Comments on: Weak Standard for Space Rods

By: BonerDudr

BonerDudr — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:13:39 +0000

RODS FROM GOD YA’LL!!!

By: Joe Schmoe

Joe Schmoe — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:38:56 +0000

This is not a new concept. Way back in the '80s Lockheed worked on a system called "Spears from Space". They were designed to fit on the D5 missile so they could be launched from subs. That way they could have higher availablity for a variety of targets. They were designed with Be for reentry heating with a movable slug of metal inside the main tube to enhance the impact effects. They had a cone on the tail for speed/stability control. They were intended to take out Soviets subs by dropping a load of them in the general area. If one spear found the target it could easily go through all the decks and sink the sub. It was designed to hit targets within 150 feet or so of the surface. Never was deployed because of the "well, duh" effect when one considers that the Soviets would see the launch of a D5 and not know if it was carrying nukes or inert spears. In other words, if you used them, you'd be starting a nuke war, even if you weren't launching nukes. Bad concept then, bad concept now.

By: Hans-Ole

Hans-Ole — Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:16:56 +0000

I would just say to all of you, that if it hasent been for Oncle Sam I would be speaking german or russian by now. I live in Denmark and somebody has to dominate the high ground, and I prefer Oncle Sam instead of China or Russia. They too has spaceweapons in progress so why not deter them with a weapon like rods from god ???. That would make a small nuke-explosion and a chockwave through the concrete, making the concrete pulverising, because the molecular structure cant hold together with such a sudden chockwave. Thank god for Oncle Sam resourching in such weapons so that we as a free west can deter others from doing bad things.
Hans-Ole from Denmark.

By: Eric S.

Eric S. — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 03:39:50 +0000

So, people still buy that whole “vaporizes on impact” thing? While there would be *some* vaporization and/or melting, mostly what you ought to have is simply a solid that’s past it’s plastic limit. BTW, the rule of thumb is at 3 km/sec, an object’s KE is the equivalent of that same mass of TNT (for reference sake).
The real argument against the Rods from God is: how do you target the thing and guide it in when the plasma sheath from plowing through the atmosphere at that speed will eliminate the use of GPS and you’d need a REALLY stable IMU to carry on from the last update. After all, we’re not talking 100 m CEP being good enough, you’re going to need something on the order of 10 m. And if you can locate the target that precisely to begin with, why wouldn’t you build something like a hypersonic cruise missile to take the target out, rather than put all that mass in orbit. Finally, if I’m the bad guy, I take apart the best tank I can and duplicate a scaled-up version of the front glacis over top of my underground facility.
Finally, on the bright side, the deeply buried target generally doesn’t move much, so, unless you get specific intel that person X will be in the bunker between 10:00 and 10:05, you don’t need to worry about the absentee ratio much. Just wait until the next satellite comes along and spank your target.
– Eric.

By: JSAllison

JSAllison — Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:21:38 +0000

If excess velocity is a problem, how about hanging a cone on the backend as an airbrake? Figuring out the size needed doesn’t sound like it’d be rocket science.
In hearing about the exotic materials proposed for these things, well, I can’t help but remember that all the destruction that has resulted over the years from mother nature’s bombardment system has been done with rocks.

By: paul

paul — Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:08:41 +0000

I HATE CHINAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

By: TravisA

TravisA — Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:33:28 +0000

I read a Rand Corporation report called “Space Weapons, Earth Wars”; the report stated that liquid tungsten is pyrophoric, so considering that, and all the whining that would come from the use of “radioactive” depleted uranium, tungsten would be a better choice

By: kelley b.

kelley b. — Sat, 11 Jun 2005 05:02:49 +0000

You can count on it: they might advertise the God Rods as tungsten, but they’ll most likely be depleted uranium alloy with a temperature-resistant ceramic outer coating to act as a heat shield and slow oxidation.
An ionized plasma might dissipate in the atmosphere and wouldn’t penetrate or transfer kinetic energy.
Ceramic-coated depleted uranium would penetrate, carry lots of mass for kinetic energy transfer, and burn ferociously. It might also leave a toxic radioactive residue for a final long term effect.

By: Cranky Observer

Cranky Observer — Sat, 11 Jun 2005 03:18:20 +0000

Does it really matter that the rods would vaporize? I would think that the effect would be based on energy transfer, not mechanical penetration, and that would be essentially the same regardless of the phase of the material striking the target.
I am sure that is wrong for some reason — enlightenment please!
Cranky

By: EARL KIRKMAN

EARL KIRKMAN — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:47:54 +0000

Oh pleeeeeease.……it was such a good concept in those science fiction novels.….can we at least have the intelligent tanks with the energy disruptor bolts