No one has admitted to orbiting Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS), though the Soviets did deploy a system for such (R-36O) in the 70s, eventually withdrawing it in the 80s under SALT II. FOBS is technically not compatible with the Outer Space Treaty (1967).They appear to be describing a new type of weapon, that is a nuclear missile that remains in orbit until needed. Do we know if these exist or not?
You say no one has admitted to but it would surely be fairly obvious and require some maintenance?No one has admitted to orbiting Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS), though the Soviets did deploy a system for such (R-36O) in the 70s, eventually withdrawing it in the 80s under SALT II. FOBS is technically not compatible with the Outer Space Treaty (1967).
I presume NATO’s spy satellites are carefully monitoring RU’s nukes?
You say no one has admitted to but it would surely be fairly obvious and require some maintenance?
Not necessarily obvious. Needs maintenance.You say no one has admitted to but it would surely be fairly obvious and require some maintenance?
Communications sattelites are maintained by other robot sattelites (when they are maintained at all). We keep being told nuclear weapons need regular maintenance (hence all the confidence about Russia's not working) which would presumably need human technicians.Communications satellite
FOBS designs don't put warheads on orbit for years. The idea is to launch hours/days/weeks ahead of time with the hardware sitting on the ground for months/years where it can be periodically serviced (every N years).Communications sattelites are maintained by other robot sattelites (when they are maintained at all). We keep being told nuclear weapons need regular maintenance (hence all the confidence about Russia's not working) which would presumably need human technicians.
Totally.I think every fucking politician with their hands on our future should be forced to make that journey so they understand how rare our planet is.
I’m pretty sure that by the time every influential politician on this planet had made a trip to space, there would be no habitable planet left to care about. We’re going to need a plan that doesn’t involve sending 10 million rockets to space, basically.I think every fucking politician with their hands on our future should be forced to make that journey so they understand how rare our planet is.
Space shuttles had a payload of 29,000kg. Allowing a mean weight of 90kg means at least 320 politicians per trip. The shuttles themselves are reusable and all the politicians really need is to be dropped off in orbit.I’m pretty sure that by the time every influential politician on this planet had made a trip to space, there would be no habitable planet left to care about. We’re going to need a plan that doesn’t involve sending 10 million rockets to space, basically.
How many politicians, though? Across 7 or 8 billion people, that’s a lot of politicians. Even if it’s only 1 politician per 1000 people*, you’re still going to need over 20,000 rockets (or rocket trips, if you must) at full payload.Space shuttles had a payload of 29,000kg. Allowing a mean weight of 90kg means at least 320 politicians per trip. The shuttles themselves are reusable and all the politicians really need is to be dropped off in orbit.
I suppose we could start with a swim in the mid Atlantic to learn about pollution. Survivors to be dropped off in orbit.How many politicians, though? Across 7 or 8 billion people, that’s a lot of politicians. Even if it’s only 1 politician per 1000 people*, you’re still going to need over 20,000 rockets (or rocket trips, if you must) at full payload.
But ming’s post that I was actually responding to wasn’t about dumping politicians in space, it was about taking them to space and then bringing them home again, hopefully more enlightened about the need for climate controls as a result of their experience. So that isn’t taking them as payload, it’s taking them passengers. At 3 passengers per rocket, you’re now up to more like 2.5 million rocket trips. An environmentally damaging way to teach about the environment!
*and by the time you’ve dealt with all the people that have the influence we’re talking about, I’m pretty sure we must be in the ballpark at 1 in 1000.
FOBS designs don't put warheads on orbit for years. The idea is to launch hours/days/weeks ahead of time with the hardware sitting on the ground for months/years where it can be periodically serviced (every N years).
(I wouldn't be confident that it doesn't work. I'd be confident that it doesn't function 100%, just like any other complex engineering project, which is something quite different).
...but they've been training with Ukrainians on modern MLRS systems recently ...
Also a major drawback is that instead of contemplating the vast emptiness of space, you'll see thousands of rockets flying about all over the place. Oh, wait, isn't that Brian who used to be cabinet member for housing on West Dorset district council? Hey! Brian! This is exciting isn't it? What are you up to these days?How many politicians, though? Across 7 or 8 billion people, that’s a lot of politicians. Even if it’s only 1 politician per 1000 people*, you’re still going to need over 20,000 rockets (or rocket trips, if you must) at full payload.
But ming’s post that I was actually responding to wasn’t about dumping politicians in space, it was about taking them to space and then bringing them home again, hopefully more enlightened about the need for climate controls as a result of their experience. So that isn’t taking them as payload, it’s taking them passengers. At 3 passengers per rocket, you’re now up to more like 2.5 million rocket trips.
And that just deals with today’s politicians. Over time, you’re going to need to induct the new ones. Four cycles already gets you to 10 million rockets.
An environmentally damaging way to teach about the environment!
*and by the time you’ve dealt with all the people that have the influence we’re talking about, I’m pretty sure we must be in the ballpark at 1 in 1000.
I just double checked that WDDC actually has a housing departmentAlso a major drawback is that instead of contemplating the vast emptiness of space, you'll see thousands of rockets flying about all over the place. Oh, wait, isn't that Brian who used to be cabinet member for housing on West Dorset district council? Hey! Brian! This is exciting isn't it? What are you up to these days?
Suppose there might be money in the town twinning budget but would necessitate new road signsI just double checked that WDDC actually has a housing department
THERE IS NO WEST DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL ANY MORE!1!11!1
The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole (Structural Changes) Order 2018
This Order provides for the establishment, on 1st April 2019, of a single tier of local government for a new local government area comprising the existing Boroughs of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole and a single tier of local government for the remainder of the county of Dorset (articles 3...www.legislation.gov.uk
Housing is under the purview of the successor unitary authority, Dorset Council...
Housing - Dorset Council
Apply to be on the housing register, advice on homelessness and housing advice for landlords and tenantswww.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk
No wonder they sent that fantasist Brian into orbit
over a100 ship backlog did I read somewhere?...