The commission claims the NK sats are in said orbit, passing over US and allies whatever that's worth.ladajo wrote:1. The platform needs to be in a useful orbit, or be maneuverable.
Would some kind of crude timer/timing signal work? Maybe even a link to a NK ship in the pacific or Atlantic if need be?ladajo wrote:The platform requires space tracking and surveillance support or organic reliable position reporting in order to conduct targeting.
3. The platform requires a ground control segment and link to manage its operations (there is a time aspect to this as well as geographic, beyond the actual functional process itself).
In any case why would it require precision targeting? Your target is the "center" of the continental USA; relatively easy target I would think; if your off a little bit so what?
Why not just detonate the bomb (destroying the sat to, who cares..no need to "release") in orbit when is over the US? Why would it need to deorbit? from the link:ladajo wrote:4. The platform needs to be able to perform a controlled deorbit, or payload release in order for the payload to reach an altitude useful for desired EMP effects.
One detonated at an altitude of 294 miles would affect most of the continental US.
How high (don't know) are you supposing the NK satellite(s) are that they would need to "deorbit" before detonating?
Assuming they have said weapon on/inside the satellite...how do we know the sat itself isn't simply a bomb? Yes assuming they have the means to remote detonate it...but sure even a ground based nuke has either a timer or some kind of remote detonator (with lesser range of course)? As for "interference" that assumes we are actively trying to "jam" said NK sat; don't know if that is even true.ladajo wrote: 5. Deployment of the payload needs to include a means to ensure proper fusing for desired effects at the right time.
6. There needs to be a weapon, with a useful shelf life, on the platform.
7. The platform needs to survive until employment either organically, or with protection against external interference.
8. The weapon needs to survive until employment either organically, or with protection against external interference.
This is the easiest one. The "target" would be us and our allies; if you believe the commission's findings doesn't seem we have done much of anything to protect our civilian infrastructure; maybe our military assets are better protected?ladajo wrote: 9. The target set need to be susceptible to desired effects.