News NATO plans to build satellite links as backups to undersea cables — recent cable damage incidents shine spotlight on Project HEIST

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
LOL, I can just see it now: instead of anchor drags, a chunk of space debris mysteriously appears directly within the orbit of one of these satellites.

Then, I also have to wonder about the potential for attacks via ground-based (or in-orbit) energy weapons, although attribution would hopefully be a bit easier in that case. The path for retaliation is also very straight-forward (knock out one of their satellites), which is perhaps why this isn't (yet) a "thing".

I think the advantage of something like Starlink is the sheer number of satellites. However, without a commercial funding model, I think it'd be impractical to maintain such a large fleet. The downside of depending on a private network is, of course, the owner might be rather temperamental and have questionable loyalty or allegiances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carvedinside, King_V and newtechldtech
bit_user said:
That's not a new priority. It just fell mostly under the jurisdiction of the Air Force, previously. Space Force just took stuff we already did and put it into its own branch.
Click to expand...
There is/was enough specialized stuff for Space to be split off from Air Force.
Just like splitting the Air Force off from the Army Air Corps back in '47.


In addition, there was a lot of jostling between the Navy, Army, AF, as to who was going to control all the 'space stuff'.
Screw it...make it its own thing.

I know several people who transitioned from Air Force to Space Force.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
They already have satellites for secure military communications. So I guess they are talking about general civilian communications in which case satellites will never be able to come even close to providing the equivalent bandwidth of fiber optics. Unless you want to say goodbye to terrestrial radio & TV broadcast and give their frequency range over to Satellites too.

Honestly it would make more sense to rebuild the microwave transmitter network instead. Physical instillation inside your territory only, Point 2 Point so difficult to spy on or disrupt. Not reliant on foreign assets to carry your info (read American satellites). Doesn't require additional frequency or exotic new technology to overcome frequency limitations.
 
Regarding Space Force...
Any NCO or Officer in any of the services knows that there are 5 combat domains: land, air, sea, space, and cyberspace. That only left cyberspace and [outer] space as the last domains without their own dedicated branches, and now the later is accounted for -- in the U.S., anyways. Continuing on that trend, maybe we'll eventually see a dedicated cyber military branch in the next few decades??
 
newtechldtech said:
meh , Just make tens of cables for backups , better , faster and cheaper .
Click to expand...
Not really, they can all be mapped and found and planned for disruption. Satellites too really.

Pretty much no way around having infrastructure out there in some fashion.

A cluster of ships with line of sight communication perhaps? Might be a wartime solution, but not really practical for normal infrastructure.
 
Eximo said:
Not really, they can all be mapped and found and planned for disruption. Satellites too really.

Pretty much no way around having infrastructure out there in some fashion.

A cluster of ships with line of sight communication perhaps? Might be a wartime solution, but not really practical for normal infrastructure.
Click to expand...

well not all can be targeted at once , the army will rush to the place ASAP when One or two are targeted . the backups will work in that time .

There is another way in the sea .. is mesh like floating objects with 5-7G antennas , and in thousands , you sink one ball the rest will still work and in parallel will add up bandwidth ...

Quantum Communication is good but we are still behind ...
 
By their nature, multiple undersea cables will all be within a pretty small area unless they are routed well outside the shortest path.

I won't get into the politics of how you stop someone without triggering a war, and if war is happening, then that won't be an unescorted/unarmed vessel doing the cable cutting.

Small buoys would be vulnerable to jamming, and be shipping hazards unless they are broadcasting their position. Also they would have to be tall, or be very dense to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
"About a hundred cable cuts happen each year"...
this makes me think the recent cables dragged by anchors presumed by the "shadow fleet" are more incident by turning off motors and trying to brake using the anchors instead of motors, to avoid noise or fuel consumption, if I move million in oil I don't want anybody to know where I am or what I did.
 
It is strange that the press is yelling about these and it was not that many years ago that egypt was cut off the internet because 2 different under sea cables where damaged. In that case they seem to agree it was just bad luck that 2 different ships happen it hit them in a short time. There are likely many other fiber cuts you don't even hear about. There was one near the coast of the USA when a hurricane dragged a buoy anchor over one. Unless you worked in the tech you never even saw the news since they were more worried about the damaged onshore.
 
bit_user said:
LOL, I can just see it now: instead of anchor drags, a chunk of space debris mysteriously appears directly within the orbit of one of these satellites.

Then, I also have to wonder about the potential for attacks via ground-based (or in-orbit) energy weapons, although attribution would hopefully be a bit easier in that case. The path for retaliation is also very straight-forward (knock out one of their satellites), which is perhaps why this isn't (yet) a "thing".

I think the advantage of something like Starlink is the sheer number of satellites. However, without a commercial funding model, I think it'd be impractical to maintain such a large fleet. The downside of depending on a private network is, of course, the owner might be rather temperamental and have questionable loyalty or allegiances.
Click to expand...

Not much commercial shipping in space, so disrupting communication will take a lot more. Is it perfect, of course not it is however a whole other ball game.


TheSecondPower said:
This isn't a perfect plan. I believe Russia and China were each blamed for recent deliberate cuts. The US, Russia, and China have all proven to have working anti-satellite weapons.
Click to expand...
The Chinese haven't been blamed, the fact the one ship was Chinese hasn't changed that as there is suggestions of different ways the Russians are behind it ie. possible Russian captain and/or a crew that has been bribed by Russia.

As for using anti-satellite weapons. Maybe, however part of the effect of using commercial shipping is there is doubt and confusion because there is many ships. If weapons were to be used that is then something very different.
 
ivan_vy said:
"About a hundred cable cuts happen each year"...
this makes me think the recent cables dragged by anchors presumed by the "shadow fleet" are more incident by turning off motors and trying to brake using the anchors instead of motors, to avoid noise or fuel consumption, if I move million in oil I don't want anybody to know where I am or what I did.
Click to expand...
No anchors are ever going to work as brakes, think of those anchors of more like dragging a bunch of beer cans after a car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom