That's true but with newer rounds like Excalibur, a recent variant of MLRS, guided bombs (that can work in bad weather as opposed to laser guidance), as well as telling where the average soldier is being dependant on GPS. It's better to have a backup that makes these things function as they are supposed to.Originally Posted by Rank amateur
Actually, we aren't as dependent on GPS as you might think...
JDAMs are GPS-aided weapons. They have a very accurate INS that does the actual guiding. If the GPS never locks on, or is denied, the weapon will still guide, albeit slightly less accurately. However, JDAMs going INS-only have been generally been as accurate as the GPS-aided spec for the weapon.
The same holds true for a number of other weapons.
George
It's not the weapon I'm worried about....
It's the guy calling it in that forgot how to read a map because of his over-reliance on GPS that raises my concern.
Example is better than precept.
Absolutely. When I was flying B-1s, we made sure we had "no GPS" training sorties to make sure we didn't get over reliant on those sats being around. Probably a good idea for just about everybody...
George
As I recall, Galileo (the European system) is designed to be interoperable w/ GPS.
More to the point, without direct knowledge, I can guess that satellites are hardened against EMP.
The problem is that EMP hardening is expensive. Ergo, a lot of stuff *not* spacebound is -not- hardened.
Launching to the altitude of the GPS satellites, also, is expensive (regardless of payload); The number of countries that can independently launch anything is small: 7 of them, and two (the UK and France) now combine their space operations under the ESA.
In short: Worry not about the satellites. They're safe from EMP. Worry about all the equipment that uses them. They're not.
DC would be fairly easy
The launching of a nuke to strike at the satellite network is a bit beyond the technical abilities of most "terrorists." The concern lies in a state using them in a terrorist fashion (Iran, NK, or perhaps Pakistan). They have the techno to do it.
It is not beyond the capability of anyone with enough moxie (and money) to detonate a nuke in DC. Just look at the freakin truck traffic in the city.
Could you detonate it really close to the WH or Capital? Probably not. But you could take out the Lincoln Memorial, or the Washington Monument, or a host of other areas.
The point in detonating a nuke in DC wouldn't necessarily be the resulting damage (which would still be significant), it would be to show you could do it.
And since our southern border is pretty leaky...
"What is best in life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women."
The Economist on Space Racing
Interesting bit in The Economist on space as a contested domain.
"The Militarization of Space: Disharmony in the Spheres." The Economist (19-25 Jan 2008), p. 23-25.
A very short summary of it here: "Missal Defence."
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks