jtk@mordor.s1.gov (Jordan Kare) (08/27/88)
In article <65053@sun.uucp> kwatts%tahquitz@Sun.COM (Kevin L. Watts) writes: >! I know this isn't the place to discuss fiction but I was wondering >how you all feel about the FEASABILITY of this idea... > > Canada, fearing a war between USA and USSR, and the damage that could >befall when both sides shootdown the other sides missles over canada, built >giant canons, filled them with an enormous amount of debris, and shot it all ^^^^^^ >into orbit. The premise was there would be so much junk up there that any >missile would be destroyed if it passed through. At last! A canonical solution! Jordin (stick to your guns) Kare .
leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (08/28/88)
In article <65053@sun.uucp> kwatts%tahquitz@Sun.COM (Kevin L. Watts) writes:
<! I know this isn't the place to discuss fiction but I was wondering
<how you all feel about the FEASABILITY of this idea which was the theme
<of one of the stories in a book I have.
<
< Canada, fearing a war between USA and USSR, and the damage that could
<befall when both sides shootdown the other sides missles over canada, built
<giant canons, filled them with an enormous amount of debris, and shot it all
<into orbit. The premise was there would be so much junk up there that any
<missile would be destroyed if it passed through.
<
< Is this Theoretically possible given the trajectories of ICBM's?
<Bombers could still deliver their payloads in any case. May be it was to
<thwart some orbital weapons platform or something. So no one could safely
<launch anything.
I figured I'd better expand on this as I am somewhat curious as well, having
read the same story.
The "cannons" are shafts sunk into solid rock, and use shaped charge *nuclear*
explosives to fire the junk into orbits. (think nuclear-powered scattergun)
--
Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."