Was Star Defense Initiative even possible or was it just a political ploy to buckbreak the Russians?

Was Star Defense Initiative even possible or was it just a political ploy to buckbreak the Russians?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    latter, though undoubtedly can be built with the advent of reusable rockets (starlink is literally a civilian BP that throws internet instead)

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      *concurrently

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      We can put basically any payload into orbit that we want at this point... but that doesn't mean that we can build directed energy weapons that can hit a tiny target moving very quickly, possibly in the atmosphere, from a thousand miles away. If we can't do it today, then we sure as shit couldn't have done it forty years ago.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        nah, anti ballistic missile laser tech is here now. you'd need a fuck ton of them to have the coverage, but the tracking and hitting ability works

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Anon, even setting aside the problem of power requirements for an iron beam system in space, in order to get total coverage you'd need tens of thousands of satellites. If the end goal is to park a few dozen or hundred satellites into geostationary orbit that can pick off an ICBM from 22,000 miles, we're a LONG way off.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You can now, the electric lasers of today are more compact and powerful than the chemical lasers of the 1980s.
        Also the power storage options for such a system is much more advanced, there is advances in the nuclear batteries that can power lasers in space, like the ASRG.
        Lasers in space are way more powerful due to 1. Lack of atmosphere means less refraction of beam, meaning it’s strength is not diminished and 2. Computer targeting software is more accurate than ever, and AI is only going to improve that efficiency.
        If you get hit with multiple beams in space, an ICBM can definitely lose structural integrity of the rocket.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Was *Strategic* Defense Initiative even possible
      Yes
      >or was it just a political ploy to buckbreak the Russians?
      Not "just," but yes.

      It was bullshit smoke and mirrors to freak out the Russians and make them waste money trying to defend against it. It worked. All they had was some random ass theories and research. it's 2023 and only now are something like this even just starting in the early phases of being used.

      Wrong

      Lasers were a meme, the real threat was the Brilliant Pebble system. With modern electronics instead of 80s crap it would be the ultimate in ABM.

      This anon is correct.

      It did two things Anon. First it was a big BS psyop to get the Russians to waste money. The second was it funded fundamental research into lasers and other technologies that at the time were nowhere close to ready but would pay off decades later to the weapons starting to enter service now.

      Whether Reagan knew that or not doesn't really matter. The generals, scientists and engineers all did. All Ronnie had to do was sell it to the public and Russians to make it look credible. And our technical lead was so great at the time that it wasn't hard for him to do it.

      >It did two things Anon. First it was a big BS psyop to get the Russians to waste money. The second was it funded fundamental research into lasers and other technologies that at the time were nowhere close to ready but would pay off decades later to the weapons starting to enter service now.
      This is accurate.

      it was a prime example of how economics can be wielded as weapons of war in frozen conflicts.

      This is accurate, as well.

      Lasers were never the meat-of-the-matter, regarding SDI. It got all the attention and focus by both proponents and detractors, but it was really not the technology included in the Initiative that would pay off the most, EKVs are.
      Look up Brilliant Pebbles, watch the minimal amount of test footage available from the late-80s/early-90s, and realize those Kill Vehicles are probably the backbone of any modern US TBM Defense after launch.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >modern US TBM Defense
        US TBM is still Patriots and airborne SEAD/DEAD as we can see over Kiev.
        any space-based BMD would likely be smart rocks/brilliant pebblesm tho, yes

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >US TBM is still Patriots and airborne SEAD/DEAD
          Look up THAAD and SM-3, retard.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >THAAD and SM-3
            Fine, US TBM is still surface-based interceptors and airborne SEAD/DEAD
            does that work better for your autisms?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Anon, you aren't going to SEAD ICBM silos.

              >Was *Strategic* Defense Initiative even possible
              Yes
              >or was it just a political ploy to buckbreak the Russians?
              Not "just," but yes.

              [...]
              Wrong
              [...]
              This anon is correct.

              [...]
              >It did two things Anon. First it was a big BS psyop to get the Russians to waste money. The second was it funded fundamental research into lasers and other technologies that at the time were nowhere close to ready but would pay off decades later to the weapons starting to enter service now.
              This is accurate.
              [...]
              This is accurate, as well.

              Lasers were never the meat-of-the-matter, regarding SDI. It got all the attention and focus by both proponents and detractors, but it was really not the technology included in the Initiative that would pay off the most, EKVs are.
              Look up Brilliant Pebbles, watch the minimal amount of test footage available from the late-80s/early-90s, and realize those Kill Vehicles are probably the backbone of any modern US TBM Defense after launch.

