Strategic Defense Initiative 2.0: Can Trump Achieve What Reagan Failed?

60
Strategic Defense Initiative 2.0: Can Trump Achieve What Reagan Failed?


From the Depths of the Cold War


One of the most controversial topics in stories The development of weapons and military-technical confrontation between the USSR and the USA is the American program "Strategic Defense Initiative" (SDI), launched on March 23, 1983 by then US President Ronald Reagan.



It is characteristic that the topic of anti-ballistic missile defense (ABM) was first developed in the USSR back in 1949, when Ronald Reagan's ultimate dream was to become president of the Screen Actors Guild. Nevertheless, the public learned about the ABM system after Reagan declared the USSR an "evil empire" and called on America to make every effort to gain a decisive advantage over the Soviet Union by creating an anti-ballistic missile shield within the framework of the SDI program, which received the half-joking name "Star Wars".


We have previously discussed the history of the creation of missile defense systems in the USSR and the USA in the article Cold War missile defense and "Star Wars".

It would seem that after the collapse of the USSR there was no longer any point in deploying missile defense systems?

However, having abandoned the most ambitious directions, the US Armed Forces focused on more achievable goals, not on creating a global anti-missile shield, but on intercepting single intercontinental ballistic missiles. missiles (ICBMs) and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs).

The new missile defense systems were positioned as a means of defense against “rogue states” like Iran and North Korea, although by some “coincidence” the elements of the missile defense systems were positioned so as to intercept missiles launched from Russian territory – however, everyone understood this perfectly well. In terms of creating strategic and non-strategic missile defense, not everything went smoothly for the United States, but it is hardly worth underestimating the importance of the work carried out there.


Often there is a sharp reduction in the amount of information in open sources about achievements in a particular area, for example, in terms of creating a laser weapons or rail guns, may not mean that "everything is bad" there, but on the contrary, that certain results were obtained, after which the corresponding programs were transferred to the status of "black", implemented in a regime of increased secrecy. These are just examples, it is far from a fact that the US has advanced in the creation of combat lasers and "rail guns", but who knows?

And now, the newly elected US President Donald Trump is once again talking about the need to create an anti-missile shield over America, calling it an advanced analogue of the Israeli "Iron Dome", thereby causing a surge of emotions among a number of politicians and regulars of thematic resources. But in fact, Donald Trump did not say anything new from what he said earlier - back during his first presidential term.

The Ghost of the Cold War


On January 17, 2019, Donald Trump released the Missile Defense Review at the Pentagon. The document included a new US strategy in space, which was called defensive and provided for the expansion of the missile defense arsenal.


In particular, the strategy proposed placing a new generation of early warning satellites in space. According to the document, the most serious threats to the United States are North Korea, Iran, Russia and China. The report says that the United States will not limit itself in developing missile defense against countries that do not recognize international norms.

That is, five years ago, “friend” Donald, without a moment’s hesitation, sent Russia, and at the same time China, to the list of rogue states and announced the need to build a global US missile defense system (Sunset of the nuclear triad. US missile defense: the present and near future).

What happened in this direction during the first administration of Donald Trump and his successor, “Self-Propelled Joe”?

What happened here is this: despite the relative calm in terms of the deployment of strategic missile launchers such as the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GBMD), the US Armed Forces began deploying satellites into orbit Silent Barker, designed to control outer space directly from space, HBTSS and PWSA satellites, designed to track hypersonic missiles, and potentially any other air targets, as well as Starshield satellites, capable of linking all components of the US Armed Forces into a single whole, including combining the capabilities of satellite constellations for various purposes.


Limited capabilities and unlimited potential


After the inauguration of the new US president, several sources "from Trump's circle" simultaneously reported to the Financial Times that the decree on the creation of a new American missile defense system had already been signed. Within the framework of SDI 2.0, it is planned to ensure the interception of ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles using satellites equipped with laser and kinetic weapons.

The statements about laser weapons capable of intercepting ballistic missiles from space immediately led to a mass throwing of hats on a number of thematic resources, but in the meantime, everything is much more complicated than it seems. Already now, lasers in orbit can potentially solve the problem of filtering out light false targets, and this is a very important task, since there will be only a few heavy false targets on a ballistic missile, but dozens or even hundreds of light ones.


