Question about satellites

[mikeo80]

As we on the East Coast of the USA get ready for a visit from Irene, it brought an interesting question to mind.

I know from reading the V1 rule book, the nuclear exchange knocked out most scientific research areas. However military command posts survived.

During the exchange, was there an anti satellite effort by either side to deny "the high ground" to the other side?

Being able to see what your advisary is doing during a military discussion is invaluable. (OT Desert Storm comes to mind)

Communications sats would also be a high priority. There was a sentence in V-1 that said that the military had the majority control of any surviving telecommunication networks.

My $0.02

Mike

[dragoon500ly]

The module "Satellite Down" mentions that "during the height of the war, just about every satellite on both sides, was knocked down or rendered worthless junk."

My own take, is that within the period 1995-1997, ASAT weapons knocked out most of the network.

[Mahatatain]

My own take on it is that there could well be one or two military comms satellites still operational that give patchy comms around the world to those who have the right gear to use them.

[Mohoender]

I think that this source is reliable and it accounted for about 4000 satellite launchs by 1998. Therefore, I would expect to find something like 3500-4000 satellites around earth by 1995 with roughly 50-60% of them in working conditions.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...s/980202e.html

By 1988 the US ASAT program was cancelled but in T2K, I would expect it to be revived with the threat of war. If indeed it was pursued, I would expect the deployment to be about 200 missiles as by 1988, the USAF intended to deploy 112 missiles with 20 aircrafts (according to wiki). IMO USSR would have deployed, at most, the same number of missile with Mig-31.

I don't expect this to be enough to destroy the entire network but it would be largely enough to seriously damage the spy sattelite network, GPS and Glonass. Then, more satellites would be put out of commission during the exchange (EMP from high altitude burst). Last, more will have simply fallen into disrepair. Glonass had been completed in 1995 (24 satellites) and had fallen to 6 working sattelites by 2001. Satellites networks would have suffer more from the end of launches than from direct attack IMO.

Anyway, by 2000, most of the satellite networks would be seriously damaged with more being destroy every year. By 2010 all pre-twilight sattelites will be virtually gone except for a few lucky ones (lifespan being 15 years on the average and 20 for commsat).

Result of this:
Starting in 1995, spy satellites would progressively be destroyed. By 1997 spy satellites network would be seriously down and gone by the year 2000.
By 1997, using a smart weapon will have become almost impossible except with ground teams. Still communicate with such a team by 2000 would have become a very hard task.
By 1997, both GPS and GLONASS would have become increasingly unreliable and coverage by 2000 would be more than limited, at best.
By 2000, getting a reliable weather cast would be quite difficult. And not knowing for sure what weather you can count on during your next offensive is a bit of a problem.
By 2000, military communications would have taken over most of the civilian systems. Communications would be increasingly difficult and comm security would be geopardized. For my part, I would not be surprised to see pigeons and cable phone taking over part of the job.

If France remains indeed out of the conflict it will gain from this its most important advantage. Kourou (French Guyana) has not been destroyed, it has some rockets in storage and can manage to build more (especially with Belgium on its side). Therefore, France can still launch some satellites and maintain/repair some of its network. that should rate high in Paris priority.
This could allow for limited survelliance capabilities (Helios), for the survival of a very important system we usually forget about (Argos), for some communication (Syracuse), for the last fairly reliable weather surveillance system (Meteosat). I don't include radio and TV (Eutelsat) as this system would probably be neglected. As I said, this would grant an important advantage to France (may be not in 2000 but probalby as early as 2002-2003) but I would also expect Paris to sale some of the information it gets from this to NATO and may be to the Warsaw Pact. About Argos, I would expect Paris to have kept the system available, at least to NATO, allowing for many pilots and sailors to survive. Anyway, it would be a major advantage in global relation.

[Mohoender]

I didn't know about this system but I would also expect France to do its best to maintain the Cospas-Sarsat system (In fact, it appears that what I thought about Argos, in fact, concerned this system) that had resulted from a collaboration between USA, Canada, USSR and France (1979-1988 and thank you wiki). I would, then, expect France to still grant access to this system to all. Just because it makes sense at a diplomatic level.

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by Mohoender

I didn't know about this system but I would also expect France to do its best to maintain the Cospas-Sarsat system (In fact, it appears that what I thought about Argos, in fact, concerned this system) that had resulted from a collaboration between USA, Canada, USSR and France (1979-1988 and thank you wiki). I would, then, expect France to still grant access to this system to all. Just because it makes sense at a diplomatic level.

EMP will also have a significant effect.

[Rainbow Six]

Guys, might be worth looking at this thread as well...

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2429

Cheers