Posted on 06/09/2003 8:17:33 AM PDT by Edward Watson
US Space Assets in the Event of Hostilities with China
The exposed soft underbelly of the United StatesBy Edward K. Watson
(April 20, 2001)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China is rapidly becoming America’s next rival and its aggression and apparent alacrity for confronting the US seems to make a military conflict inevitable. Beijing realizes it lacks the military capability to engage US forces in symmetrical warfare and has consequently focused its efforts on asymmetrical means to neutralize American strength. Since China’s forces can’t survive a head-to-head confrontation against US forces, it has turned its attention to targeting America’s over-reliance on highly vulnerable information, surveillance, communication and guidance systems.
While the US has limited means to contain and absorb damage caused by hackers, EMP weapons and electronic warfare; its space-based assets are highly vulnerable and lack adequate protection against even a moderately determined assault. The loss of America’s myriad of satellites for information gathering, tracking, guidance and communications renders the US “blind and dumb” in the event of hostilities with foreign nations.
Unfortunately, the US doesn’t seem to have learned the lesson of Vietnam – the dazzle of high tech weapons and the associated capability of inflicting overwhelming force is no match for an opponent willing to fight unconventionally. The Pentagon must break free of its rigid mentality that all combatants would respect the importance of space and any utilized ASAT weapons would be designed to avoid creating debris fields that will damage other satellites.
America’s most important satellites are the 24-satellite GPS in semi-synchronous orbit and dozens of ultra top-secret military satellites orbiting in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Some of these satellites are the three famous Keyhole KH-11 spy satellites, which orbit at 320 km.
The Global Positioning System (GPS)
The GPS is a constellation of 24 satellites (21 operational, 3 spare) traveling close to 4 kps in a circular orbit 20,200 km above the earth, giving each GPS satellite a 12-hour orbit. These 24 satellites are grouped into six different orbital planes, with four satellites to each plane. Each satellite’s position is precisely known to enable accurate positioning on the earth’s surface by triangulation from three or more satellites.
Since the 1991 Gulf War, the US has come to rely upon the GPS for guidance and positioning and is rapidly converting most of its missiles, bombs and even artillery shells with GPS or differential GPS guidance. Most of its planes, bombers, tanks, warships and attack helicopters will be made to rely upon GPS to guide them to their targets.
What would happen to the effectiveness of the US military if it were to lose its GPS constellation?
China uses both GPS and the Russian GLONASS to guide its weapon systems. If Beijing wanted to cripple the US in case it attacks Taiwan, all it has to do is eliminate the GPS satellite system. The neutralization of GPS severely handicaps the US while preserving the accuracy of Chinese systems due to their use of GLONASS. The US can’t retaliate against GLONASS since it belongs to Russia.
How can GPS be neutralized? The GPS signal could be jammed, but the US military possesses countermeasures to nullify the jammers and has created missiles that home in on the jamming signal. Furthermore, any jamming would be over a limited area.
A second way to neutralize the GPS system would be to use high-energy lasers to damage or destroy the satellites. However, the technology to destroy satellites in semi-synchronous orbit is considerably more difficult than those in LEO.
A third and best way is to collide objects into the satellites. Anything traveling in the same plane but in the opposite orbital direction would have a very high probability of colliding head-on with one or all GPS satellites within the plane. The greater the number of objects injected into orbit; the greater the odds of successful interception. If the first pass fails to impact, the subsequent passes may succeed. Any successful interception will fracture the satellite, creating a debris field of hundreds to thousands of objects, thus increasing the number of objects capable of destroying additional satellites.
Can China destroy America’s GPS and its satellites in LEO?
Thanks to the Clinton Administration’s astonishing generosity, China now has the means to destroy most, if not all of America’s satellites whenever it wants to by positioning Anti-Satellite (ASAT) systems with near pinpoint precision. Its Long March 3B (LM-3B) launch vehicle can lift a 5,000 kg payload into Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) and its Long March 2E (LM-2E) launch vehicle can place 9,500 kg into LEO.