Inflatable transatmospheric false warhead of the American Minitman ICBM

In the future, with the growth of laser power, it may become a very realistic task to defeat ballistic missiles at the initial stage of their trajectory, for example, by burning through the walls of the second-stage tanks or by affecting the sensors of the “bus” distributing the warheads.

Critics are no less skeptical about the possibility of creating, within the framework of SDI 2.0, some kind of kinetic interceptors capable of attacking targets both in space and in the atmosphere.

Meanwhile, the private American company True Anomaly is already developing the concept of “inspector” satellites – read Jackal interceptors ("Jackal"). And True Anomaly is planning to launch thousands of these satellites into orbit, supplementing them with the Mosaic complex system, which will receive information from the Jackal interceptor sensors, process it using artificial intelligence, and present it to operators in a clear graphical form.

Conclusions


Despite the struggle between the Republican and Democratic parties, preparations for the deployment of missile defense systems and dominance in outer space in general are being carried out tirelessly in the United States.

The above-mentioned orbital satellite groups Silent Barker, Starshield, HBTSS and PWSA are nothing more than a “sensor layer” – a kind of “skeleton” of the future missile defense system – as they say, “if there are bones, the meat will grow.” And the “meat” is already visible – these are Jackal interceptor satellites. Of course, these are not yet “diamond stones” – interceptors of ICBM warheads, but Jackal interceptors may well become the basis for them.


It is also worth remembering that the cornerstone of building orbital infrastructure is the low cost of launches, an advantage in which the US has already provided partially reusable launch vehicles (LV) from SpaceX – surprisingly, some still manage to believe that all their launches are unprofitable, even when some stages have flown into space dozens of times.

But the super-heavy, fully reusable Starship / Super Heavy launch vehicle is on the way – Elon Musk launches prototypes with maniacal persistence, despite any obstacles, including crashes of expensive prototypes.

If his efforts are successful and the cost of launching one kilogram of cargo into orbit can be reduced by an order of magnitude, then the United States will gain a colossal advantage simply because it will be able to conduct as many test launches and experiments in space on a variety of programs as needed, just as we now launch rockets at test sites here on Earth, delivering them there by truck, where the cost of delivery is only a small part of the costs.


It is quite possible that in five to ten years the United States will be able to intercept “goodies” launched by countries such as Iran or North Korea, and By 2040, the American SDI 2.0 may well begin to pose a threat to Russia's nuclear deterrent forces as well.

So we should not engage in boasting, but work on creating symmetrical and asymmetrical response solutions, and one of the most important tasks here is the creation of fully reusable Russian launch vehicles of all classes.
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    5 February 2025 04: 00
    With launch vehicles, you can put anything into orbit. We're already behind in these vehicles, perhaps hopelessly so. And the joke about "trampolines" wasn't particularly funny back then...
    1. +3
      5 February 2025 04: 09
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      With launch vehicles, you can put anything into orbit. We're already behind in these vehicles, perhaps hopelessly so. And the joke about "trampolines" wasn't particularly funny back then...

      Rogozmos wasn't joking about trampolines. No.
      He simply forgot to clarify that Russia will be left with the trampolines.
      1. +5
        5 February 2025 04: 37
        Quote: Bearded
        that Russia will be left with trampolines.

        It's sad to read this, considering that we were the first in space...
        1. +2
          5 February 2025 05: 34
          Quote from Uncle Lee
          that we were the first in space...

          The Norwegians were the first at the North and South Poles...
          1. +1
            5 February 2025 05: 37
            Quote: Puncher
            The Norwegians were the first

            So what? We were the first to cross the Northern Sea Route, and we discovered Antarctica... The conversation was about space.
            1. +10
              5 February 2025 05: 44
              Quote from Uncle Lee
              The conversation was about space.

              What I mean is that being the first does not always mean being a leader. You may still have some hope, but for the Russian Federation, space is becoming a thing of the past. In 2027, the ISS will be sunk, there will be no Russian OS, manned space exploration will die. There will be no point in maintaining three spaceports, because for 3-4 satellites per year, this is excessive. The only LVs that will remain are Soyuz 2.1 in different versions and that's it. This is the optimistic future of Russian space exploration.
              1. +2
                5 February 2025 05: 47
                Quote: Puncher
                manned space flight will die.

                I agree that everything is very pessimistic... Well, that's what I mean...
                1. +2
                  5 February 2025 06: 03
                  Quote from Uncle Lee
                  everything is very pessimistic...

