Sub-orbital bombardment.

[RogerRanger]

Just walking around my field thinking about the future of naval warfare, and I believe it comes down to hyper-sonic missiles, SSN's and orbital/sub-orbital bombardment. We know the missiles and subs, but not much about the bombardment.

So I was thinking how it could work. Basically you build a bunker to house the sub-orbital bombardment platform, with enough energy and cooling to use the platform system and the kinetic energy weapon, you would bring the platform up to the correct height, for off a magazine of 5-20 thousand pebbles at a target, then bring the platform back down into the bunker for protection. Also using direct energy weapons to shield the platform and destroy income attacks. You would house the platform under a lake and mountain, to limit exposure time and have the cooling/energy production and water/mountain protecting the bunker from income attack. I would then set up 7 of these bunkers in the UK. 3 in the highlands, two in the Lake district and 2 in Snowdonia.

I also think putting kinetic and direct energy weapons on ships is wrong headed, because they require too much energy and cooling and you would need to lob the projectiles over thing to hit a target.

 

[Tonyukuk]

I remember when everyone was talking about Project Thor, an orbital weapon concept which would use tungsten rods as kinetic weapons of mass destruction. Only problem is that they need to be pretty big and will be too heavy to send into space in a cost effective manner. Furthermore, they aren't exactly as destructive as nukes, a lot of news articles and videos exaggerated their capabilities. Sure they could flatten blocks, destroy bunkers and bases, but they would need to be MASSIVE to destroy an entire city. Of course the benefit is there is no nuclear fallout, but they just aren't feasible weapons in my opinion.

When a new type of non-nuclear bomb, kinetic or energy weapon is made which is light enough to send into orbit, yet effective enough to flatten entire cities, things will begin to get scary.

 

[Lordimperator]

Project Thor, an orbital weapon concept which would use tungsten rods as kinetic

Sounds like GI Joe movie secret weapon

 

[RogerRanger]

I remember when everyone was talking about Project Thor, an orbital weapon concept which would use tungsten rods as kinetic weapons of mass destruction. Only problem is that they need to be pretty big and will be too heavy to send into space in a cost effective manner. Furthermore, they aren't exactly as destructive as nukes, a lot of news articles and videos exaggerated their capabilities. Sure they could flatten blocks, destroy bunkers and bases, but they would need to be MASSIVE to destroy an entire city. Of course the benefit is there is no nuclear fallout, but they just aren't feasible weapons in my opinion.

When a new type of non-nuclear bomb, kinetic or energy weapon is made which is light enough to send into orbit, yet effective enough to flatten entire cities, things will begin to get scary.

Yeah the space or orbital bombardment is a non-starter for the UK. The US/China/Russia maybe, but not the UK.

I would use it as a tactical and operation weapon, not a strategic one. So you see a formation of Russian tanks moving towards your position, you send up a platform, fire off 20,000 pebbles, damage the Russian tanks, break up the formation to give you the operational advantage. Then Russian S-400's are in position to shoot down your aircraft, once it fires, you get its position and rain down thousands of rocks, destroying its system and functionality. Same goes for surface ships and even enemy aircraft on the ground. It would be a simpler way to do it and you have added protection from the earth, which you can't get in space. I am going to write to the MOD about this.

 

[TheInsider]

I remember when everyone was talking about Project Thor, an orbital weapon concept which would use tungsten rods as kinetic weapons of mass destruction. Only problem is that they need to be pretty big and will be too heavy to send into space in a cost effective manner. Furthermore, they aren't exactly as destructive as nukes, a lot of news articles and videos exaggerated their capabilities. Sure they could flatten blocks, destroy bunkers and bases, but they would need to be MASSIVE to destroy an entire city. Of course the benefit is there is no nuclear fallout, but they just aren't feasible weapons in my opinion.

When a new type of non-nuclear bomb, kinetic or energy weapon is made which is light enough to send into orbit, yet effective enough to flatten entire cities, things will begin to get scary.

Why not carry it in pieces and assemble it in space. Thanks to Elon Musk this can be a reality. Starship has insane cargo capacity and magnitudes cheaper compared to earlier spacecraft.

 

[RogerRanger]

Why not carry it in pieces and assemble it in space. Thanks to Elon Musk this can be a reality. Starship has insane cargo capacity and magnitudes cheaper compared to earlier spacecraft.

Those people are going into space to harvest raw materials. Nothing more than that. There was a book by George Friedman called the next 100 years, in which he talks about moon bases and the Japanese using massive rocks hidden on the dark side of the moon to attack US space installations.