• matcha_addict@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m pretty sure that starlink satellites are orders of magnitudes more expensive to manufacture and deploy than the weapons that can target them.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      8 months ago

      Really? You can put up 50 starlinks at a time for tens of millions of dollars, whereas asats need a more expensive an maneuverable kill vehicle and a launch for each one with lots more complicated targeting and maneuvering. It’s pretty hard to track and follow something down moving so fast through space and hit it. Plus Russia just doesn’t have the launch capacity to put up that much mass to orbit.

      • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not to mention that SpaceX has designed things so that they can piggyback starlink deployments on the back of other commercial launches. So, for example, AT&T pays them $25 million to launch a new telecom satellite, and they toss in another dozen or so starlink satellites along with it.

        AT&T pays for the majority of the launch costs and starlink benefits from it.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 months ago

      How do you know that? You’re launching an entire rocket to kill one satellite, that can’t be cheap.

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yes, it is probably expensive, but a satellite is probably even more expensive, and not just by a little.

        • B0rax@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          I don’t think it is… one of the satellites cost USD 250k in 2019. it is likely cheaper now.

          There have been Anti Satellite Weapon tests (for example from China) to see if it is feasible. The cost for such an attack would be much much higher than 250k (we are talking multiple millions)

          • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Hmm you made me think and if they use their reusable rockets tech and maybe some other similar things, it may be cheaper in the end because they save a lot of money in places where others don’t

    • UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Maybe, but one of the best traits about Musk is he’s willing to throw money at this regardless of profit. So he’s gunna keep throwing up more of these satellites, while Russia’s rocket supply is only going to get harder to resupply for the foreseeable future.