![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() On 9/28/2006 3:59 PM, SirRichardCraniumEsq. wrote the following: Has any thought been given to the disparity in altitude between spy camera satellites and the GPS constellation? SNIP Working with the speed of light(LASER)it probably does not matter that much. Beam dispersion, hence diminishing energy density at the target, and pointing accuracy are two considerations that come immediately to mind. In addition to the simple geometry of pointing accurately at something farther away, every thousand miles of orbit height adds something more than ten milliseconds of delay to your aiming feedback control loop. And since you are talking about ground based weapons you probably have the atmosphere causing your beam to wave around in a significant way. It may be that only space based weapons of this type are even feasible. I don't know. Maybe someone who does will pipe up. If the Chinese can hit a spy satellite I am sure they can figure out a way to zap a GPS bird. If not right now soon in the future. There is a big difference between illuminating a bird with the minimal amount of energy density required to temporarily blind its camera and delivering enough energy to kill the bird. Note that now they are not even killing the cameras though they might be able to do that. Remember that it isn't enough to just (accurately) get energy to a target -- it must be absorbed and not reflected away. This issue is not exactly a new one for military satellite designers. America should establish a good solid VOR/DME back up network on the ground hardened for EMP attacks with back up power and redundancy. Electromagnetic pulses big enough to cause wide scale ground damage of electronics come only from nuclear detonations, which tend to cause other difficulties that could make VOR availability a fairly minor priority. There are those pesky gamma rays hitting all that live meat, for example. Also the (unhardened) ground and spaced-based assets of the domestic telecommunications network. The FAA as always is walking backwards with their future planning and right now are looking at decommissioning ground based navaid's soon. That is just stupid Possibly, but illogical and unscientific arguments don't prove it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Hagerstown Aviation History To Be Auctioned, Museum Working to Save Last Flying Hagerstown-Made Fairchild C-82 | [email protected] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 10th 06 01:17 AM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Home Built | 3 | May 14th 04 11:55 AM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | May 11th 04 10:43 PM |
Here's the Recompiled List of 82 Aircraft Accessible Aviation Museums! | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 18 | January 20th 04 04:02 PM |