Hypersonic and hyper agile don't really go together. The laws of physics, particularly inertia and friction, will quickly put an end to that fantasy.
this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
31 points (100.0% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
691 readers
237 users here now
Militaria shitposting central! Post memes, tasteless jokes, and sexual cravings for military equipment and/or nuclear self-destruction!
Rules:
- Posts must abide by Piefed.social terms and conditions
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
!forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
For the other, slightly less political NCD, !noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
Besides it being a war crime, that must be committed before any war or there's no point (thus giving plenty of time for everybody to justifiably shoot you first):
-
orbits are extremely predictable and easy to spot, thus easy to attack;
-
getting things in orbit is very expensive, for what serves the same purpose of a submarine;
-
orbits are extremely spread, so you will need a ridiculous number of missiles with a ridiculously low availability.
getting things in orbit is very expensive, for what serves the same purpose of a submarine
Orbital scanning tech is getting more advanced by the year. Submarines may lose their stealth advantage by the end of the decade
We are comparing them to something that you can detect by looking up. They will never lose that advantage.
It doesn't fucking matter if the satellites are easier to detect. The job of a sub isn't to kill satellites. It's job is to stay hidden and be ready to nuke a country in a retaliatory strike as a deterrent.
Subs are slow, and very high value targets if you're looking at a potential nuclear exchange. If a sub is spotted, it's going to be added to the list of first strike targets so the attacker doesn't have to worry about retaliation.
So, putting the missiles in orbit instead of the submarine improves exactly what on that list of requirements?
The missiles will be significantly harder to hit than the submarine in a few years.
Are there missile defense systems? Yes, but taking down short range missiles is significantly easier than ICBMs or hypersonic missiles. It's like hitting a bullet with another bullet if you don't catch it early in the launch.
And you're forgetting that MIRV's are a thing. Missile defense systems have limited capacity and are expensive to field. Meanwhile you can use MIRV's to multiply the effective number of missiles you're launching for not much extra cost.
The missiles will be significantly harder to hit than the submarine in a few years.
The missiles that pass over your head in a fixed time 16 times a day?
Way to completely misread what I said.
The missiles won't be harder to hit in the future. Submarines are going to be that much easier to hit.
Are you done being a dick now?
Take a look at what invention you are talking about.
Jfc you're dense. Just shut the fuck up
Back to back "international warfare laws are merely suggestions" posts today, I see.
Honestly, Russia got plastered all over the news for trying to put rockets in space multiple times in my life, if another nation tried it then they could expect the same or higher level of sanctions and loss of trust.
Back to back “international warfare laws are merely suggestions” posts today, I see.
what's laws
Geneva Suggestions of 2026