This means a single LM-3B can place 100,000 (for a very large cumulative cross-section) 50-gram steel objects (too small to be tracked by ground-based sensors) in one or all six of the GPS’ orbital planes, going in the opposite direction of the satellites for maximum collision velocity (7.8 kps). Such saturation will destroy all the GPS satellites within the same orbital plane. The LM-3B can also deliver its payload to target satellites in GEO, completely eliminating all of America’s satellites.
This also means a single LM-2E can saturate LEO with 190,000 50-gram objects, creating enormous fragmentation within the region from destroyed satellites, rocket bodies, mission related debris and prior fragmentation debris. If China’s mobile 406 mm supergun containing six launch tubes can be modified to fire its missile into LEO; each supergun platform can deliver 4,800 kg if each missile carries a 800 kg payload. In short, a single LM-2E or two 406 mm mobile superguns can create the Kessler Syndrome.
Would China target American satellites if fighting against the US? Why not? Such an action would cause the greatest amount of damage to the war-fighting capabilities of the vastly superior Americans. Such an action will cause China to lose its satellites as well but Beijing’s intention of a localized conflict means the loss will have minimal impact on its war-fighting capabilities, especially if they prepare for the loss beforehand.
Factors to consider:
(1) In case of a US-China conflict, the US needs its satellites a lot more than China needs its satellites. Beijing will willingly sacrifice its handful of satellites to cripple America’s retaliatory ability.
(2) China doesn’t need satellites to locate its targets since it isn’t going to target US forces stationed in the continental US or in Europe but will limit itself to US bases and facilities within East Asia. It has already vectored in the precise location of these targets into its ballistic missiles when it conducted naval maneuvers close to these facilities last year.
(3) China will fight a regional war, and will do its best to avoid fighting against the Europeans and Russians.
(4) China hopes a quick conquest of Taiwan will prevent its trade from being adversely disrupted and will occur before the US assembles its forces to aid Taiwan.
(5) Chinese military journals have shown Beijing’s learned the lessons of Desert Storm and Allied Force by repeatedly emphasizing the importance of pre-emptive strikes to avoid giving the US the opportunity to assemble its forces and dictate the course of the war. What better way to demoralize and neutralize the Americans than rendering their forces “blind and dumb”?
(6) Since most satellites in LEO are American, any destruction of third-party satellites within the same region will be passed off by China as accidental and will be compensated for at the end of hostilities.
(7) Europeans and Russians won’t declare war against China if they lose their satellites in LEO.
(8) China already has the means to destroy America’s GPS system as well as all its satellites in LEO by saturating the orbital path of US satellites with an unsurvivable debris flux.
It’s ridiculously easy to destroy satellites by placing objects within their path. This is due to the hypervelocity of objects in orbit, which ranges from 8 kps at the top of the atmosphere to 3.9 kps in semisynchronous orbit to 3 kps in geosynchronous orbit.
The typical impact velocity in LEO is 13 kps or 14 times the muzzle velocity of a .50 cal machine gun bullet. This velocity’s kinetic energy is equivalent to 40 times the object’s mass in TNT. This means if an object with a mass of 100 grams collides with a satellite in LEO at a combined 13 kps; the energy released is equivalent to 4 kilos of TNT, sufficient to completely destroy most satellites.
These forces mean an object just 1/1000th the mass of a satellite in LEO is capable of fragmenting the satellite into hundreds of pieces.
It is sobering to realize all satellites, even “hardened” ones capable of surviving impacts by small and medium sized objects, are vulnerable to ASAT hypervelocity collision.
How the US can avoid a space “Pearl Harbor”
There are many things the United States can do to avoid the destruction of its satellites or the catastrophe resulting from this loss:
Create a deterrent. Since there’s no guaranteed way to prevent the destruction of its vitally important satellites, the US must make it explicitly clear any ASAT attack on its satellites, whether in LEO, GEO or the GPS network will be considered by the US to be equal to an attack of unconventional weapons upon its soil and the US will respond with a full nuclear strike.
Avoid over-reliance upon satellites and GPS in particular. The US move to relying upon satellites for all its navigation, guidance, intelligence and communication needs are based on the assumption these space-based assets will always remain operational in case of war despite their incredible vulnerability. It is vital that the US expand alternatives to satellites, ranging from buried fiber optic networks to wireless to stratospheric manned and unmanned flying platforms to blimps.
