• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -159 months ago

    I’m pretty sure that starlink satellites are orders of magnitudes more expensive to manufacture and deploy than the weapons that can target them.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      199 months ago

      Really? You can put up 50 starlinks at a time for tens of millions of dollars, whereas asats need a more expensive an maneuverable kill vehicle and a launch for each one with lots more complicated targeting and maneuvering. It’s pretty hard to track and follow something down moving so fast through space and hit it. Plus Russia just doesn’t have the launch capacity to put up that much mass to orbit.

      • @IphtashuFitz
        link
        English
        59 months ago

        Not to mention that SpaceX has designed things so that they can piggyback starlink deployments on the back of other commercial launches. So, for example, AT&T pays them $25 million to launch a new telecom satellite, and they toss in another dozen or so starlink satellites along with it.

        AT&T pays for the majority of the launch costs and starlink benefits from it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      149 months ago

      How do you know that? You’re launching an entire rocket to kill one satellite, that can’t be cheap.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -19 months ago

      Maybe, but one of the best traits about Musk is he’s willing to throw money at this regardless of profit. So he’s gunna keep throwing up more of these satellites, while Russia’s rocket supply is only going to get harder to resupply for the foreseeable future.