[removed]

If it’s not in orbit or attempting to orbit then it’s okay to shoot down. It’s pretty simple.

And right after the war, maybe we grow up. That's my hope. I don't think the war gets avoided unless we start drowning first. After either, we move forward.

When were we trying to define space? We are talking about valid surveillance tactics. You don't need a horizontal vector at all if the earth rotates below you and you have enough.... altitude.

Suborbital isn't a valid surveillance method because that is otherwise known as an ICBM and its gonna look exactly like one on radar. Which, returns to my original point:

>Its not fuzzy at all. You are either in orbit, or you are not.

If you aren't in orbit then you are a threat and a target.

Actually, the GPS satellites are not geosynchronous satellites, which would imply orbits at 22,236 miles above sea level for circular orbits. From Earth, only those orbits appear stationary (in equatorial orbit) or at least varying within a relatively small area (if not in equatorial orbit).

The GPS satellites are in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), around 12,540 miles. The GPS satellites do not hover over one area. They don't have to hover. Each satellite broadcasts its own four dimensional position in spacetime (3 space coordinates and the time, kept by accurate atomic clocks). Based on the calculated time delays from at least 4 satellites, a GPS receiver can uniquely determine the it's position.

See the Wikipedia article on GPS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System

and on geosynchronous orbit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosynchronous_orbit

[removed]

>The kármán line isn't even in space

Earth's exosphere extends out past the moon. Any definition of "space" will be squishy. Satellites in low Earth orbit experience drag, too. Objects at 100km can complete multiple orbits around the Earth before drag pulls them down into the atmosphere. I'd be willing to call that space if someone wanted to argue about it.

Apparently so. Elsewhere in this thread someone is hard on for "the end of nations replaced by a world administration will happen after we all die from climate change, and that's how we'll go spacefaring peacefully"

Considering the USAF has plans to fly the B-52 until at least 2050 I don't see that happening. I'm sure Ukraine and Russia, Pakistan and India, Azerbaijan and Armenia, and Israel and Iran are all just itching to give up their sovereignty and borders to form a sunshine and rainbows world government with each other.

But I'm with the other guy. Fix our planet because day dreaming about terra forming Mars to solve it is just that: day dreaming.

>18 km out of... 100km. The kármán line isn't even in space, in that you still encounter drag and orbit degradation.

I mean you still encounter drag and orbit degradation way higher than the karman line though. The ISS also encounters drag and orbit degradation still.

Dude whatever you are doing to make enough in the first 80 to retire for another 420, I want in!

I think it's more likely climate change plunges us into a third world war instead of a sunshine and rainbows world wide mutual aid commune but okay.

Never heard of geosynchronous artsats?

There are at least 3 physical arguments about where space "begins". The first was explained well by Shrike99 - a theoretical limit from von Karman that aircraft around this altitude would have to travel faster than orbital velocity to obtain enough lift to support itself. At first rounded to 100 km/62 miles in most of the world, and maybe really about 84 km/52 miles in more recent calculations. A second aerodynamic basis is a practical one. As I understand it, the USAF 50 mile definition (besides rounding down from Von Karman) is the lowest a satellite can go and still complete one orbit (because of air friction, although that would seem to depend on the shape of the satellite, so that might not be a really solid argument). A third one is not an aerodynamic argument, but from a simple observation that there is a rapid increase in atmospheric temperature below 100 km. That is suggesting that there is a qualitative boundary of sorts at that altitude, so why not call it "space" above that. It's all somewhat arbitrary anyway.

In any case, as others pointed out, all these definitions are well above the balloon height.

What does smashing into us territory have to do with how we define space? In fact suborbital means you're going to smash anyway. In fact, altitude has 0 to do with where you land if there's no horizontal vector.

Altitude is correlated to distance traveled down range unless you have a rocket motor with infinite fuel. Please, show my the viable launch position that would achieve the desired surveillance at a lower altitude than a satellite could that isn't then going to smash into US territory somewhere.

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

|Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |FAA|Federal Aviation Administration| |GEO|Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)| |ICBM|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |LEO|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |MEO|Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)| |SSTO|Single Stage to Orbit| | |Supersynchronous Transfer Orbit| |USAF|United States Air Force|

|Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |apogee|Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)|

^(8 acronyms in this thread; )^(the most compressed thread commented on today)^( has acronyms.)
^([Thread #8578 for this sub, first seen 18th Feb 2023, 02:40]) ^[FAQ] ^([Full list]) ^[Contact] ^([Source code])

I could throw a go pro over a prison yard and get surveillance capability. Suborbital apogee can be any altitude.

[removed]

[removed]

Not what I said. i said it will take 40 years from whenever we start Willingly, no not yet. But in 5 10 years when we start diieing back from global warming, as China and USA have huge demographics problems, yeah, it starts becoming feasible. Eventually it gets bad enough, we either war ot drown. Humans may start becoming reasonable.

Yah, I think all the short term thinking is coming due soon now. :-) The next let them eat cake moment approaches, and then yup, we might be ready to cooperate.

Got it - you have no intention of learning. Hope your bubble is at least fun to stay in.

[removed]

Kinda depends on your angle and speed, but it's generally agreed to be above 100km above the surface.

It may seem wrong, but that's how GPS operates... via geosynchronous satellites in orbit all over the world.

Do you honestly believe the US, as an example, will willingly give up its sovereignty within its borders in 40 years? They currently have plans to fly the B-52 bomber for half that window.

What about China? Is the CCP going to relinquish power just for your world government idea?