Paranoid uses for starship

[kerbiloid]

33 minutes ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

if they get attacked, wouldn't that be an act of war?

Even if so, should then its owner start a nuclear war and get the whole country destroyed? Unlikely. 

That's why Starship won't be used as a Death Star.

[tomf]

I don't think even the most paranoid general would think that spaceX would start a nuclear was on their own, where would they get the warheads for a start?

But if spaceX independence is a sham and really it is cover for a secret DOD black project...

[kerbiloid]

31 minutes ago, tomf said:

I don't think even the most paranoid general would think that spaceX would start a nuclear was on their own, where would they get the warheads for a start?

But if spaceX independence is a sham and really it is cover for a secret DOD black project...

As "owner" I mean the Starship's country, not company.

***

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_инцидентов_с_участием_иностранной_авиации_над_СССР_(1946—1991)

It's not so easy to start a war even when something is shot down. Read the list.

[SOXBLOX]

1 hour ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

SpaceX is also an American meaning they may follow American laws while in International waters, so if they get attacked, wouldn't that be an act of war?

It would be. I don't see it starting a whole war, though. Most likely, the USA would respond in kind. Perhaps putting an SM-3 through one of the enemy's comm sats? Attacking a BMEWS sat would be an escalation. It would look like preparation for a nuclear launch.

4 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Space APS?

Absolutely! Stick something like KKV's in Starship with their own little hatch to fly out of, and a radar somewhere, and the attacker would have to fire multiple missiles. The missiles could conceivably be worth more combined that Starship, making the attack Pyhhric.

[Codraroll]

7 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

2. This won't work. The re-entering Starship will be detected by radars, even mobile ones like the AN/TPY-2 (THAAD), AN/MPQ-63 (Patriot), and presumably the S-400 and S-500, will be able to provide early warning. Again, this will just invite attack on SpaceX launch facilities themselves.

If using Starship as an ICBM, you wouldn't let the whole thing re-enter in one piece. You would pack it with warheads and decoys, launch on a very steep suborbital trajectory, release the payload, then boostback or change orientation so the Starship itself comes down safely and quietly over your own territory outside the range of enemy air defenses. The enemy would be left to contend with hundreds or even thousands of incoming objects at once, most of which would be harmless balloons, but by the time you could tell them apart it would be way too late to shoot down all of them.

This would be in flying violation of a bunch of ICBM treaties, of course, but if you're the type to start a nuclear war, you presumably wouldn't let treaties bother you too much anyway.

[kerbiloid]

46 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

If using Starship as an ICBM, you wouldn't let the whole thing re-enter in one piece. You would pack it with warheads and decoys, launch on a very steep suborbital trajectory, release the payload, then boostback or change orientation so the Starship itself comes down safely and quietly over your own territory outside the range of enemy air defenses. The enemy would be left to contend with hundreds or even thousands of incoming objects at once, most of which would be harmless balloons, but by the time you could tell them apart it would be way too late to shoot down all of them.

This would be in flying violation of a bunch of ICBM treaties, of course, but if you're the type to start a nuclear war, you presumably wouldn't let treaties bother you too much anyway.

SuperHeavy = N1 + DC-X, lol.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/n1_icbm.html

[Rakaydos]

It will be nice when the EIS is finished and Starship finally does what the N1 failed to do.

[tomf]

If you are going to start nuclear war you are probably willing to expend some upper stages.

You would want to launch on an entirely typical trajectory that just happens to overfly the enemy territory and not reveal your true nature until practically overhead for minimal warning.

[GuessingEveryDay]

2 minutes ago, tomf said:

If you are going to start nuclear war you are probably willing to expend some upper stages.

You would want to launch on an entirely typical trajectory that just happens to overfly the enemy territory and not reveal your true nature until practically overhead for minimal warning.

No, say you're sending RTGs on probes, but the RTGs are actually nukes. During the launch, say the launch has had a catastrophic accident and the FTS isn't working, while  steering it toward the target.

[magnemoe]

14 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The superheavy orbital thing is immediately hit by a small a-sat missile.

Suggestions? Decisions?

(Yes, it's known who has hit and the hitman says he will do this again next time.)

Better to wait for the payload to be deployed as it will not be so close monitored and don't have powerful engines. 
It also escalate the fight. Kind of like unrestricted submarine hunting. 
Assuming this was not an response to an starfall strikes (claiming copyright on the starship bomber version name  )

Now today its an very low number of countries who can hit stuff in space, this will grow as stuff like S-500 become second line (will not discuss the standard missile because its name (seriously either you are an Dilbert character or some who get an medal for confusing everyone including the enemy, works if you are not confusing the operators)) 
This is likely to change down the line, but might be harder to copy and an cheap starship ripoff. 

 

[SunlitZelkova]

13 hours ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

SpaceX is also an American meaning they may follow American laws while in International waters, so if they get attacked, wouldn't that be an act of war?

I was assuming the war has started for other reasons. Then SpaceX gets attacked, whereas if it does not pursue a Starship combat variant, it might be left alone.