                  But I have a very small hope that Roscosmos will be able to agree with China on the deployment of Chinese copies of Starlink. The Chinese are, of course, unusually pompous and treat the Russian Federation with open disdain, but their plans to deploy a large satellite group look rather unrealistic. China does not have "cheap" launch vehicles that could be launched by the dozens per year. Their plans are certainly grandiose, to copy Falcon 9 and then... but the implementation is very poor. And time is running out and the US needs to catch up now, in 10 years it will be too late. They simply do not have much choice, and we have a rocket and an excess of spaceports. But for some unknown reason there is no "consensus" on this issue, it is not even being considered, at least there is no information.
                  1. 0
                    6 February 2025 00: 58
                    Quote: Puncher
                    Roscosmos will be able to negotiate with China on the deployment of Chinese copies of Starlink.

                    Chinese industrial electronics are cheaper than Russian ones. A Chinese PLC costs 15 at retail after customs clearance. A Russian one costs 000 rubles, a purely Russian one costs 25 rubles. Moreover, the microcircuits are still Chinese. The ratio in space products will be even more unfavorable for Russia against the background of Chinese products.
                    1. +1
                      6 February 2025 06: 49
                      Quote: gsev
                      Chinese industrial electronics are cheaper than Russian ones

                      It's not about manufacturing Chinese satellites, but about delivering them into orbit.
                      1. 0
                        6 February 2025 20: 01
                        Quote: Puncher
                        and their delivery into orbit

                        The Chinese mission to the Moon was more successful than the Russian and Israeli ones. They are reducing the gap with the USA and not increasing it like Russia. By the way, the USSR's lunar program under S.P. Korolev ended in failure because the automation engineers did not ensure the thermal conditions of the electrical equipment system of the spacecraft launched to the Moon during S.P. Korolev's lifetime.
              2. -1
                5 February 2025 12: 09
                This is the optimistic future of Russian cosmonautics.

                In today's times it would be more correct to say "Optimized"(((((((((
              3. -1
                5 February 2025 14: 03
                There will always be commentators who say that everything is lost. The reality is that Baikonur is hanging. Plesetsk and Vostochny will close the 20 launches that Russia is currently doing. It is unlikely that we will do 30, but it will not fall below 15 either. Baikonur is leased until 2050, it is a pity to close it, mothball it? Maintain a minimum of 1-2 launches per year? Difficult. As for the missile defense in space, the assholes will create it sooner or later. They have the competence, money and the ability to attract any contractors from almost all over the world. So we cannot fall asleep. Probably the only way to resist is to place nuclear weapons in space, which, if detonated at one time, will paralyze it for several tens of minutes. For the duration of the retaliatory strike. An alternative could be a treaty banning weapons in space, but the assholes, given their leadership in this area, will not go for it.
              4. -1
                5 February 2025 19: 14
                In 2027, the ISS will be sunk, there will be no Russian OS, manned space exploration will die.
                manned spaceflight has existed for the last 40 years only on the principle of "just so there is something", no breakthroughs have been made on the ISS, for all the money spent it would have been possible to launch a hundred Mars rovers and Pluto rovers, and there would have been enough left over for five telescopes. How to live in space and use a space toilet was learned back in Brezhnev's time
              5. +1
                5 February 2025 21: 43
                Puncher, I'm ashamed to read you. Are you an ancient old man or something? Or do you read nothing but topwar? Or are you just a provocateur? You ask yourself why three cosmodromes were built. Or do you think that there are more stupid people there than you?
                Well, he drove everyone further into melancholy, it’s not good.
                1. +3
                  6 February 2025 03: 23
                  Quote: Vik Ganz
                  Well, he drove everyone further into melancholy, it’s not good.

                  So add some optimism. If you know something that allows you to look at tomorrow with a smile, then go ahead.
        2. 0
          5 February 2025 17: 09
          History does not move in a straight line, but in a spiral. It is completely logical that a rise is followed by a fall.
        3. +2
          6 February 2025 12: 01
          Quote from Uncle Lee

          It's sad to read this, considering that we were the first in space...

