As some countries continue to weaponize space, experts are beginning to imagine what a real showdown might look like above our heads. According to a new report, future space wars are likely to be much slower and more deliberate.
A little over two years ago, Donald Trump declared his intention to develop an American space force. Officially created in December 2019, this first “Space Force” now aims to conduct military operations in space with the aim of protecting American assets and interests. Naturally, the creation of this American space force spawned all sorts of fanciful notions of space combat. Will military satellites ever act like X-wings and Tie Fighters?
A priori, it is not for tomorrow, according to a new report examining what would be technically possible in space combat in the near future. Based on this paper, published by The Aerospace Corporation , the physical constraints suggest that all battles and wars will have to be planned well in advance.
On Earth, a war generally involves an effort by opposing forces to dominate physical assets. In space, this type of approach would be impossible for several reasons.
– Satellites move very quickly and predictably . In circular orbits, some travel at between 3 and 8 km/s, depending on their altitude. In comparison, an average bullet travels only about 0.75 km/s.
– The near space is huge :the volume of space between low Earth orbit and geostationary orbit is about 200 trillion cubic kilometers. This is about 190 times larger than the volume of the Earth.
– Timing issue:within the limits of the atmosphere, planes, tanks and other ships can theoretically move in multiple directions. Satellites do not have this freedom . Due to the gravitational pull of the Earth, these instruments always move in a circular or elliptical path, constantly in free fall around the Earth. Simply having multiple satellites in the same location to wage a "war" would be physically very complicated. Moreover, at such speeds, these instruments maneuver very slowly.
In conclusion, "if indeed maneuvers were to be planned in space, they should be planned well in advance “, explains Rebecca Reesman, co-author of the report. “Any conflict in space will therefore actually be much slower and more deliberate than a Star Wars scene . This will require a lot more long-term thinking and strategic asset placement ". In other words, no need to imagine the slightest spontaneous skirmish in space.
The report also identifies several ways satellites could be "attacked". Besides releasing missiles on the ground, radio signals could also be used to jam an adversary's satellites. It's kind of an extension of electronic warfare already underway in naval and air battles. Also, the main emphasis will be on defending these satellites, and not on attacking enemy instruments.
Obviously, nations will be strongly encouraged not to destroy other satellites due to the potential to create additional debris that could affect other nations' assets in the space. However, it is not difficult to imagine that a nation could decide to permanently lose access to certain locations in geostationary orbit, because of this debris, for the simple purpose of winning a war on the ground.
