Nearly two weeks after the successful launch of a payload for the U.S. Space Force’s Space System Command, leaders from the branch along with launch provider, Firefly Aerospace, and satellite manufacturer, Millennium Space Systems, touted the importance and details of the mission during a press briefing on Tuesday [Sep 26].Lt. Col. MacKenzie Birchenough, the materiel leader for the SSC’s Space Safari Program Office (an acquisition program office supporting USSPACECOM), said the Victus Nox mission was an important step forward in establishing what they term “Tactically Responsive Space” (TacRS) missions.“The overarching purpose of this mission was to demonstrate our ability to rapidly… deter and, if necessary, respond to adversary threats in the space domain,” Birchenough said.<snip>[TacRS]Beltz and his colleagues said this demonstration is an important step on being able to stand up the full ability for TacRS missions starting in 2026, a goal that SSC leaders said was achievable.<snip>[Some information that I had not read before:]Going into this mission, Beltz said there were a suite of seven possible flight profiles that Firefly was ready to perform. He said the goal is to be able to establish more nimble rapid response capability, both in location as well as orbital destination. That includes, he said, continuing to work alongside other federal agencies for operations like this, such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).“As we head towards the future, we need to kind of tease apart the tension between speed and flexibility and get to the point where we’re hitting both in full,” Beltz said.<snip>[Firefly Alpha Vandenberg SLC-2W and Canaveral SLC-20]Firefly CEO Bill Weber: “[Victus Nox] was flight three. We could probably fly up through flight eight out of Vandenberg. Somewhere in the six, seven, eight timeframe for Alpha flights, SLC-20 will come online and we’ll be able to fly East and West Coast missions,” Weber said. “We’re about a year, maybe a year-and-a-quarter calendar-wise away from that capability coming online there.”<snip>[Victus Haze]Birchenough said they are applying lessons learned from Victus Nox to Victus Haze.“I think you could walk through every single phase and every single step of this and kind of refine those processes and that’s really what this mission was all about,” she said. “We certainly intend to roll as many of those lessons learned as we can into Victus Haze and our future efforts.”Contracts for Victus Haze will be awarded in the Fall of 2023. A launch timeframe has not yet been announced.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/03/2023 04:41 pmQuote from: deadman1204 on 10/03/2023 04:30 pmShooting down satellies is easy. Very easy. They have incredibly predictable orbits. This "responsive launch" is leo only, which makes it even easier. Your proposing tripling the price of any program or more to make multiple spares, and pay for storage, and then probably never use any of them. Launch is the easy and cheap part. Every time. First, satellites can't be "shot down". If hit, they break into many, still orbiting pieces. Some of those pieces may degrade from orbit faster than the original satellite, but other parts may end up in higher, longer-lived orbits. Interception is messy and would hurt the country making the interception because orbital debris could damage that nation's own satellites. There are other, neater ways to disable a satellite network.Second, satellites are being mass produced today. Starlinks by the thousands, etc. Nearly 1,000 Starlink satellites have been launched in just the first 9 months of this year. They have to be building them at a rate of nearly four per day at least! There are already plans to use these constellation swarm production and launch methods for defense satellites. They don't have to be stored on the ground... - Ed KyleWill add that LEO constellation satellites have enough onboard orbital maneuver capability to make interception by ascending kinetic impactors iffy. Tracking the interceptor isn't that hard. All the orbiting satellites have to do is changing their position by few tens of meters during the final phase of an interception attempt.Finally there isn't enough launch capacity to knock out enough satellites to degrade a constellation numbering in the tens of thousands. Before said launch capability will be severely degraded. Since that is a de facto declaration of hostilities.
Quote from: deadman1204 on 10/03/2023 04:30 pmShooting down satellies is easy. Very easy. They have incredibly predictable orbits. This "responsive launch" is leo only, which makes it even easier. Your proposing tripling the price of any program or more to make multiple spares, and pay for storage, and then probably never use any of them. Launch is the easy and cheap part. Every time. First, satellites can't be "shot down". If hit, they break into many, still orbiting pieces. Some of those pieces may degrade from orbit faster than the original satellite, but other parts may end up in higher, longer-lived orbits. Interception is messy and would hurt the country making the interception because orbital debris could damage that nation's own satellites. There are other, neater ways to disable a satellite network.Second, satellites are being mass produced today. Starlinks by the thousands, etc. Nearly 1,000 Starlink satellites have been launched in just the first 9 months of this year. They have to be building them at a rate of nearly four per day at least! There are already plans to use these constellation swarm production and launch methods for defense satellites. They don't have to be stored on the ground... - Ed Kyle
Shooting down satellies is easy. Very easy. They have incredibly predictable orbits. This "responsive launch" is leo only, which makes it even easier. Your proposing tripling the price of any program or more to make multiple spares, and pay for storage, and then probably never use any of them. Launch is the easy and cheap part. Every time.
<snip>There already exist systems (e.g. SM-3's LEAP) that can track an object in space during terminal guidance. Such last-minute dodge attempts would also require forewarning of an intercept or onboard active interception detection and interceptor tracking (non-trivial) and sufficient propulsion to beat out the manoeuvre budget of a smaller and lighter interceptor. Interception can occur in a location of an adversaries' choice (e.g. over their territory, or the middle of the ocean as with Burnt Frost) which further limits countermeasure options.
There remains the strategic issue that if the cost of your interceptor is greater than the cost of building and launching the satellite you intend to intercept than attrition is not in your favour (the main problem - among other - that killed Brilliant Pebbles), that does not mean there is no tactical utility. <snip>
Ahem, Brillant Pebbles was mostly for anti-ballistic purposes around the incoming mid-course phase with limited engagement envelope versus even LEO satellites.
Quote from: deadman1204 on 10/03/2023 04:30 pmShooting down satellies is easy. Very easy. They have incredibly predictable orbits. This "responsive launch" is leo only, which makes it even easier. Your proposing tripling the price of any program or more to make multiple spares, and pay for storage, and then probably never use any of them. Launch is the easy and cheap part. Every time. First, satellites can't be "shot down". If hit, they break into many, still orbiting pieces. Some of those pieces may degrade from orbit faster than the original satellite, but other parts may end up in higher, longer-lived orbits. Interception is messy and would hurt the country making the interception because orbital debris could damage that nation's own satellites. There are other, neater ways to disable a satellite network.