7 hours ago, Codraroll said:

If using Starship as an ICBM, you wouldn't let the whole thing re-enter in one piece. You would pack it with warheads and decoys, launch on a very steep suborbital trajectory, release the payload, then boostback or change orientation so the Starship itself comes down safely and quietly over your own territory outside the range of enemy air defenses. The enemy would be left to contend with hundreds or even thousands of incoming objects at once, most of which would be harmless balloons, but by the time you could tell them apart it would be way too late to shoot down all of them.

This would be in flying violation of a bunch of ICBM treaties, of course, but if you're the type to start a nuclear war, you presumably wouldn't let treaties bother you too much anyway.

Starship isn't useful as an ICBM though because it is liquid fueled. Now the Titan II managed to do 24 hour alerts but regardless of whether Starship can be redesigned to do that, building a silo for Starship would be prohibitively expensive.

[kerbiloid]

9 hours ago, tomf said:

You would want to launch on an entirely typical trajectory that just happens to overfly the enemy territory

All typical trajectories are much shorter than intercontinental, and purposedly pass above national territory or close to it.

So, a rocket with 5 000 km long launch will definitely be treated as something like ICBM.

Especially since it's known to exist.

9 hours ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

No, say you're sending RTGs on probes, but the RTGs are actually nukes. During the launch, say the launch has had a catastrophic accident and the FTS isn't working, while  steering it toward the target.

The same.

[MKI]

On 9/1/2021 at 3:12 AM, tomf said:

What scenarios enabled by the planned starship system are you going to be presenting to leadership in order to justify increased spending on your project?

The USA rips up the Outer Space Treaty, declares the Moon a colony and builds a self sufficient base, with a permanent military presence, with enough infrastructure to build deeper space networks to support complete USA control on the rest of the solar system for the foreseeable future.

My project I'd want accelerated is another version of Starship to match capabilities to building another Moon outpost to prevent a monopoly of the solar system going to the USA.

Obviously my project is in the dark corners of the government with little funding, as no serious general actually is looking into militarizing space at that scale, nor does any serious general actually believe such events would transpire anytime soon. Then again I'm sure there is some general out there already protesting this, hence why copy-cat Starship designs are already popping up. By the time Starship can support a permanent moon base, you must have similar capabilities otherwise you already lost. 

 

On a little more "realistic" scale, Starship's capabilities aren't much better than existing technologies. The difference is the scale and economics involved in using it. Throw enough money at the problem and you can get anything significant into orbit from any number of vendors to overcome any Starship capabilities. Its only once you start looking at large scale projects on the Moon (and Mars) does Starship start to become the only option beyond existing capabilities. 

The only unique capability that Starship possess in terms of LEO is the ability for Cargo Starship to "pick up" an existing satellite and return it to the ground. However this capability already existed with the Space Shuttle, and was one of the reasons for the Buran's development. However such capabilities aren't worth much in practice, so even the most paranoid generals wouldn't worry about it due to all the possible such enemy actions.

 

 

[kerbiloid]

7 hours ago, MKI said:

The USA rips up the Outer Space Treaty, declares the Moon a colony and builds a self sufficient base, with a permanent military presence, with enough infrastructure to build deeper space networks to support complete USA control on the rest of the solar system for the foreseeable future.

My project I'd want accelerated is another version of Starship to match capabilities to building another Moon outpost to prevent a monopoly of the solar system going to the USA.

(Reads and populates the Moon and the Phobos with cheap anti-Starship shooting mines.
Probably, the first Lunar Race ^(tm) was cancelled exactly because to eliminate the military lunar base appeared to be much cheaper and easier than to build and support.
So, they signed the Outer Space Treaty to not disturb each other with silly attempts.)

Edited September 6, 2021 by kerbiloid

[SOXBLOX]

48 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

(Reads and populates the Moon and the Phobos with cheap anti-Starship shooting mines.
Probably, the first Lunar Race ^(tm) was cancelled exactly because to eliminate the military lunar base appeared to be much cheaper and easier than to build and support.
So, they signed the Outer Space Treaty to not disturb each other with silly attempts.)

Starship: *Deploys hundreds of mine-sweeping KKVs.*

*Star-spangled Banner intensifies*

LOL, I'm joking. 

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, SOXBLOX said:

Starship: *Deploys hundreds of mine-sweeping KKVs.*

(Intercepts the Starship by a kilogram-mass single impactor shot from the tiny lunar lander long before it comes to the Moon,

Nobody even knows, what happened. Probably, a meteorite.

Advanced version, By an impactor shot from Phobos.)

Edited September 6, 2021 by kerbiloid

[MKI]

12 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Probably, the first Lunar Race ^(tm) was cancelled exactly because to eliminate the military lunar base appeared to be much cheaper and easier than to build and support.
So, they signed the Outer Space Treaty to not disturb each other with silly attempts

The first space race stopped due to things getting expensive, and public opinion and focus moving away from space travel. The Soviets couldn't get their N1 prototype off the pad in one piece, and the US already made it to the moon. If things get cheaper and public opinion turns back toward space travel, I see no reason for it not to pick back up in a "round two" of sorts. 

