Is it possible to launch something to space stealthily?

[ARS]

I've been playing KSP for about 2 years now. And one day, I wondered that is it possible to launch something into space stealthily? (Not in kerbal style -stuff blowing up- of course). I've been thinking about several possibilities to perform that launch, though I don't know whether these are plausible or not. These possibilities assumes that the technology in the setting for SSTO, space elevator, railgun etc. has been matured enough to be used normally for space travel, but not too far into stuff like FTL, warp drive, etc. (call me weird, but whatever)

1. Using SSTO with stealthy design, flying low under the radar into a place with free of radar before boosting into space

2. Disguising the launch as something inconspicuous, like say, u want to launch a spy satellite by smuggling it inside a normal communication satellite launch

3. Using railgun or mass driver to hurl the object into space from a place free of observation (I don't know whether metal gear REX-style railgun can REALLY deliver nukes undetected or not)

4. I'm considering space elevator. But I don't know how to use that to send stuff into space stealthily

If you have other suggestion, feel free to write (sorry for my bad English -_-;)

[Green Baron]

Hu, what's your plan ? :-)

 

Status quo: seriously, a few years ago i would have said "No" with all the observation and surveillance satellites. But after realising that all the forces of the world aren't able to find a 300ton airliner in the Indian ocean my clear answer is: "No ... problem". You have good chances if you launch from a remote place, away from the states that are probably being watched over.

 

Cannot comment on space elevators, railguns, SSTOs because science fiction ...

 

[Tex_NL]

A spy-sat disguised as a weather- or com-sat would probably be your best bet. I would actually be surprised if this has not been done, or IS being done.

For Launching it yourself I agree with @Green Baron: Launch from a location as remote as possible.
And keep it as small as possible. A large heavy launch will stick out like a sore thumb and be visible from very far away. A small rocket is less visible and might be dismissed as fireworks or a hobby rocket.

Edited December 3, 2016 by Tex_NL

[Kryten]

 There's no way to have a hidden launch, because of the SBIRS system. Any rocket big enough to reach orbit will stick out like a thumb in infrared, and SBIRS has coverage of the entire planet. If we assume the US is the one trying to do the stealthy launch, the Russian equivalent system US-K has extensive coverage of US territory.

[YNM]

Given the amount of satellites up there today, I question one can truly makes a hidden launch.

 

That's why US and SU were waiting each other first (acceptability by others) before trying to get as many as possible up (once someone's up, no way to be hidden).

[GoSlash27]

Tom Clancy postulated this once in Clear and Present Danger. He disguised an ELINT sat launch as a stage failure. They didn't try to hide the existence of the sat itself, they merely disguised the purpose and target. As a result, everybody dismissed it as a piece of space junk.

Best,
-Slashy

Edited December 3, 2016 by GoSlash27

[cantab]

Yeah, whatever the technology, disguising the payload as something else works.

But let's say you want to conceal even the fact that you've launched *anything*. Rockets are out, they're not only obvious but they look like ICBMs and so are very well watched for.

SSTOs may be possible. It would have to fly stealthed or under-the-radar out into a part of the ocean beyond radar coverage, before climbing. My chief query is that stealthing a jet is established, but what about when the rockets kick in? Even outside radar range, could the infrared signature be made low enough to be undetected?

Air-launched rockets are the same deal as SSTOs.

With a mass driver, as soon as the projectile hits the air it's gonna make a load of shock heating, like a re-entry only even worse. I suspect that might be spotted.

With a space elevator, I suppose one could be constructed to have the car movements invisible, then you also maintain operational secrecy and no-one knows what you're doing with it. The problem is that for your enemies it's a known unknown - they don't know what's going up and down and when, but they do know that you *can* move stuff on the space elevator any time you like. A stealth spaceplane, or even a mass driver buried in a mountain, could be a top-secret black project, but a space elevator just can't be hidden.

[Scotius]

Well, you can't launch anything to orbit stealthily. The amount of energy spent to achieve orbital speed can't be hidden anymore - there is simply too many sats looking specifically for that thing to flare up. Even sounding rockets used for atmospheric research are monitored. Only way to put something secret in space, is to disguise it as a innocent payload.

[kerbiloid]

 

Spoiler

 

[ARS]

So basically, my best bet is to disguise the payload as something innocent? Like I'm launching a spy satellite by hiding it inside a weather satellite launch?

[Tex_NL]

6 minutes ago, ARS said:

So basically, my best bet is to disguise the payload as something innocent? Like I'm launching a spy satellite by hiding it inside a weather satellite launch?

Don't hide it inside the weather satellite. Make it a weather satellite. Have your satellite perform both jobs.
Many satellites take hi-res pictures of earth or do other detailed scans. A few extra instruments won't be that obvious. And neither would a camera that has a higher resolution than it says on the box.

Edited December 3, 2016 by Tex_NL

[ARS]

4 minutes ago, Tex_NL said:

Don't hide it inside the weather satellite. Make it a weather satellite. Have your satellite perform both jobs.
Many satellites take hi-res pictures of earth or do other detailed scans. A few extra instruments won't be that obvious. And neither would a camera that has a higher resolution than it says on the box.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the answer:)

That reminds me... is it possible to hide the payload inside the multistage fairing? Like the one in KSP. So it's like I'm launching the weather satellite, but there's a spy satellite hidden inside the multistage fairing. After the fairing deploys and the weather satellite is decoupled from it, the TRUE payload is deployed shortly after (so basically it's 2 satellite in 1 fairing, but 1 is hidden) is this possible?