          We can go back there, but to do that we need to do the smallest thing - go back to a normal education system. Education is not for the "elites", but for the whole people.
    2. -2
      6 February 2025 20: 25
      It's too early to moan for the repose of the soul! Let's wait for the continuation!!!!!
  2. +1
    5 February 2025 05: 44
    The Iron Dome program does not fit in with Trump's statements about reducing the monstrous national debt. On the contrary, it will only increase it.
    1. +4
      5 February 2025 06: 05
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      does not fit with the statements

      Where have you seen a politician today whose statements were consistent with each other?
  3. +5
    5 February 2025 06: 27
    So we shouldn't indulge in self-righteousness
    We're all out of hats.
    1. +5
      5 February 2025 06: 41
      Quote: parusnik
      We're all out of hats.

      But there are plenty of caps...
  4. +5
    5 February 2025 06: 58
    It's amazing, but some people still manage to believe that all their launches are unprofitable

    what's surprising about this if there is a group of people who sincerely believe that SpaceX doesn't launch anything at all, and all the videos of launches are CGI on a green screen. They analyze every frame, come to the conclusion that it's all fake. Their "leader" seriously regularly publishes analyses, rents a room in which he holds video conferences and his audience really believes everything he says. When you read their enthusiastic comments about the fraudster Musk, at first it's funny, and then it becomes sad that idiots are so active...
    1. 0
      5 February 2025 12: 11
      Competitors of the Flat Earth Sect, that's all.
    2. 0
      8 February 2025 10: 00
      When you read their enthusiastic comments about the fraudster Musk, at first it's funny, and then it becomes sad that the idiots are so active...

      Why be sad, don't you know that idiots are always more active than normal people? Simply because they can't do anything except yell. Normal people do their job quietly and calmly at this time. Then they present the results. Sarmat, Avangard, Oreshnik are examples of this...
  5. +6
    5 February 2025 07: 11
    Peacetime relaxes state structures. In the pre-war USSR, some people's commissars led without leaving their chairs. Others went to places and brought the designs to mind. The results were felt during the war. The entire defense begins to limp when the selection of personnel takes place thanks to personal sympathies and connections. The Minister of Space and especially his curators should know more about the machines than many performers. It was not for nothing that there was a stir at Baikonur when a curator from the ministry arrived. He knew literally everything. From the tension of a bolt, a nut, or the radius of a pipe. And almost every time he found something, even minor negligence. Now some ministers are jacks of all trades out of boredom. Now one department, then another. Stalin did not have such a permanent clip of ministers. The ministers were not yet forty, and Stalin demanded that they find replacements for himself.
    1. -4
      5 February 2025 11: 22
      Quote: Nikolay Malyugin
      other. Stalin did not have such a permanent staff of ministers. The ministers were not yet forty, and Stalin demanded that they find replacements for himself.

      And how did this help the fact that under Rychagov they destroyed 2,5 planes per DAY belay and he blamed everything on the aviation industry?
      1. -2
        5 February 2025 12: 12
        But who won the War?
        1. -4
          5 February 2025 12: 40
          Quote: Quzmi4
          But who won the War?

          Based your message - they won because they shot the people's commissars like dogs and there were no permanent ones?
  6. +5
    5 February 2025 07: 45
    As long as the people making decisions have their foundations of well-being outside the country of temporary residence, no measures will be taken to create minimal threats to their own future.
  7. +7
    5 February 2025 08: 22
    All the articles on VO, for the most part, end with the word "Need".. It seems that those who need it, don't need it at all.. And I think the hats haven't run out yet. smile
    1. -4
      5 February 2025 10: 06
      Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

      Quote: kor1vet1974
      It seems that those who need it, don’t need it at all.

      "Our" elite, appointed by the State Department in the 90s, does not need it at all.

      A remarkable event happened recently. The test of the "Oreshnik" in combat conditions. The Americans slept through this launch and demanded a repeat, aiming a bunch of satellites at the launch site and ... nothing.

