• Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Use a bigger rock. I might change the cost by hundreds of millions, and still be less than the billions in development and production for a nuke.

      • remon@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Where do you get these rocks though? There is actually a similar concept that uses tungsten rods instead of rocks.

        But the entire thing isn’t really practical. If you want the ability to strike any place on earth in a reasonable time, you’d to have hundreds of tungsten rod equipped satellites (or rocks with rocket engines attached to them) in orbit at the same time.

        I’m not sure it would actually be cheaper than just using nukes on ballistic missiles.

        • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          The expense of a delivering the nuke is negligible in comparison to the cost and effort of building a nuke. So much so, that large rocks are more economical than building a nuke at this point.

          • remon@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Building nukes isn’t that expensive. The most expensive part is probably building the enrichment facilities, but that’s a one-time investment. Once you have all the material, a nuke isn’t that complicated to build. A bunch of students basically designed one that was deemed to be functional.

            On the other hand, launching hundreds, possibly thousands of multi-ton projectiles into orbit is extremely expensive. And of course you have to maintain them in space somehow, possibly for decades. Either that or you have to de-orbit and replace them, which would mean regularly bombarding the ocean or some desert …

            It’s just not practical. Even if it was I highly doubt it would be cheaper.