Have a “launch-on-demand space launch operations” contingency plan. The US needs to have dozens of satellites including entire constellations and delivery systems in storage to replace those destroyed within 24 hours of a decision to do so and position these satellites in areas of minimal debris. Develop inexpensive launch systems. Gun-launched systems are by far, the cheapest way to place objects into orbit but have repeatedly been stymied by political pressure and lack of financial backing. At a cost per pound 1/20th to 1/36th that of the space shuttle, the Jules Verne Launcher or Lawrence Livermore’s SHARP light gas gun could rapidly launch the needed satellites, construction and shielding materials.
“Harden” all new satellites. The US must increase the passive and active protection as well as operational protection schemes of its satellites. Passive: Increase the shielding and defensive screens of satellites. Ideally, each essential satellite should be enveloped within a “water balloon/meshed bumper” sphere to protect it from small and medium sized objects as well as high-energy weapons. Each satellite must possess a free-flying bowl shield at the leading edge of its orbit at least 2 meters thick to absorb hypervelocity ASAT projectiles. Active: Develop ground-based and space-based radar systems to track small objects on an intercept course with its satellites with a rapidly deploying free-flying shield to prevent the object from impacting the satellite. Operational Protection: Increase redundancy and duplication of components to ensure continual operation in case of component failure. Oversize components such as solar panels to allow gradual systems degradation without losing operational functionality.
Harden satellites while in orbit. The International Space Station (ISS) is the perfect location for installing shielding around sensitive satellites. The US must create an assembly area in space wherein shielding is placed around satellites prior to placement in their designated orbits. To maximize efficiency and reduce costs, the shuttle should only be used for crew and sensitive materials transport whereas gas gun launchers should be used to place the satellites and materials into orbit. An added bonus for creating an orbital construction platform is the US can use it to assemble solar powered satellites (SPS) that are then boosted into their desired orbits. These SPS can produce an unending supply of hundreds if not thousands of gigawatts of pollution-free energy transmitted to electric utilities on the earth’s surface.
Develop and deploy anti-ASAT weapons in orbit. The US must rapidly create orbital platforms capable of detecting and destroying ASAT hypervelocity projectiles. This means the “Brilliant Pebbles” program must be reactivated and the US must develop high-energy lasers and plasma weapons to destroy missiles and warheads before they reach their targets.
Nurture better ties with Russia. The United States should treat Russia as a true strategic partner in space by providing it with its own anti-ASAT orbital platform. This goodwill gesture will reassure the Russians that despite the US will act unilaterally to protect its space assets; it isn’t trying to neutralize Russia’s nuclear deterrent capability. Failure to do so will create a much stronger Russia-China alliance that will undermine US security.
Conclusion
1. Any US-China conflict will see China using extensive asymmetrical tactics to cripple, blind and demoralize the overwhelmingly powerful American military forces. The United States must prepare for these asymmetrical attacks that will be directed at the eyes, ears, guidance and communication centers of its forces.
2. Any Chinese attack will be sudden and designed to cause as much havoc and impotence as possible.
3. China can afford to sacrifice its satellites whereas America can’t function without them.
4. The United States must “harden” its satellites from destruction.
5. US satellites are far more vulnerable to destruction than the much-publicized cyber-warfare susceptibilities of the computer, World Wide Web and global information infrastructure networks. The US must revamp its military to be capable of inflicting overwhelming force without the aid of any of its satellites. In other words, the US must have the capability to fight and win a high tech war even if all its satellites are lost.
Nothing will accelerate the loss of America’s status as the world’s superpower faster than the loss of its satellites. Hopefully, it wakes up and rectifies its vulnerability.
Perhaps we should pay China to build our anti-ballistic missile system!
In a more serious vein, the US must have and maintain a control of space. Space is the metaforical high ground of the 21 century. I think the US should have battle stations parked in orbit around the Earth with the capability to hid any target on Earth.
I think this argues for particle beam weapons research for the battle station's primary weapon system. The US should also develop very high energy laser systems.
The idea here would be to have the capability to strike an any missile which is launched that is necessary.
I think that the first nation or group of nations that puts such a system up will effectively control the Earth for at least 1,000 years. IMHO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.