      It turned out that Putin had at his disposal a design bureau and troops in which there were no of their people. They were not frightened by "Oreshnik" itself, but by the fact that they no longer controlled everything in Russia.
  8. +2
    5 February 2025 08: 40
    Sorry, Yura, we wasted everything. And considering that Roscosmos was a de facto monopolist in launches for a decade, we were definitely wasted.
    1. +2
      5 February 2025 09: 33
      On the issue of the effectiveness of rockets as a means of launching cargo into orbit, if we accept that the thickness of the rocket's skin at launch cannot be less than a certain limiting value, then the larger the rocket, the less percent of its mass falls on this skin and more percent falls on the cargo being launched. This is the main reason why the new Max rocket is so big, plus it has three dozen engines that can duplicate each other, therefore, to reduce the cost of launching cargo into orbit, we need to increase the size of the carriers, but if we want to launch many small simple satellites, then we think we need to consider alternative options.
      1. 0
        5 February 2025 12: 19
        When Musk dies, "civilization" will finally go virtual... This is to say that, since rockets are ineffective, we need to look for other options. But we've been taken in the wrong direction. The biggest salaries go to the most useless characters from the point of view of Eternity - forgive me, the pathos! - characters. "It's high time to fly to the stars, and they're inventing water-soluble rolls of toilet paper." Sorry, I'm sick of it.
        1. +1
          5 February 2025 23: 49
          sore comrade: WHY "fly to the stars"?
          In near space, 99% of tasks are solved by cheap satellites: communications, surface imaging.
          manned spaceflight is essentially a nostalgic symbolic fetish, which we try not to lose as a competence, and we load it with “at least something” (an interesting, but unprofitable scientific program, filming a “challenge”, etc.).
          the same moon is of no use to anyone except "Country Prestige"...
          in the next 100-200-500 years, we can calmly explore near-Earth space, building ever more sophisticated networks of communication satellites, global navigation, early warning systems for natural disasters (this is where the notorious AI will at least really give something), etc.

          any Manilovism-Maskovism "let's fly to conquer Mars" - will only eat up scarce resources and that's it...
      2. 0
        5 February 2025 19: 05
        There are no problems with rockets. There is nothing to carry on them.
  9. -7
    5 February 2025 09: 54
    Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

    Quote: A. Mitrofanov
    One of the most important tasks here is the creation of fully reusable Russian launch vehicles

    Why? So that the "1st stage fuel tank" can be used multiple times?
    After the explosion, there will be nothing left of the rest of the rocket.

    What nonsense... as well as the whole article. We have enough resources (S-500 and not only) to cope with these tasks (cheap and cheerful) and, by the way, our Buran is on a spare track. To use lasers in space, we need a compact nuclear reactor, which we have, but the enemy does not have and does not expect to have. tongue
    1. +5
      5 February 2025 10: 51
      Quote: Boris55
      Why? So that the "1st stage fuel tank" can be used multiple times?
      After the explosion, there will be nothing left of the rest of the rocket.
      We are talking about reusable launch vehicles, means of launching cargo into space, and not about combat systems.
      And the author is absolutely right. For a long time, we used to laugh at the reusability of the first stage of the Falcon 9 from SpaceX, and now we are urgently trying to copy it in the form of the Amur-SPG launch vehicle (Soyuz-7, inferior in terms of payload to the Falcon 9) and the reusable first stage for the Angara. In this, we are far behind both the US (where they have been in operation for a long time) and China, where they are at the flight testing stage. We are still at the stage of developing and testing individual units.
      But some people convinced us that this was a dead end and that Musk was a fraud. True, the "dead end" Falcon 9 had 133 (!!!) successful launches into space in 2024. Russia had 17.

      Deploying large groups requires a huge number of launches. Of those 133 Falcon 9 launches, about 80 went to Starlink, due to which the group already has more than 7500 devices! So, each rocket needs engines (and there are 9 of them on the F10 - Merlin 1D, this is half the cost of the rocket), tanks, avionics, etc. The factories will simply be overloaded. And due to reusability, SpaceX uses the same stage 20 times. Reducing the price is also important (restoring a stage is much cheaper than creating and testing a new one from scratch).
      Quote: Boris55
      (S-500

      This is a doomsday scenario. The Kessler effect (the formation of many debris) will disable all our satellites, and make space inaccessible to both us and them.
      Quote: Boris55
      our Buran is on a siding
      There is no Buran of ours, nor are there any projects for its resurrection.
      Moreover, it was even more expensive than the Space Shuttles. Because it used the super-heavy RN Energia and 4 side boosters with liquid rocket engines (versus a disposable tank and 2 simple solid-fuel boosters in the Shuttles). Roughly speaking, to launch Buran, you need to use 5 rockets in one bunch.
      Quote: Boris55
      which we have, but the enemy does not have and is not expected to have.

