centuri the first time they fire it.
Rocket-fag. love it.