[a34729t]

China has missed their window of opportunity, sadly.

For the next big war, the US will simply not even need to air or sea to deliver weapons or supplies (see SpaceX's StarFall, of which 60x4 should fit into Starship). Per my calculations, the JDAM version of this will be cheaper than flying planes (and pilots) to drop bombs or cruise missiles.

For small(er) wars, cheap drones break everything as they can destroy your backfield. Unless of course you happen to move your backfield into orbit and beyond.

[manvillej]

I just don't see how the fuel costs of getting things up to space winning out unless production is located up there. especially since rocket launches tend to be extremely static.

More dangerously, I think that would inevitably lead to space being the battlefield. Since that area doesn't need any more shrapnel orbiting at 17,500 mph; it seems an idea best left to the drawing board. The cleanup required will make clearing mine fields seem like dusting the living room.

[ceejayoz]

> I just don't see how the fuel costs of getting things up to space winning out unless production is located up there.

Starship's in theory targeting something like a million bucks in fuel for a launch. For a military that spends more than that on individual missiles, that's peanuts.

[tsimionescu]

Starship is also in theory targetting to reach Mars in 2022.

[ceejayoz]

There's an unavoidable physical cap here.

It's fueled with methane and oxygen, and its size is known.

It can't be, say, $50m/flight in fuel for the same reason a 747's flight can't be; there's not enough space for that much fuel.

[tsimionescu]

Sure, but that's true of Saturn V as well, and of Falcon 9, and Soyuz and any other rocket you want. That didn't make space deployment a viable military strategy so far, and I think we should be skeptical of any such claim about Starship.

Also, fuel is just part of the cost of a rocket.

[ceejayoz]

> Also, fuel is just part of the cost of a rocket.

Sure. But if you blew up a 747 at the end of every trip, it'd be a small part of the total cost, not a major part.

Starship's reusability makes it very clearly not like the other examples you cite, yeah? There are lots of scenarios where the US government would pay, say, $10M to deliver a payload somewhere fast, but not $250M.

[dredmorbius]

Co-development of the SpaceX Tardis makes deadlines irrelevant.

[tofuahdude]

The prospect of cleanup duty has never stopped anyone at war. Fields of landmines maiming children for decades, unexploded ordinance in cities, etc etc.

Near earth orbit will be a field of debris until gravity takes over.

[icegreentea2]

Unclear how China will react to orbital/near-orbital launches that track near/over China in a hot war situation.

If I were China, I'd probably be backdoor signalling that they would consider these launches to be potential nuclear strikes to try to get them off the table.

[__turbobrew__]

China could also prove to the world their ASAT capabilities by shooting down military orbital payloads which overfly their territory.

[tsimionescu]

I'd bet China would like nothing more than the USA basing its future war strategy on Starship, with its long history of fictional timelines and capacities.

[throwawayqqq11]

Have you considered the cost difference of drone re-entry vs commercial container logistics?

There are many options to deliver drones to a location and i dont think from orbit is the most viable one, let alone moving any production there.

[pphysch]

Opportunity for what?

[lostlogin]

The next war is going to need the US to do something pretty spectacular if it’s going to reclaim the ground it’s lost in the Iran war.

The situation there is an utter joke, and shows no sign of wrapping up any time soon.

[Robotbeat]

That’s because there’s no political will for ground forces by the US because it’s a dumb war. If there was political will, then the area around the Hormuz strait would’ve been seized, as well as the nuclear sites secured. Carpet bombing, too, not just surgical strikes.

[dredmorbius]

It's not merely that the US has not, will not, and/or can not put boots on the ground.

It's that regional bases and sea-based platforms from which the US has operated with impunity in previous conflicts, as recently as a decade ago, are no longer safe from retaliation. This puts the US, its forces, and perhaps more significantly its friends and allies in the region at risk in both the present and any future conflict(s).

[lostlogin]

> That’s because there’s no political will for ground forces by the US because it’s a dumb war.

It’s all very well claiming you can win, but when you don’t that’s the result you’re stuck with.

[elzbardico]

Most analysts doubt the US, on its present phase, has the capabilities of doing so.

[greekrich92]

Not sure if you've noticed, but none of that SpaceX stuff is going to happen

[marcusverus]

L̶a̶u̶n̶c̶h̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶n̶e̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶p̶r̶i̶v̶a̶t̶e̶l̶y̶ ̶f̶u̶n̶d̶e̶d̶

̶F̶i̶r̶s̶t̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶r̶e̶u̶s̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶i̶m̶p̶o̶s̶s̶i̶b̶l̶e̶.̶ ̶

̶F̶i̶r̶s̶t̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ ̶r̶e̶u̶s̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶n̶’̶t̶ ̶e̶c̶o̶n̶o̶m̶i̶c̶a̶l̶.̶ ̶

̶M̶e̶g̶a̶c̶o̶n̶s̶t̶a̶l̶l̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶L̶E̶O̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶a̶ ̶p̶i̶p̶e̶ ̶d̶r̶e̶a̶m̶.̶ ̶

̶S̶t̶a̶r̶s̶h̶i̶p̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶n̶e̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶f̶l̶y̶.̶ ̶

Starfall will never happen!

[shimman]

No serious really argued that; what they argued is that a Mars colony is impractical, interplanetary travel as a fantasy, and data centers in space as delusional.

[Robotbeat]

Having followed SpaceX since the beginning, this is not true at all. People doubted every single step. Industry experts did.

[noosphr]

People doubt the timelines, not the claims. The timelines are pure fantasy and have been since the start.

[ceejayoz]

> People doubt the timelines, not the claims.

People doubted the claims, too. Particularly landing and re-use.

Concrete example: https://spaceflightnow.com/2015/04/13/ula-plans-to-introduce...

[Robotbeat]

Nah, it was everything. Everyone expects aerospace timelines to slip. That wasn’t the issue. I had an aerospace greybeard (guidance and navigation expert… nice guy, btw) from a civilian space agency that you would recognize tell me that booster landing on a droneship was “impossible.”