• LeZero [he/him]
        ·
        11 months ago

        I have information from a very serious source that Hamas is building concrete bunkers into existing satellites

        The source : it came to me in a prophetic vision

        • 420stalin69
          ·
          11 months ago

          It was actually a Hamas rocket that took out those satellites. The “go back down” Chip malfunctioned and it went into low earth orbit.

    • blobjim [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      11 months ago

      I assume they could just jam radio signals.

      • supafuzz [comrade/them]
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think that's easier said than done with Starlink - the system is highly directional, you'd have to beam noise into the dish from the direction it's pointed in

        • envis10n [he/him]
          ·
          11 months ago

          Morbidly, they could also just bomb where the dishes are

          • WayeeCool [comrade/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It's a bidirectional connection, so yeah, this is the most likely solution. The big drones employed by the US and Israeli air forces are equipped with SIGINT hardware to pinpoint radios, cell phones, and other transmitters on the ground so they can be targeted for strikes. Starlink uses directional antennas but it's a phased directional antenna sending out a cone and not a beam like a laser. The radio frequencies used by Starlink are public information and because SpaceX has an exclusive license to use those bands, it's extremely easy to identify and target Starlink modems on the ground.

        • hotcouchguy [he/him]
          ·
          11 months ago

          Very high gain antenna, but also a low power and long range link. Jamming is probably not difficult if you throw enough watts at the problem.

    • daisy
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They would need an awful lot of them. There's currently about 4500 Starlink satellites already in orbit. SpaceX can launch 20+ of the new heavier version (or 50+ of the older lighter version but I think they don't build them anymore) on a single rocket (which of course is mostly reusable). They've never published satellite production rates but it's currently at least 150 new-version satellites per month, because that's how many they've launched so far in October 2023 alone. They're not making them the old bespoke way where a single one-off satellite design takes a year or more to build. They've got assembly lines cranking them out. Starlink operates with lots of network redundancies, so you'd probably need to take out more than half of the satellites to make the network unusable. Can Israel build a hundred ASAT missiles every month that have 100% accuracy? Do they have a stockpile of 2000+ right now?

      I think the Israeli government's likely path here will be pressuring the US government to crack down on SpaceX. It'll be framed in the media as a counter-terrorism measure. The funny thing though is that SpaceX has an extremely strong negotiating hand to play due to the space industry being in a weird transition period. Most other companies' older rockets are no longer available for new launch bookings, and newer rockets are not ready yet. The US government needs someone to launch their military comms and spy satellites which are big and heavy and usually go to really high orbits (which takes a more powerful rocket). They have to launch on domestic rockets for national-security-law reasons. There's only a few rockets available that fit that bill:

      • SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. Active production.

      • ULA's Lockheed-designed Atlas V. Only 17 more launches possible due engine availability problems. It uses Russian engines that are now unavailable due to sanctions.

      • ULA's Boeing-design Delta IV. Only 1 more launch possible, scheduled for February 2024, and then it's permanently retired.

      • Northrop Grumman's Antares 200-series. Only 3 more launches possible due to engine availability - it also uses now-unavailable Russian engines.

      The rest of the available domestic rockets are basically:

      • Never been flight-tested yet (Vulcan, Antares 300-series)

      • Not even been built for testing yet (Neutron, New Glenn)

      • Costing a ridiculous amount of money and taking 2+ years to build each rocket (SLS)

      • Designed for really lightweight satellites or cargo deliveries to low orbit (Electron, Minotaur, Pegasus)

      ULA's Vulcan was designed as the replacement for both Atlas V and Delta IV and is actually a pretty sensible design. There's one built and ready for its test flight. The problem is that Vulcan uses an engine called BE-4, produced by Jeff Bezos' company Blue Origin. The same engine will power Blue Origin's own planned rocket New Glenn. Blue Origin is years late in delivering production-quality engines. Another fun fact about Blue Origin is that, despite having been founded before SpaceX, and despite Bezos showering the company with his personal cash, they have never even attempted to launch an orbital rocket. They have not put one gram of cargo into orbit. They're not exactly breaking speed records on the R&D front.

    • sisatici [he/him]
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think they have. one of their AA missiles is anti satelite