[insert_name]

9 minutes ago, ARS said:

Ah, I see. Thanks for the answer:)

That reminds me... is it possible to hide the payload inside the multistage fairing? Like the one in KSP. So it's like I'm launching the weather satellite, but there's a spy satellite hidden inside the multistage fairing. After the fairing deploys and the weather satellite is decoupled from it, the TRUE payload is deployed shortly after (so basically it's 2 satellite in 1 fairing, but 1 is hidden) is this possible?

Absolutely, many launches carry multiple payloads. The arriane 5 has this as it's default mode of operation. However it still wouldn't be stealthy as you can not conceal an object in space

[ARS]

21 minutes ago, insert_name said:

Absolutely, many launches carry multiple payloads. The arriane 5 has this as it's default mode of operation. However it still wouldn't be stealthy as you can not conceal an object in space

I see. Thank you very much for ur answer:)

[Kryten]

39 minutes ago, ARS said:

So basically, my best bet is to disguise the payload as something innocent? Like I'm launching a spy satellite by hiding it inside a weather satellite launch?

It's usual for weather sat data to be freely available; if your data never turns up, and your sat doesn't seem to have been developed through the normal channels, it's going to be obvious something's up.

17 minutes ago, insert_name said:

Absolutely, many launches carry multiple payloads. The arriane 5 has this as it's default mode of operation. However it still wouldn't be stealthy as you can not conceal an object in space

It is possible to conceal an object in space, the Misty sats back in the 90s demonstrated that as much, but it'll cost you. Misty were cancelled after costing about $5 billion each, about twice as much as comparable non-stealth sats.

[Tex_NL]

2 minutes ago, Kryten said:

It's usual for weather sat data to be freely available; if your data never turns up, and your sat doesn't seem to have been developed through the normal channels, it's going to be obvious something's up.

That's why I suggested to make it a legit satellite. Have it transmit the legit data as normal but keep the secondary purpose hidden.
As an added bonus will the legit use pay for the entire satellite. You'll have a spy-sat in orbit hidden in plain sight and it wouldn't have cost a thing. Or at least all expenses are covered by the legit use.

[Kryten]

The other big problem is there's not much *point* having a secret spy satellite. I mean, it's not the late 50s anymore, there's international consensus that it's okay to have military missions, and for you to give minimal details out about a mission if you want to keep it classified.

[Jonfliesgoats]

Its hard to disguise a launch and easy to disguise or hide a payload.  The Urugan was launchable from something as small as a Zenit rocket which is eminently hideable/transportable.  An X-37 or similar vehicle can live happily in a fairing.

Amateur astronomers and spotters actually pose significant challenges because you can't make something, even a black something, entirely invisible.

[ARS]

2 hours ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

Its hard to disguise a launch and easy to disguise or hide a payload.  The Urugan was launchable from something as small as a Zenit rocket which is eminently hideable/transportable.  An X-37 or similar vehicle can live happily in a fairing.

Amateur astronomers and spotters actually pose significant challenges because you can't make something, even a black something, entirely invisible.

Well, my main question is basically how to send something out there undetected. It doesn't matter if it's detected after it deploys, but the main issue is how to send there undetected. So far, smuggling it as something innocent is my best answer, just like @Tex_NL said

[magnemoe]

10 hours ago, Tex_NL said:

A spy-sat disguised as a weather- or com-sat would probably be your best bet. I would actually be surprised if this has not been done, or IS being done.

For Launching it yourself I agree with @Green Baron: Launch from a location as remote as possible.
And keep it as small as possible. A large heavy launch will stick out like a sore thumb and be visible from very far away. A small rocket is less visible and might be dismissed as fireworks or a hobby rocket.

Yes, main benefit is that enemy can hide from known spy satellites. 
Main downside is that you can look at the satellite with an telescope and get decent details, so an com sat with an huge telescope and you know something is wrong, 
You could probably deploy an small stealthy secondary payload, this would be most interesting if you wanted to spy on another satellite. 

You can not hide the launch, the IR sensor system is so good you can easy get smaller ballistic rockets, some estimates they can get 155 mm artillery and fighter jet on afterburner in good conditions. 

[Jonfliesgoats]

Here is an interesting story related to informal observers:

https://warisboring.com/skygazers-have-already-found-the-u-s-governments-new-spy-satellite-b766042a4810#.vkfy98ap3

[magnemoe]

7 hours ago, Kryten said:

The other big problem is there's not much *point* having a secret spy satellite. I mean, it's not the late 50s anymore, there's international consensus that it's okay to have military missions, and for you to give minimal details out about a mission if you want to keep it classified.

True, however its some reasons, first you do stuff like testing planes at area 51 where they have mobile hangars to hide planes on the ground in. 
You simply want to hide you progress and capabilities. 
Second is tactical, its well known that taliban and other groups use satellite timing to hide. So would you do with any special operation in an war where the other side has access to satellite data. 

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, magnemoe said:

so an com sat with an huge telescope and you know something is wrong, 

It's a node of an intercontinental commercial signal network. Connects people.

 

Spoiler

 

 

[YNM]

Yeah, I guess now most classified launch just counts for "slight failure" or secondary payload or hidden capabilities. It's too obvious otherwise.

[Nibb31]

There are very few totally secret launches. Most US military launches are openly identified as SIGINT, communication, recon satellites or experimental flights like the X-37B missions. From the moment of their launch, military satellite orbits are public knowledge and can be followed on sites such as http://www.heavens-above.com/. This includes any changes of orbital parameters. Pretty much every military or paramilitary organisation knows when a spysat is going to fly over.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Nibb31