      Firstly, we only have it in development, not in hardware or in space, and secondly, they also have it in development.
  10. +1
    5 February 2025 09: 55
    If Donald Fredovich "doesn't break his neck" on the internal economic and administrative problems of the USA, it is POSSIBLE that he will succeed with the past "wants" of the "Hollywood cowboy" Reagan... Let's wait...
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 11: 03
      Quote from nordscout
      Waiting for ....

      So Trump is in a more advantageous position. The USSR had 2338 ICBMs alone, while the Russian Federation had more than 500. That is, the task has become relatively simpler. This does not threaten us with anything good, having realized that the Russian Federation is not capable of launching a nuclear missile strike on the US (the rest are not a pity), they will be able to simply ignore our interests. And even more so, having launched the first strike, they will simplify their task even more.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. +6
    5 February 2025 10: 11
    Putin said that the presence of missiles capable of flying for weeks and bypassing dangerous areas of missile defense systems, that our hypersonic missiles cannot be intercepted, at least today. Science does not stand still and tomorrow we may have other, more advanced missiles. This is not a reason for the United States to engage in improving domes and missile defense systems, especially since China already occupies leading positions in five of the 13 key technologies and is increasing its nuclear potential in an effort to catch up with the United States and Russia.
    The struggle for dominance in space is similar to the struggle of European state formations for supremacy at sea in the colonial era. Today, the same thing is happening in space at a new stage of historical development, and this is an inevitable stage. The number of participants has only decreased.
    In order not to indulge in self-righteousness and work on creating symmetrical and asymmetrical counter-solutions, it is necessary to have money and productive forces in the required volume, and without this, the Russian Federation always faces N.S. Khrushchev’s dilemma – developing a priority direction to the detriment of others, if only not to miscalculate priorities.
  13. -2
    5 February 2025 10: 27
    The United States will not limit itself in developing missile defense against countries that do not recognize international norms.

    What? Against the pin dossier? belay laughing
    Newly elected US President Donald Trump is once again talking about the need to create an anti-missile shield over America

    And we are her tsunami, tsunami. We have all the moves written down. Yes fellow wassat
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 12: 22
      May God grant our calf to catch the wolf...
  14. -2
    5 February 2025 12: 13
    At the moment, the Americans are not able to send space tourists to Earth. There is no rocket. There are a lot of announced space programs, but there is not a single rocket) It just happened) If the military had delivery vehicles that met the minimum conditions, this disgrace would have been stopped long ago. So there are sonorous names of "space programs". But there are no opportunities. Well, no! In general, it's a rip-off, guys, and not satellites for tracking everything in the world...
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 15: 58
      Quote: Mikhail3
      At the moment, the Americans are not able to send space tourists back to earth.
      These are not tourists, but astronauts. And they will be returned not by a rocket, but by a spaceship, and he is already on the ISS. This is SpaceX's Crew Dragon on the Crew-9 mission. They are now members of its crew and will return on standard flight schedule - this March. And they got stuck during first manned flight of their new Starliner ship.
      By the way, due to an accident in the thermal control system of the Soyuz MS-22, our cosmonauts also got stuck, and we had to send the Soyuz MS-23 empty. It turns out that we also have
      Quote: Mikhail3
      But there are no opportunities. Well, no.
      Or is it another? laughing

      So they have all the possibilities, some are even better than ours. Of course, you can go crazy with propaganda, but why underestimate the enemy so much?
      1. 0
        6 February 2025 09: 20
        Quote: Infinity
        And it won't be a rocket that will return them, but a spaceship.

        Well, and so on in the same style) And not tourists but astronauts)) NASA still pays for protection? Like in the story about "we were on the Moon"? He-he...
  15. bar
    +3
    5 February 2025 12: 56
    So we should not be complacent, but work on creating