              Is talking about EKVs in SM-3 and GBI as evidence of fruitful R&D from SDI. Those didn't exist in the 80's. The plan during the cold war was to use nukes to shoot down other nukes. That was the only way you had a chance to hit them. EKVs have proven effective in many tests.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was bullshit smoke and mirrors to freak out the Russians and make them waste money trying to defend against it. It worked. All they had was some random ass theories and research. it's 2023 and only now are something like this even just starting in the early phases of being used.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Is there any proof the Russians even reacted to it? As far as I know Russians realized quickly you could just shoot down any SDI system with ASAT rockets for a fraction of the cost and left it at that.

      As far as I know it was only Americans wasting money on lasers and making concessions to keep their research going.

      Soviet union was dying for many other reasons. SDI playing any part in it seems like a massive cope to justify this retarded meme program retroactively.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The program was established largely to explore whether it even was possible. Most ideas (and in particular, the nuclear-powered X-ray beam which Teller advocated for) were declared infeasible but a few did appear feasible, if somewhat vulnerable to countermeasures.

        >As far as I know Russians realized quickly you could just shoot down any SDI system with ASAT rockets for a fraction of the cost and left it at that.
        That's part of why Brilliant Pebbles became the penultimate implementation of SDI - the Pebbles were to be so numerous that intercepting them all in a short enough time frame wasn't possible. You have to remember that the US would still maintain the ability to retaliate even with an active SDI, so Russia really couldn't spend days or weeks swatting SDI satellites before launching an attack and expect to still prevail.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >even possible
        yes and no. the Initiative was to do basic reearch, which happened. space-based directed energy antimissile systems are not possibly then or now, although smart rocks/brilliant pebbles seem to have good potential

        >Russians realized quickly you could just shoot down any SDI system with ASAT rockets
        You cannot, if only b/c the antimissile systems would shoot down the ASATs as well

        >proof the Russians even reacted to it?
        There are reams of paperwork regarding the SDI from russia, it was the top concern of the Kremlin for years, until the Warsaw pact started to fall apart. While SDI did not "bankrupt the USSR", and the USSR never even started building something similar, it put them in a moderate panic trying to figure out what the US was up to, since Reagan was simultaneously vowing to rid the world of the Soviet nuclear threat and also offering to share missile technology with the USSR, they couldn't figure out the game.
        turns out there was no game, SDI was duly explored, found to be wanting, and ABM went back to land based interceptors

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What really bancrupt russians was US flexing muscles and really pushing soviets around with the advanced tech as a leverage instead of playing their hand weak despite having an overwhelming strategic advantage like they did in the 60s.

          Ocean Venture 81, Able Archer 83, Arab-Israeli wars of the 80s, SDI and lots of other shit put massive pressure on the soviets to not just preserve their forces but to expand production and development of new technologies amids an economics recession they were experiencing.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US had a heavy space truck hauling heavy payloads, and the Sovs didn't, so that potential left the Sovs theoretically vulnerable. But not practically.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lasers were a meme, the real threat was the Brilliant Pebble system. With modern electronics instead of 80s crap it would be the ultimate in ABM.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the soviets knew it was impossible and used this to their advantage in negotiations, securing concessions to allow it to continue with out objections

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It did two things Anon. First it was a big BS psyop to get the Russians to waste money. The second was it funded fundamental research into lasers and other technologies that at the time were nowhere close to ready but would pay off decades later to the weapons starting to enter service now.

    Whether Reagan knew that or not doesn't really matter. The generals, scientists and engineers all did. All Ronnie had to do was sell it to the public and Russians to make it look credible. And our technical lead was so great at the time that it wasn't hard for him to do it.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it was a prime example of how economics can be wielded as weapons of war in frozen conflicts.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Star Defense Initiative
    Is this a meme or something?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The currently deployed ABM interceptors were originally designed by the people working on the program in the 80s.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was an idea that was too far ahead of its time. Only with recent advances in satellite, sensor, directed energy, and interceptor missile technology has the SDI concept become feasible.

    That said, SDI was the program that kickstarted all of these various different fields of study in the first place.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It concerned the soviets enough that they built an orbital battlestation of their own. But somebody had an uh-oh and it accelerated itself back down the gravity well and burned up. They also were fucking around with reusable rockets but when the SU collapsed the funding obviously went away.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    test

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *