From what I guess it is some bouncing methode like in glinding vehicles but with some helps to keep its speed high enough to turn around the earth, so maybe a powered glinding vehicle.
It's definitely not a satelitte.
jhelb and nomadski like this post
Yankees taking advantage of Russian honesty.GarryB wrote:Not a big deal... they were called Fractional orbital bombardment systems... the Soviets had a FOBS version of their SS-9s... you essentially put the warhead into a stable orbit and deorbit over the target... if you line the target and the launch position up and continue round you get a complete circle... obviously with the earth moving during this it is not so much a ring as a spiral, but you can aim to counter the horizontal movement so it still goes over the target... the real point is that you can fly the missile directly to the target.... or you can fire it in the opposite direction the other way around the planet and still arrive at the target from the opposite direction over the south pole instead of the north where all of Americas early warning systems are pointed.
More importantly you can just keep orbiting for days or months or years so when your weapon deorbits and attacks its target or just explodes in orbit creating an EMP pulse that starts an attack... very destabilising and banned under the ABM Treaty of 1972... but that agreement was ripped up by the US so it no longer applies and never applied to China anyway.
The Russians have been talking about a no weapons in space agreement but the US is not interested.
GarryB likes this post
Russia needs to develop countermeasures to detect and destroy FOBS regardless of whether they are American or Chinese.
Missile warning in LEO will spot such a space vehicle. South facing radars in the U.S will also pick up such a Chinese FOBS.Isos wrote:Main issue is that if it can circle once before falling on its target then it can do it twice or more and make the US spend their precious interceptor missile when they think the thing is falling onto them but keep flying.
This is the whole point why the U.S is putting missile warning in LEO and taking advantage of the advances in commercial space. A satellite in LEO has way less lifespan and takes less time to develop so you could tweak it to meet new threats and always keep them guessing.GarryB wrote:The irony is that Russian space tracking is excellent, and the US has rather more to lose with weapons in space because the US is vastly more reliant on using space based assets... even their ABM systems require satellites, while the Russians could probably get away with just relying on their OTH radars for early warning.
The first warning you might get of a FOBS attack is what you thought was a satellite deorbiting to land or fly low over your territory... which would generally be too late... but they keep excellent track of everything in space and who launched it... so the instant it starts to deorbit and boom they will know whose it was and who to attack even if they are temporarily blind.
It sounds like more of an advantage than it actually would end up being...
FOBS is basically a space vehicle. X-37B is probably the U.S version of FOBS. But the US won't accept it.GarryB wrote:the US has rather more to lose with weapons in space because the US is vastly more reliant on using space based assets... even their ABM systems require satellites, while the Russians could probably get away with just relying on their OTH radars for early warning.
GarryB likes this post
Missile warning in LEO will spot such a space vehicle. South facing radars in the U.S will also pick up such a Chinese FOBS.
Exotic payloads like FOBS that require heavy, silo-based rockets are somewhat less than ideal if there’s a credible threat of an enemy preemptive strike
This is the whole point why the U.S is putting missile warning in LEO and taking advantage of the advances in commercial space. A satellite in LEO has way less lifespan and takes less time to develop so you could tweak it to meet new threats and always keep them guessing.
FOBS can absolutely be detected. It's really just a matter of the current U.S radar arrays not pointing in the right directions.
FOBS is basically a space vehicle. X-37B is probably the U.S version of FOBS. But the US won't accept it.
China did not carry out a test of hypersonic weapons, but instead carried out a trial of a spacecraft, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian has stated. Zhao Lijian added that it was a "routine test" for reusable space rocket technology.
The technology behind X-37B and a FOBS is similar. Just like a space craft can carry satellites into space and an ICBM carries nuclear warhead. But an ICBM is also a space craft, just that it is delivering nuclear warheads instead of satellites.GarryB wrote:
No. FOBS is an artillery weapon that is powerful enough to put its shell into a stable orbit and that shell has a deorbit thruster so at a time of the operators choosing it can deorbit and land where they want it to land when they want it to land.
X-37B is a space plane... different.
SS-9 is another version of FOBS. Just like a Buran can also be used as a FOBS.GarryB wrote:As I said there was a FOBS version of the SS-9 many many years ago at a time when there were no space planes.
Neither Russia nor the US (or any other country) has the capability to negate a full Chinese nuclear attack using traditional ballistic missiles either. Deterrence still maintains the equilibrium.GarryB wrote:The cost for the US to improve coverage will be enormous and because of the distances it wont be effective anyway.
With ABM systems in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans and the Arctic ocean and Alaska and California... a FOBS weapon deorbiting over central USA on a trajectory to hit New York or any part of the US will only give you a few minute warning... not even enough time to warm up an AEGIS radar system...
PapaDragon likes this post
The technology behind X-37B and a FOBS is similar.
SS-9 is another version of FOBS. Just like a Buran can also be used as a FOBS.
Neither Russia nor the US (or any other country) has the capability to negate a full Chinese nuclear attack using traditional ballistic missiles either.
Ballistic trajectories are very easy to predict, a FOBS glide weapon can change it's trajectory en route.
Even if you have poor steering as a consequence of the velocity, any changes in trajectory during flight would be enough to cause a wide miss if you are trying to intercept by prediction.
Yes it does, especially since majority of China's population fit in one small area, China knows it would be decimated faster than Russia which is far more spread out with a lot more natural defenses than China's east coast.
The U.S intends to use the X-37B as a weapon. They keep it in orbit most of the time. And in all likelihood there are more than one X-37B in orbit.GarryB wrote:In comparison the X-37B is a plane that is launched on top of a rocket into space that can fly back down to earth...
A nuclear space bomber like the X-37B is also a glider.GarryB wrote:Would not surprise me if they did but that would not make it a FOBS, that would make it a nuclear space bomber..
GarryB likes this post
GarryB likes this post
Russia has a massive fleet of SSBNs/SSGNs that guarantees a comprehensive second strike capability. For countries like ours (India) we are still at least a decade away from fielding 5-6 SSBNs. Neither will we achieve Russia's per capita income figures in the next 30 years.GarryB wrote:Would not surprise me if they did but that would not make it a FOBS, that would make it a nuclear space bomber.
The commonly quoted figure of 350 warheads that PLA apparently has is not true. Chinese scholars have themselves stated (although privately) that China has over 1000 warheads.GarryB wrote:
Back on topic the PLA rocket force is not going to grow to 20,000 nuclear warheads... China does not want to win a nuclear war because even the winners of such wars lose.
This might happen given that most India politicians are controlled by the U.S and U.K. I had previously posted a Twitter thread that goes into great details as to how the CIA prepared Modi (link below).GarryB wrote:With the right person in charge... an India Putin or Xi, I think India has a bright future... unless they fall back to their colony ways and expect the US or UK to tell them what to do... because the US and UK are selfish bastards who could care less about India and are afraid that China and Russia might create a better model and a world where everyone gets a much better life.