India successfully shoots down satellite in space(timesofindia.indiatimes.com) |
India successfully shoots down satellite in space(timesofindia.indiatimes.com) |
Western Nations often have this tendency of pass international laws with exceptions for themselves using ridiculous arguments. Such as nuclear proliferation treaties which allows existing nuclear powers to build more nuclear war heads but does not allow others to build even the first nuke.
India's NSA Ajit Doval in 2011 had pointed out that this is going to happen to satellite sabotage as well. The existing players will gang up to ban such weapons while making exemptions for themselves. By publicly showing and acknowledging this capability India has ensured a seat at the table in future.
""In the journey of every nation there are moments that bring utmost pride and have a historic impact on generations to come. One such moment is today,"" U+1F644
V. Does the test create space debris?
The test was done in the lower atmosphere to ensure that there is no space debris. Whatever debris that is generated will decay and fall back onto the earth within weeks.
[0] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/soon-after-pm-address-foreig...
We need an international treaty banning this because the detritus produced in the form of hundreds of thousands of new fragments in orbit is one of the largest threats to future space development.
I certainly hope that among the nations and people who are developing these weapons, they have a number of game theory people who have thoroughly considered all of the ramifications of mutually assured destruction.
In a major conflict, the US and Russia have a number of geostationary and MEO orbit military satellite communications systems which are outside of the reach of any LEO antisatellite weapons (capable of shooting down things up in up to approximately 550x550km circular orbits).
On an Indian specific note, this threat has to be aimed only at whatever Pakistan might put into orbit. At present Pakistan has negligible ability to launch anything themselves, and very little actual Pakistani owned/manufactured/controlled satellites in low earth orbit. But who else can it possibly be considered a threat to?
India is hopefully not foolish enough to think that they could get into a shooting war with China and come out ahead.
Sending a science mission to space is great and rightly lauded, this is wasteful and energies spent better elsewhere.
I've seen some criticism from certain individuals. However, I haven't read any condemnation from any Western government(as yet). I'm not sure but Western governments(or at least the US government) was probably taken into confidence either before the event or soon after the test. Considering that China already has this tech, it becomes paramount for India to have it. I think this is generally supported by the US(the government) as well.
> All the while the region suffers from chronic poverty, poor access to clean water and basic services.
Developing such such security apparatus doesn't mean we are ignoring poverty and other essential things. Both can be done simultaneously, just like the US did(explained by a sibling comment).
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/02/india/nasa-india-anti-missile...
I don't think there is any technological glory on destroying a satellite that deserves such a public announcement. Perhaps it is far less complicated than putting a satellite into space which is what India was already good at it.
We are talking about the capability to track and destroy a live satellite in space in under a span of 3 minutes with precision. There is a significant amount of technology involved here right from the types of propellants, precise navigation controls to steer rock in a specific direction...all of which has been developed indigenously. This technology can be easily used in other space programs for civilian applications.
Not sure on what basis you are considering this as not being technologically significant.
For a rough estimate, see this: https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/
That said, I don't think a big mirror reflecting the sun is all that practical when a big ass laser would do the same job and be easier to manufacture and operate.
Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_decay#/media/File:Alti...
We can see space-x events from 32 different angles and audio of everything happening, I kind of assume you would record these events too?
I would not be surprised if India announces ICBMs in the next 5 years. A country that can place 100s of satellites in space as well as place geostationary satellites, has the necessary rocket technology to build an ICBM. Just because they don't talk about it, doesn't mean they can't do it.
I think India is in the midst of adopting an active deterrence policy. Being passive hasn't yielded good results.
1. https://www.isro.gov.in/about-isro/organisation-structure
What's curious is that he seems to go missing when there's a fuck up. Who was responsible for demonetization? No idea, blame anyone you want but don't blame him!
Finding personal faults with any public person is pointless (as in having an effect on you). What matters is whether the results are good/bad.
Adding a link. Sorry about creating a new comment. Am on mobile
Don't be too quick to find faults!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokhran-II
And point to be noted is that this one was just after the election. So it seems like elections have not been a major factor in these kinds of announcement in India.
* His list of achievements is absurd and factually incorrect, and he rarely gives credit to others who contributed.
* He hates criticism and tries to muzzle it. A politician should not interfere with the press but he does so. He has gotten journalists fired because they criticised him.
Just read the tweets on his profile... A sample: https://mobile.twitter.com/narendramodi/status/1110862796437...
It's like... Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.
If you're going to blindly criticise anyone without considering things out of your bubble, that's your prerogative.
It really makes no sense at all.
a) you give it enough energy to reach escape velocity, in which case there's no problem.
b) you blow out the circular orbit into a long ellipse. The far end, apogee, can be very far out depending on how much energy you added, but the near end, perigee, is always at the same altitude as it was at the moment of impact. Therefore, as long as the satellite is "within" thin atmosphere at the moment of impact, the fragments will periodically pass through thin atmosphere as well.
To properly boost yourself into a higher (circular) orbit you need to give yourself two kicks: one to raise your apogee, and then half an orbit later another to raise your perigee to match.
It doesn’t have to be in a sustainable orbit to cause problems.
To be clear, I'm not objecting to the weapons existence. I'm objecting to the tests, which are potentially worse than above-ground nuclear testing. The kessler syndrome, if realized, would permanently destroy our ability to deploy, access, and use space resources.
So the first, the US, was a travesty, but everyone else is legitimate self-defense?
You realize that nobody is fooled right? Everyone except for Modi's supporters sees through this
I'm not about aware about any change in the Code of Conduct since the EC made that statement. Correct me if I am wrong.
And the question isn't whether it is permissible, but rather was it an obvious opportunistic move? The answer to the latter is yes to pretty much all of the outside observers.
The atmosphere is hardly a problem. You'd use numerous beams simultaneously, fired from all over the country. No single beam would be powerful enough to cause atmospheric breakdown. The sensible choice is to surround every power plant with lasers.
No, this won't be undetectable.
Light pressure is fine, but probably not as productive as ionizing the surface to produce thrust. With high power, atoms at the surface can become multiply ionized. They get blasted off the surface. This would be pulsed, since otherwise the resulting ions would absorb some of the beam and there would be a risk of melting the surface.
If the thrust isn't enough, for example due to a very high orbit, you can just keep going until the target is gone.
Weather isn't much of a problem. There is probably clear weather somewhere over the country. Station keeping won't last forever.
Oh, and if you don't insist on a neat and tidy removal, you can just use non-pulsed beams to melt the target.
Don't be too quick to overstate others' positions!
As far as overstating positions go, the opposition in India was quick to jump to conspiracy theories after the Pulwama attack saying that Modi orchestrated the entire attack for political gains. This ridiculous conspiracy theory mongering has gone on to unprecedented levels this election. After failing at making a dent for the past 1 year by parroting Rafale lies, the opposition is now trying to find a new issue to latch onto.
It can't be that you keep throwing darts until one of them sticks! That is not how a responsible opposition should behave!
Talk about skewed perspectives.
China managed to not have Xi Jinping announce when they did it.
> And the question isn't whether it is permissible, but rather was it an obvious opportunistic move?
I don't know.
Which test you're talking about? Xi wasn't leading China back in 2007. And thanks to the ignorance of their top brass, the Chinese received considerable negative reaction after the test.[1]
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_...
You're right - I was confusing it with the more recent non-destructive tests that were also not explicitly announced.
And I don't think they received negative reaction because they didn't announce. It's no secret that the West is not full of fans of China
