From: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!ARPAVAX:C70:arms-d Newsgroups: fa.arms-d Title: Arms-Discussion Digest V0 #165 Article-I.D.: ucb.2186 Posted: Fri Oct 22 06:40:31 1982 Received: Sat Oct 23 04:01:55 1982 >From HGA@MIT-MC Thu Oct 21 23:18:51 1982 Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 0 : Issue 165 Today's Topics: Nuclear Weapons in Space MX in orbit Nightmare directed energy weapons ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 19-Oct-82 22:05:59-PDT (Tue) From: UCBVAX.ihnss!houxj!wapd@Berkeley Subject: Nuclear Weapons in Space Weapons in space would be radio-controlled as far as the "launch" signal was concerned, but such things as reprogramming of targets could be carried out by a human in a space shuttle. How often do these things get reprogrammed, anyway ? I think that we will never see such weapons in space because of security problems. What is to stop some bright undergraduate from launching one of them (by cracking the control codes) ? Someone could buy a few thousand dollars worth of equipment and start sending random signals to one of the satellites, hoping to eventually do something to it. Unlikely that they would ever succeed, but is it unlikely enough for our comfort ? What about physical security ? In twenty years there might be 50 countries with the bucks and know-how to send up a killer satellite or to send up a team to take over one of the satellites. As activity increase in space (colonies, manufacturing, etc) the job of guarding the satellites will be harder. It might be feasible to establish the space equivalent of missile submarines. That is, a "colony" whose sole purpose is the maintenance and operation of a stable of nuclear weapons. It would be able to defend itself from local threats. Not a pleasant subject. Bill Dietrich houxj!wapd ------------------------------ Date: 19 Oct 82 21:14:23-EDT (Tue) From: J C Pistritto Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V0 #164 MX in orbit: The problem with the orbiting MX being on a fixed trajectory could be solved by giving the warhead some intelligence, and a minimal control surface area. You should be able to achieve at least 100 miles of cross- range with farily minimal modifications, (the Space Shuttle can achieve much more than that (about 700 I believe), although it flies a much longer path). That would give you at least some retargeting options. -JCP- ------------------------------ Date: 20 Oct 1982 9:22-PDT From: dietz at usc-cse Subject: Nightmare directed energy weapons There's been a lot of talk recently about directed energy weapons (lasers, particle beams) for knocking out ICBM's. All these proposals are pretty marginal; the energy required for the beam is huge. If you use conventional power sources (chemical fuels, nuclear reactor) the DEW is dwarfed by the power plant. And countermeasures are feasible if the energy in the beam is only just enough to kill unprotected missiles. So that's why Edward Teller, the father of the H-bomb (actually, Ulam should be the father, Teller the mother) is pushing for the developement of the nuclear pumped x-ray laser. There are persistent rumours about a test of this laser circulating. If correct, it is easy to see why Teller wants it. The laser would involve exciting the lasing material by a nuclear explosion. An x-ray pulse would travel down the laser medium, which is arranged in a spike pointing away from the bomb. Accuracy can be obtained by making the spike narrow and long. Of course, the laser is destroyed in use, but what a pulse you get! The technology involved in this laser is basically the same as in the H-bomb. In the bomb, a nuclear trigger ionizes a plastic imploder, impregnated with alumina to absorb the X-rays from the trigger in a uniform manner. This imploder compresses the Li6-D to fusion conditions. The fuel is arranged in a rod pointing away from the trigger. Replacing the fusion fuel ("fussile" material?) and/or the imploder with the laser medium seems like a natural thing for a bomb designer to want to do. The implications of this weapon are interesting. It now becomes possible to deliver a fraction of the energy of a nuclear bomb at great distance from the bomb itself. There is no limit, in principle, on how big a laser you could make. How about building a huge X-ray laser in space? You wouldn't have to worry about fallout (it stays in space). Just direct a beam of X-rays onto the soviet union. If there'e enough energy and your focussing is good it should generate a big explosion. Perhaps this requires too much energy; perhaps not. Unlike ICBMs and other current weapons this one acts at the speed of light. Talk about destabilizing! Even better would be a gamma-ray laser. This is hard; you'd need to generate a population inversion in nuclei, not atoms. A fraction of the beam could reach the ground (1E-3 ?), if the beam is strong enough and the energy of the gamma's is picked carefully. Result: instant lethal radiation dose over a wide area. No blast, no fallout, little atmospheric NOx. I hope these things aren't feasible. ------------------------------ End of Arms-D Digest ********************