How long will the Outer Space Treaty last?

[ShachonianX]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty

Something about humans is that peace in any area never seems to last. Knowing the nature of mankind, how long until the Outer Space Treaty is broken? Of course, this could've already broken it. Only if it got into orbit, however. Also, the military is also seeming using the X-37 as a spy spaceplane, so how long until we find actual weapons being used in space?

[karolus10]

Outer space treaty forbids mostly nukes, there is no regulation about putting huge laser on orbit...

Edited June 2, 2013 by karolus10

[ShachonianX]

Outer space treaty forbids mosty nukes, there is no regulation about putting huge laser on orbit...

Well, we're all doomed now, probably.

[falofonos]

That treaty only applies to States.

The definition of weapon of mass destruction is also a bit vague...

Ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres

apparently count as weapons of mass destruction. So the Apollo program was a theoretical breach of the treaty.

In civilian hands a pair of non-ignitable explosive shoes apparently count as a WMD, so who knows?

[Spaceisbeautifulul]

Until us humans find something better to do, we will continue to kill each other and break laws and treaties.

Why don't we all just play hopscotch?

[ShachonianX]

Until us humans find something better to do, we will continue to kill each other and break laws and treaties.

Why don't we all just play hopscotch?

It's human nature. Kill, conquer, destroy, explore. It will probably eventually lead us to our downfall.

[Designer225]

So the Apollo program was a theoretical breach of the treaty.

In civilian hands a pair of non-ignitable explosive shoes apparently count as a WMD, so who knows?

The Saturn V rocket doesn't operate as a ballistic missile for the program, and it was used for exploration. But who knows?

And you think this is all human nature. It should be: kill, conquer, negotiate, destroy, explore, rebuild. But again, who knows?

[Poldarias]

Welll in the cold war a president (I don't know who it was then) wanted weapons put in space...

[ShachonianX]

Welll in the cold war a president (I don't know who it was then) wanted weapons put in space...

You mean the Star Wars program?

[Rage097]

It's human nature. Kill, conquer, destroy, explore. It will probably eventually lead us to our downfall.

After which you'll all be replaced by more logical (and possibly more violent) beings such as myself and we'll focus more on WTH is out there than WHY AREN'T THEY DEAD YET!?

[Redjoker]

Welll in the cold war a president (I don't know who it was then) wanted weapons put in space...

that was Reagan with star wars and it wasn't really a weapon as it was going to be a form of a ballistic missile shield.

[Kryten]

The soviet IS system would probably fit the definition of 'weapon in space'-it was a satellite with a large (relative to itself) maneuvering engine and a shrapnel warhead, intended (and used to, in tests) to destroy other satellites.

[Poldarias]

ah, I stand corrected. Thanks for correcting me

[Sᴄɪɴᴛɪʟʟᴀᴛᴏʀ]

It will last as long as other measures of launching nuclear weapons are cheaper. The cost of putting a nuclear missile battery in space and keeping it in orbit and secure would be massive. Not to mention the public would be unanimously against it so no politician would risk approving it in the first place. Its cheaper and easier to justify a low maintenance ICBM silo in a rural area than an orbiting missile fortress.

[magnemoe]

It will last as long as other measures of launching nuclear weapons are cheaper. The cost of putting a nuclear missile battery in space and keeping it in orbit and secure would be massive. Not to mention the public would be unanimously against it so no politician would risk approving it in the first place. Its cheaper and easier to justify a low maintenance ICBM silo in a rural area than an orbiting missile fortress.

Add that an submarine with ballistic missiles is harder to find and destroy than anything in low orbit.

If you use an smaller single warhead you could even put the missile on an truck launcher as the Russians do, also hard to destroy and a dirt cheap system.

As for anti satellite weapons and other weapons who are not WMD they are legal. You could put up an laser able to destroy ground target if you could make it.

Main issue is that blowing up things in obit create a lot of orbital junk who is not nice, doing testing in very low orbit where it burn up after a week and few complains.

Last US test was against an satellite about to crash, excuse was that the fuel tank could reach ground with toxic fuel.

