DOKAW

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-06-10 02:40pm

De-Orbital Kinetic Assault Weapon. It's a notion for Star Wars.

Orbital hunks of super-dense metal that can be removed from orbit and sent hurtling to the ground as artifical asteroids. Satellites designed to serve as "dumb" bombs - or even space-based rams!

Feasible? Discuss!

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-06-10 03:06pm

Assuming that as navigational technology improves, it will be a trivial matter to drop such a weapon on target, the main problem is getting the weapons into space to begin with--it'll cost a ton of money for each individual bomb, far more than a JDAM dropped from a B-52. Against missiles, it might have some promise, since they wouldn't need to be very big to puncture a fuel tank or damage a warhead badly enough it doesn't detonate.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-06-10 03:13pm

Intercepting missiles? You mean by attaching rocket engines.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-06-10 03:23pm

Axis Kast wrote:Intercepting missiles? You mean by attaching rocket engines.

I would assume that's how they're deorbited, unless you're talking about some kind of fractional orbital artillery.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-10 03:57pm

A nuke is cheaper, unless you want very small yields in which case a cruise missile or bomb works better while also being far cheaper. And even if the item you want to drop is quite small, you still going to need a bunch of expensive communication and navigational electronics, along with a big engine and fuel supply to maneuver it onto course.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-06-10 05:27pm

True ...

Although in some cases, nuclear weapons are prohibited (see N. Korea) and conventional weapons (save for the MOAB) lack the striking power.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2003-06-10 06:59pm

It seems like a complex, expensive system that only does things we can already do cheaper with weapons we already have.

IOW, a bad idea.