    Didn't the scam with SDI 1.0 and the subsequent collapse of the USSR teach us anything? Are we going to the next round with another "catch up and overtake"? It's sad if so. recourse
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 19: 08
      The USSR collapsed not because of SDI, but because of the rotten nomenklatura. They would have destroyed the country even faster without the arms race, there is no external threat.
  16. -1
    5 February 2025 15: 12
    The orbital component of the missile defense system is expensive, it will cost a ton of money, and most importantly, potentially high-power ground-based systems of LO or other energy weapons located, for example, in the highlands, can quickly destroy such systems before the first strike or at least significantly weaken them.
    The race to militarize orbit will simply trigger a race to create stationary anti-orbital complexes, including laser ones, and these complexes, in turn, once created, will threaten the American "orbit" more than anything created to date.
    I'm not sure that Americans understand this enough, but it would be better for them not to open this box.
  17. +1
    5 February 2025 15: 39
    The USSR was on the same level in the space race, the USA was always afraid of it. But in the liberal period, Russia remained in the space race, either showing that it was not interested, or fulfilling the wishes of the Washington regional committee. What did the man who sat for a long time as the head of Roscosmos, who is a journalist by education, achieve? In 1990, we had 79 launches, 2024 - 8. The difference is profound! As I write Vedomosti:
    The crisis of the Russian space industry has been going on for three decades now. Over these years, engineering and scientific personnel have been lost, technologies and production chains have been lost, the quality control system has been destroyed, software and mathematical support for control algorithms is in decline, there is no longer continuity of generations and transfer of experience and knowledge. Equipment failures, rocket accidents and loss of spacecraft (since 2011, the number of unsuccessful launches has reached 8%), misuse or embezzlement of allocated funds - this is today's reality.

    1. +1
      5 February 2025 23: 03
      In 2024, Russia carried out 17 space launches.
  18. +1
    5 February 2025 16: 58
    The US can create a powerful air defense system based on existing systems:
    - the number of ships with Aegis is planned to be increased from 2030 to 49 by 69, each with a standard set of weapons: 66 "heavy" SM-2 air defense missiles or SM-3 missile defense missiles. Currently, there are up to 3 SM-500 missiles in service, but as you can see, there is a possibility of increasing their number to 1.5 thousand in the medium term. The missiles are very expensive: $27 million per piece, if they are placed on land, the cost will increase several times, since expensive infrastructure is needed.
    - it seems more economical to deploy THAAD systems, the cost of a battery is about $1 billion (6 PUs with 8 missiles, a crew of 95 people). Taking this into account, for $100 billion it is possible to deploy 5 missile defense regiments (5 battalions per regiment, 4 batteries per battalion), which will cover the main cities and military facilities. Another question is how effective THAAD is against intercontinental ballistics.
    1. +1
      5 February 2025 23: 44
      Quote: Ivan Seversky
      Another question is how effective it is

      yeah, question... BUT, unlike "pew-pew combat lasers", this is a REAL technology! ))
  19. +1
    5 February 2025 18: 02
    Microelectronics needs to be pumped up, guys. It's not a problem to launch a rocket, but what can you display on it?
  20. +1
    5 February 2025 23: 01
    So we should not engage in boasting, but work on creating symmetrical and asymmetrical response solutions, and one of the most important tasks here is the creation of fully reusable Russian launch vehicles of all classes.

    Bases in orbit and on the Moon + satellite systems and reusable spacecraft and tugs, etc., etc. If the Russian Federation can do this, then there will be parity. If not, then there will be one hegemon on planet Earth! China will not be able to do this, since China was artificially created and may soon be destroyed by innovations!
  21. +1
    5 February 2025 23: 43
    It is far from certain that the US has made progress in creating combat lasers and railguns, but who knows?


    um... do physicists know? ))
    "laser weapons" is a load of crap, because it has already been explained 100500 times what kind of power plant is required for each "combat laser", what is the density of "combat imperial satellites" to really "cover with an umbrella", what is the focus time on the target for "burning", etc.
    Well, why carry this nonsense? Just to hope to knock out "financing for domestic developments" in a frankly dead-end branch? ) and put thousands of respected comrades on a sinecure at "NIILazerTech" for decades? ))

    here "hypersonic missiles" are a normal engineering task based on existing and new technologies.
    but not nonsense at the level of "Ren TV" ))

    oh, and now there's a new WonderWaffle - AI! )) i.e. you can offer to "attach AI to any non-working thing, and it will work" ))

    gentlemen, the fact that the publication has a "conclusions" section does not make it an analytical article ))
    1. 0
      6 February 2025 17: 58
      If reusability is needed, then I think it is not necessary to copy Musk and return the entire first stage, you can make the first stage with discarded fuel and oxidizer tanks as they are used up, and then when they run out, return only the block with engines to the ground, even by parachute
  22. 0
    7 February 2025 12: 58
    Quote: agond
    and then when they finish returning to earth only the block with engines, even by parachute

    On the German A9/A10, which was developed for the shelling of New York, they wanted to reduce the cost.
    The same was true for the Bachem 349 for air defense.