Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work? [message #411337 is a reply to message #411294] Tue, 28 September 2021 09:13 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma:
Senior Member
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 12:10:34 -0400, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 04:24:58 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2021-09-25, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2021 07:19:54 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On 25 Sep 2021 04:22:50 -0300, Mike Spencer
>>>> <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>>> >Yes, I do know that. But the US Navy operates *war*ships. If the
>>>> >Navy is ever again confronted with an actual war -- something beyond
>>>> >sending helicopter gunships or drones after "insurgents" or showing
>>>> >the flag in the South China Sea -- against a capable opponent,
>>>> >GPS/satnav is going to be the opponent's early target. Naval mariners
>>>> >have long had the attitude that they should be prepared to cope when X
>>>> >fails for almost all values of X.
>>>>
>>>> Satnav isn't that easy to kill you know. It's not like you can shoot
>>>> one down with a MiG 21. Besides, there are 4 different systems. To
>>>> render satnav unusable would require destroying upwards of 100
>>>> different satellites.
>>>
>>> From what I read there are 31 (US) GPS satellites in orbit. Cannot find
>>> out the distance to one to another. Might be less than 1000
>>> kilometers. If one nuke is fired at a distance of 500 kilometers between
>>> two satellites it might take out both of them. So you (China, or who ever
>>> is the enemy in a future war) need 15 nukes to take out the whole
>>> system. Shouldn't be a problem. Should be even enough to take down only a
>>> few of them to make the system useless.
>>
>> Not really. If you can pick up three satellites you have a 2D position.
>> Four satellites will give you a 3D position. Five will give you RAIM
>> (redundant autonomous integrity monitoring). As long as you have that
>> much of a subset in view, you can still navigate, although perhaps at
>> reduced precision.
>>
>> Occasionally NOTAMs (notices to airmen) are issued warning about possible
>> interruptions to GPS service. They specify a time range when GPS signals
>> may become unreliable within a certain radius of a given spot (smaller
>> radii at low altitudes, larger ones at higher altitudes). The specified
>> location is always at a military base; they're experimenting with jamming
>> the signals.
>
> In addition to what Charlie says:
>
> There are four constellations. We have one, Russia has one, the EU
> has one, and China has one. India is working on one. In a war in
> which the US is involved, we can count on access to at least two of
> those.
>
> Andreas could not find out the distance between the satellites because
> there is no fixed distance. They are in 6 orbital planes with 4 or
> more satellites per plane, at an orbital radius of roughly 16503
> miles. The gory details can be found in
> https://www.gps.gov/technical/ps/2020-SPS-performance-standa rd.pdf.
> You may find
> https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/av s/offices/aam/cami/library/online_libraries/aerospace_medici ne/tutorial/media/iii.4.1.4_describing_orbits.pdf
> helpful in understanding the nomenclature used.
>
> Calculating the actual closest approach is more effort than I want to
> go into for a casual conversation. For a rough estimate of the
> distance between them consider a sphere of radius 16503 miles. That
> has an area of 3,422,438,583 square miles. Divide that by 24 and you
> get 142601607 square miles per satellite. Figure the radius of a
> circle of that area and you get 6737. Double that and you have 13474
> miles. Very very rough estimate, and will vary.

The problem with your calculation is that assumes the satellites are equally
likely to be anywhere around the planet, when in fact by your statement they are
in one of six orbital planes. I don't know what the width of those planes is,
but go ahead and calculate their total area, taking into account where they
overlap. I'll let you simplify the problem by assuming flat bands, instead of
matching the Earth's curvature. I'm sure the total area is much smaller.
Targeting the area where one or more planes intersect may increase
effectiveness.

I don't have any major problem with the rest of your analysis, which leads me to
suggest that a far more practical method to take out the GPS network would be to
launch a payload of small ball bearings into the same orbital plane but going in
the other direction from the satellites. The collateral damage from setting off
a Kessler Syndrome may be very high, but hey, war is hell, right?


> Next, there's the notion of using a nuclear weapon to kill two
> satellites. Let's look at that. Assume the weapon yield is 60
> megatons. The largest nuclear weapon ever demonstrated (Tsar Bomba,
> Soviet test AN602) had a yield of 50-58 megatons depending on whose
> data you believe so that is a reasonable limit. There are no currently
> operational launch systems which could carry a weapon that size to the
> altitude required to attack GPS.
>
> Blast effects. In air the overpressure at 40 miles would be down to 1
> psi. At that overpressure breaking windows is the major effect.
> That's in air--space is a vacuum so the blast effects occur over a
> much smaller radius.
>
> Thermal effects: Beyond 50 miles the thermal intensity is enough to
> produce a sunburn in humans.
>
> Radiation: A Tsar Bomba sized weapon could produce enough radiation
> to damage unshielded rad-hard ICs at up to about 7500 miles. The
> amount of shielding installed on GPS satellites does not appear to be
> available in unclassified documents. At the
>
> EMP:
> This is the one that people always trot out. EMP is an atmospheric
> effect--it is the result of interaction of the nuclear weapon with
> both the magnetic field and the atmosphere and depends on gamma rays
> stripping electrons from atoms in the atmosphere. Its nature is that
> it is directed downward, not upward and there's not enough atmosphere
> at the altitude of GPS satellites to generate an effective E1 or E2
> pulse at their altitude. An E3 pulse could still occur but it
> requires very long transmission lines to have an effect, and that is
> something that satellites do not have.
>
> Intensification of the Van Allen Belt:
> This is something that was demonstrated in several US and Soviet
> nuclear tests. It is not an issue for GPS as they are above the lower
> belt and below the upper one.
>
> Bottom line:
> Trying to take out two satellites with one nuclear weapon is unlikely
> to take out either and would require a Starship/Long March 9/Saturn
> V/N1 class launch vehicle, none of which exist in operational form at
> this time. And if there is to be more than 1 such attempt there will
> have to be hardened silos for such vehicles, which again do not exist
> anywhere at this time--after the first attempt the launch facility
> would become a priority target.
>
> Note also that ICBMs are not designed to attack satellites. They
> could be repurposed to do so but it would require essentially
> reworking them into orbital launchers and their payload would be
> significantly reduced.
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: ISO CD image
Next Topic: book review: Broad Band: The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the Internet
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Apr 19 07:05:40 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00677 seconds