[rdfox]

For the record, the Outer Space Treaty was meant to try and prevent the deployment of orbital nuclear weapons that could be used to launch an attack with virtually no warning and no possibility of pre-emption by hitting the weapons with a preemptive strike. Both sides were, understandably, worried about that, since they would consist of nothing more than a strategic warhead strapped to a simple guidance system, a communications system (to receive "attack" commands and target information) and a retro-rocket with a hell of a lot of delta-V; such a setup could be used to launch an attack with only about five minutes warning time (if that) by cancelling most of the weapon's orbital velocity and, either simultaneously or sequentially, thrusting radially *down* towards Earth to boost vertical speed and shorten/steepen the entry, sort of like the "stop then drop" technique of landing on certain small bodies in KSP. First warning would be when the engine fires; five minutes isn't enough time for detection, confirmation, and getting the message TO the National Command Authority, much less getting a command for a retaliatory strike to the targeted forces. (Alternatively, it could be used for a "decapitation" strike, since the NCA wouldn't be able to get a warning in time to flee or even shelter in place.)

The Soviets then promptly proceeded to develop and test a system that skirted the very edge of the OST, the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System. Basically, it was a missile that launched a weapon into space, then deorbited it on the first pass over the target rather than staying on-orbit as an alert weapon--this would allow them to launch an attack over the southern polar region instead of the northern one, thus bypassing the US's early-warning systems, which were all oriented to warn of an attack over the North Pole, the shortest route. Theoretically, FOBS would avoid violating the OST because it was going to have the warhead fly less than one full orbit and could thus be argued to be a "suborbital" system; the Soviets, however, to make sure they didn't violate the OST (and to help preserve secrecy) tested it with inert warheads rather than live ones, officially described as "research satellites." (The OST only prohibited actually putting nuclear weapons into orbit; it didn't prohibit developing systems that COULD put them into orbit--largely because at the time, the difference between an ICBM and a satellite launcher was the weight of the payload and the trajectory fed to the guidance system.) Apparently, many of the Soviets' "failed" satellite launches in the 1960s and 1970s that all flew a partial orbit and then re-entered were actually FOBS tests.

FOBS weapons, and all other orbital WMDs, were prohibited by the 1979 SALT II treaty, which prohibited developing or deploying systems used to put WMDs into orbit, not just the weapons themselves--thus making everyone breathe a lot easier about polar satellite launches, because there's plenty of satellites that require polar orbits, and this means that you just have to launch southward instead of northward and everyone will quickly realize it's a satellite launch they're seeing, not an attack.

[ZedNova]

It's human nature. Kill, conquer, destroy, explore. It will probably eventually lead us to our downfall.

It's also Human Nature to Build, Improve, and Study.

[KOCOUR]

Well as militaristic as i am, and as much as i would actually like to see spacewarfare, it doesnt seem likely.

People want to be rich not dead. So why waste money on create expnsive orbital weapon systems? What would be war good for, these days? (Imean proper war, not that srewed up riotcontroll in middleeast). Buying and seling things, can get you rich lot faster, easier, and safer than conqering and plundering. Off course sometimes you can boost your bussines negotiations with some millitary action, But just small and well thought. You dont want to destroy those resources you are triing to get, do you? Also there is better chance that people will support you, if you just want them to close eyes over occasional dirty bussines practice, than if you force them to crawl in mud with haevy cold piece of metall in hands.

[Canopus]

I want to see it lifted. Not for Warfare purpose but to build and fly High thrust and high efficient engines.

[Scotius]

Well, with widespread globalisation wars are counterproductive. If you are attacking other country, you are inevitably hurting your own economy. Your business sharks won't like you anymore when you bomb their shops, factories and mines abroad. Or those belonging to their business partners.

[nhnifong]

NASA found that in the event that we would need to deflect an asteroid form Earth, that a standoff nuclear detonation was practically the only affordable and effective solution and that an agreement between space faring nations would be necessary to proceed with it. I assume that if any of these nations also had a good strong desire to use nuclear energy in space for the purpose of high efficiency engines, that a similar agreement would be made.

I don't think there will ever be any space warfare.

[WCOLE360]

I'm not completely sure, but didn't we (US), do a sub(?)-orbital nuclear test?

[nhnifong]

I'm not completely sure, but didn't we (US), do a sub(?)-orbital nuclear test?

All ICBM's are launched on sub-orbital trajectories.

Both the USA and the USSR tested ICBM's with nuclear warheads, and tested detonations over the poles.

[Kryten]

Not the poles; US tested devices over the Pacific and the USSR over Kazakhstan. But that was before the treaty.

[Sbowyer28]

I see a Future Like Halo, Rebellion everywhere because of Unjust Government, Greed, Ect...