 

12 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

to eliminate the military lunar base

Its actually very easy to eliminate enemy targets, but the politics of doing so aren't so clear cut. Destroying a base on the moon would be akin to attacking foreign soil (if the treaty was ripped up). Not only would it be an incredibly visible and slow attack that takes days to reach the target, there would have to be justification, otherwise your essentially starting a war. 

Of course a competing country could also try to get back to the moon to establish their own colonies, or call it all a shame and waste of cash for a dead rock. But I'm a paranoid commander, not a reasonable one ;D

[kerbiloid]

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

The first space race stopped due to things getting expensive, and public opinion and focus moving away from space travel.

Did anyone ask the public if it wants to go to the Moon in 1961?  Or if it wants Horizon/Orion?

The public just faced the fact of the cancellation.

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

The Soviets couldn't get their N1 prototype off the pad in one piece

The Soviets had upgraded NK-15 to NK-33 (the N1F launch planned on 1974) and had many tens of failed launches before. This never stopped from continuation.

See, the N1 launch mass is just 4 times greater than Proton's, and there were 49 Proton failures.
Every Proton failure was a fire of ~700 t of the toxic hypergolic fuel. Every N1 failure was a loss of 1 200 t of kerosene.

The last lunar Apollo has flown in 1972.

The next one (the cancelled Apollo-18) was planned on 1974, too.

I.e. the Soviet lunar program was cancelled not when the Apollos visited the Moon.
(Yeah,  it probably took several years to realize that the Americans have already visited the Moon, keeping spending billions of the failed race).

It was cancelled exactly once the American lunar program continuation was dropped.

So, nobody cared who is first-second-thirty-third, the aim of the race was not the flag planting.
It was a race of "what if the opponents build the lunar military base first and will keep us away from there".

All that "racing" was for public.

Once one party cancelled their attempts, the another party breathed a sigh of relief and immediately cancelled its own.

Of course, no one of them will say that they were planning to build a military lunar base.

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

Its actually very easy to eliminate enemy targets

The fortified ones, in vacuum, protected by ground? Possible, but not that easy.

But maintaining the lunar base is by orders of magnitude harder.

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

Not only would it be an incredibly visible

A millisecond-long flash of X-rays above the base?
Or a local moonquake with no cloud of dust because no air?

Also the military base makes sense mostly on the invisible side of the Moon.

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

slow attack that takes days to reach the target

If put the rocket on the Moon - just a half-hour.

55 minutes ago, MKI said:

otherwise your essentially starting a war. 

On the Moon. Not on the Earth.

Edited September 6, 2021 by kerbiloid

[Rakaydos]

All of that is just First Mover advantage- the first one to put that sort of thing on the moon can shoot down what anyone else brings to the moon.

Right now, it's looking like Starship is gong to be that first mover. Denying the moon and mars (and wherever else they want) to other nations forever. Unless your nation does a crash program to get there first.

[SOXBLOX]

3 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

All of that is just First Mover advantage- the first one to put that sort of thing on the moon can shoot down what anyone else brings to the moon.

Right now, it's looking like Starship is gong to be that first mover. Denying the moon and mars (and wherever else they want) to other nations forever. Unless your nation does a crash program to get there first.

That's probably the best reason I can think of for our paranoid general. If the US decides to deny everyone else access to space, and uses Starship to do it, nobody will be getting to space until the US collapses or withdraws from space. Or someone starts WWIII over it.

Edited September 7, 2021 by SOXBLOX

[kerbiloid]

The Starship is just another flying aim.

This, but bigger and on the Moon.

Spoiler

 

[SOXBLOX]

31 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

This, but bigger and on the Moon.

But how does it get to the Moon? It would have to get there before the USA sends StarshipWarship to take over the Moon. If it tries to go after, Starship will blast it out of the sky. 

Then again, we never said the paranoid general is rational...

[kerbiloid]

58 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

But how does it get to the Moon?

It's many times lighter than a crewed lunar lander.

59 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

It would have to get there before the USA sends StarshipWarship to take over the Moon.

Why? It should get to there any time. And the StarshipWarship is just a small vessel, not bigger than a plane.

1 hour ago, SOXBLOX said:

If it tries to go after, Starship will blast it out of the sky. 

It would shoot once the Starship appears above the horizon. Or even earlier.

P.S.
I don't mean that the anti-chopper mined from the picture is what's needed. It's just illustrating the whole idea.

Actually, a kinetic or a nuke rocket is what's needed.

But same small.

[DDE]

On 9/2/2021 at 4:12 PM, tomf said:

But if spaceX independence is a sham and really it is cover for a secret DOD black project...

I'd suggest a different formulaion: SpaceX has Silicon Valley lineage and is partly owned by Alphabet (Google), and Silicon Valley startups are said to be heavily managed (sometimes openly through their venture funds, but usually indirectly through "infrastructure" elements like law firms) by the CIA to ensure tech is developed in a desired direction.

...it's this kind of thread.

Spoiler

I'll admit, the current sincere, vicious spatfest between SpaceX and BO does put some holes into that theory.

 

[Rakaydos]

4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

It's many times lighter than a crewed lunar lander.

But that doesnt answer the question... how does it get on the moon?