Ideally internet debates wouldn’t get THAT heated though.
Wogi@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Many years ago my grandfather was involved in an air force test of aerial defense platforms that used balloons.
The idea was you could station these things all around the country and at the first sign of an attack you could have missiles launched from 10k feet to anywhere from anywhere.
The test encountered two problems that caused them to abandon the idea.
These balloons were incredibly easy to shoot down. Which would, presumably, rain volatile rocket fuel and munitions down on whatever was beneath them.
And if a missile launched, but failed to separate completely from it’s housing, it would carry that balloon on a wild, unpredictable trajectory, until it collided with something or it decided it had reached it’s detonation time.
BelatedPeacock@lemmy.world 2 months ago
potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id 2 months ago
Ideally, however, these would not be shot down.
Wogi@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s just it, they’re an easy target, and communications infrastructure is one of the first things you want to control or eliminate if you’re taking hostile territory.
Tenniswaffles@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
Yes, and? I don’t believe these are replacing any existing infrastructure, but are for places that have no infrastructure for the internet. They could drastically improve things in those areas, and if those place became a warzone sometime in the future they’d probably be pretty fucked with or without proper land based infrastructure.