Cute but no. In order to "fire" a projectile from space, you would have to de-orbit it first. That takes a retro burn to slow from 22,000 mph. Remember, orbit is a function equivalent to centrifugal force, not altitude. Then, said rods would need guidance. Engineering says nope.

[–] • 1 pt

Interesting point that I had not considered about the rods from God.

I had just assumed that a small push to detach over a target, making one think about it, having the weapon in space is one thing. Making it usable to hit a target is a different challenge.

Bet the answer is some form of classified.

link

[–] • 2 pts

Hitting a target is straightforward. Every satellite already had to calculate its orbit (or de-orbit). The tradeoffs are:

1) Kinetic bombardment is relatively expensive due to the cost of putting tungsten rods the size of telephone poles into orbit. Conventional weapons are cheaper.

2) Kinetic bombardment would excel against static, compressible targets like bunkers or buildings because once launched it can't be stopped and laughs at depth or hardening.

3) Kinetic bombardment weapons can readily be dodged by any mobile target.

4) Their theoretical area of effect is probably pretty small. Good for sniping bunkers, hot garbage for taking out ships that can dodge or infantry that can disperse.

No one (that we know of) has built them because they're such a costly, niche weapon.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

Thanks,

4- I would guess that it could be drop the rod vertical for penetration and flat for "splash damage".

Interesting considerations I wouldn't have thought up.

Whenever I hear an article "the military developed...." I just assume that they are being deployed for potential use at least somewhere.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

Pretty much. It's like hitting a sand castle vertically with a mallet to collapse it vs at an angle to throw sand everywhere...just at 22,000mph rather than 22mph.

The only reason it never made it off the drawing board is high cost, niche use.

If you want a well known example from fiction, read Heinlein's "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress". It was improvised in that case, but the principle was essentially the same.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

I always figured reasonable space weapons would be something more along the lines of a reentry vehicle stuffed with a cluster of self guided emp weapons.

Basically the threat would be, if you get out of line you will have to spend all of this time rebuilding your cities infrastructure after we deorbit a few emp bombs on selected targets.

link

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I never thought of that.

Though if you're on a low enough orbit then drag will de-orbit it eventually. You just need some propellant to guide it where you want it to land.

link

[–] • 1 pt

You're fundamentally mis-understanding how these would work. Kinetic bombardment weapons wouldn't be "fired". Their velocity is achieved on the front end when they're launched into orbit. To use them it's a relatively straightforward task to calculate their current position and velocity, apply a modest amount of force to push them out of a stable orbit, and then sit tight until they de-orbit at 22,000 mph on a very predictable path. The energy for that kinetic impact will be E = (1/2)mv^2. You'll lose some velocity to atmospheric drag, and maybe a small amount of mass will be burned off (though tungsten is quite heat resistant), but almost all of that kinetic energy will be delivered to the target.

People forget that the whole purpose of retro burns in manned craft is that humans in flying bricks who hit the atmosphere at 22,000 mph tend to burst into flames and have to be picked up with a stick and a spoon. Tungsten doesn't melt for another ~1500° celsius. Tungsten rods hitting their target at 22,000 mph is a feature because it allows them to hit it sooner and makes them guaranteed kill weapons on any static target. This is particularly the case for bunkers since physics is efficient in dissipating kinetic impacts. Given a "choice" between moving all the not-very-compressible dirt around the impact site and the air in a bunker/cave/etc...the bunker will pancake like Rosie O'Donnell on a folding chair.

link

[–] • 0 pt

Naw, you just accelerate it towards the ground, it's going to land somewhere. I'm sure you can calculate where it hits. It doesn't have to be slowed down.

link

[–] • -1 pt

Space is fake and you are gay.

link

(post is archived)