news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

the missile defense agency has provided new details about the development of a space-based neutral particle beam weapon designed to disable or destroy incoming ballistic missiles that sounds like the stuff of science fiction. the u.s. missile defense agency aims to have a prototype system ready for orbital testing by 2026, under a new program called the neutral particle beam (npb) program. the last time the u.s. military explored and then abandoned the concept of particle beam weapons was the star wars program led by president ronald reagan three decades ago.

a staple of science fiction, particle beam weapons are based on real science. npb requires a source of charged particles and a way to accelerate them to near the speed of light. when this beam of charged particles hits something, it creates a laser-like effect, producing extreme heat on the target's surface and capable of burning a hole in certain materials depending on the strength of the weapon. if the particles are not powerful enough to destroy objects such as missiles or re-entry vehicles, they may still be able to penetrate the outer shell of those targets and damage internal components, much in the same way microwave weapons function.

in addition, because the particle beam reacts differently to different materials, the system may also have the ability to distinguish between real incoming warheads and decoy warheads released by intercontinental ballistic missiles. separate sensors are needed to observe the impact of the particle beam on different warheads and evaluate the results. classify. in ballistic missile defense operations, the engagement window is very short. if particle beams can be used to quickly and accurately distinguish real and fake warheads, the operational efficiency of the entire ballistic missile defense system will be greatly improved.

as early as the 1980s, space-based particle beam weapons were included in the strategic defense initiative (sdi) under president reagan. the u.s. military also hired aerospace manufacturers such as lockheed, general electric, and mcdonnell douglas to develop space-based particle beam weapons. the weapon developed an original design, and the strategic defense initiative (sdio) spent approximately $794 million on the concept between 1984 and 1993.

most notably, the famous los alamos national laboratory (lanl) collaborated with sdio in july 1989 to conduct a rocket launch beam experiment, including placing an actual particle beam system on a sounding rocket and shoot it out of the earth's atmosphere. as of 2018, this remains the highest-energy particle beam ever produced. lanl's experiment successfully demonstrated that particle beams will operate and propagate outside the atmosphere as predicted, with no unexpected side effects when launching beams into space.

in the end, sdio implemented this plan to build a huge constellation of space-based kinetic energy interceptors, code-named "brilliant pebbles". the entire program ended in 1993 just before president bill clinton took office, who renamed sdio the ballistic missile defense organization (the predecessor of the u.s. missile defense agency) and refocused efforts on ground-based missile defense.

sdio's particle beam plans proved impractical given the technology available at the time. the anticipated space-based system was very large and required a large amount of electrical energy support. nuclear power devices were the most feasible option, but it was impossible to develop a nuclear power plant that was light enough and small enough at that time. even if a functional design is feasible, there is no guarantee that it will provide the promised combat capabilities, especially against ballistic missiles in the boost phase. strike missiles during the first phase of flight are attractive because they move relatively slowly and produce a large infrared signature, making them easier to detect and track. this also means that the missile's contents can be dropped over or near the launching country, rather than being destroyed mid-flight or in the final stages of its flight.

unfortunately, missiles spend most of their boost phase moving through the atmosphere. beams emitted by space-based particle beam weapons are particularly susceptible to atmospheric distortion and deflection because particles can easily deviate from their intended impact path by colliding with other particles in the air. placing particle beam weapons in the vacuum of space makes the most sense. the vacuum environment ensures that the beam remains focused over a considerable range, creating enough energy to destroy other space objects.

in the 1960s and 1970s, the u.s. military also considered a ground-based particle beam weapon that could destroy ballistic missiles late in their flight, code-named "seesaw." the u.s. advanced research projects agency determined that a system was needed to destroy the particles. the beam travels hundreds of miles of tunnels to work properly. in order to create the necessary power supply, greek physicist nicholas christofoulos, then working at lawrence livermore national laboratory, even proposed using a nuclear bomb to create a terrifyingly large drainage hole that would allow water from the great lakes to flow into a massive underground hydraulic generator complex. needless to say, the idea was ridiculous and the entire program never left the drawing board.

in addition to these potential technical issues with the particle beam itself, boost-phase ballistic missile defense systems need to be optimally positioned to engage targets within a short time of launch. the flight time of a ballistic missile's boost phase is up to five minutes. sensors must first detect and classify the ballistic missile threat, and then senior u.s. defense officials decide whether to intercept. this operational process is quite urgent. ensuring that enough space-based particle beam weapons remain in orbit would require extensive modifications to existing space launch sites, as well as significant investments in the u.s. military's ballistic missile defense sensor architecture.

space-based particle beam weapons will also have political and legal consequences. the outer space treaty adopted by the united nations general assembly in 1967 prohibits the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in space orbit, although space-based particle beam weapons themselves do not qualify as weapons of mass destruction. sexual weapon by definition, but its nuclear power source could still trigger an outcry. a space-based arms race will be another worrying issue. currently, russia and my country have developed various anti-satellite weapons.

science, technology and other considerations have changed enough over the past 30 years to make the idea of ​​deploying particle beam weapons in orbit more feasible than during the cold war. by their nature, particle beams are difficult to detect and ultimately trace to a specific source, making it impossible to find evidence after an attack. this is why the u.s. missile defense agency has not given up on space-based particle beam weapons. but this also provides russia with material to blame the united states. as long as the united states does not give up the development of space-based particle beam weapons, russia can blame its unexplained spacecraft or satellite failures on u.s. particle beam attacks.