{"id":44392,"date":"2025-03-13T20:52:00","date_gmt":"2025-03-13T12:52:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp-productionenv-bjg9h2g2bgg5b8aa.southeastasia-01.azurewebsites.net\/news\/space-force-wants-six-kinds-of-space-weapons-including-anti-satellite-lasers\/"},"modified":"2025-03-13T20:52:00","modified_gmt":"2025-03-13T12:52:00","slug":"space-force-wants-six-kinds-of-space-weapons-including-anti-satellite-lasers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/news\/space-force-wants-six-kinds-of-space-weapons-including-anti-satellite-lasers\/","title":{"rendered":"Space Force wants six kinds of space weapons\u2014including anti-satellite lasers"},"content":{"rendered":"

DENVER\u2014The US Space Force lacks the full range of space weapons China and Russia are adding to their arsenals, and military leaders say it\u2019s time to close the gap.<\/p>\n

Gen. Chance Saltzman, the Space Force\u2019s chief of space operations, told reporters at the Air & Space Forces Association Warfare Symposium last week that he wants more options to present to national leaders if an adversary threatens the US fleet of national security satellites used for surveillance, communication, navigation, missile warning, and perhaps soon, missile defense.<\/p>\n

In prepared remarks, Saltzman outlined in new detail why the Space Force should be able to go on the offense in an era of orbital warfare. Later, in a roundtable meeting with reporters, he briefly touched on the how.<\/p>\n

The Space Force\u2019s top general has discussed the concept of \u201cspace superiority\u201d before. This is analogous to air superiority\u2014think of how US and allied air forces dominated the skies in wartime over the last 30 years in places like Iraq, the Balkans, and Afghanistan.<\/p>\n

In order to achieve space superiority, US forces must first control the space domain by \u201cemploying kinetic and non-kinetic means to affect adversary capabilities through disruption, degradation, and even destruction, if necessary,\u201d Saltzman said.<\/p>\n

Kinetic? Imagine a missile or some other projectile smashing into an enemy satellite. Non-kinetic? This category involves jamming, cyberattacks, and directed-energy weapons, like lasers or microwave signals, that could disable spacecraft in orbit.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt includes things like orbital warfare and electromagnetic warfare,\u201d Saltzman said. These capabilities could be used offensively or defensively. In December, Ars reported on the military\u2019s growing willingness to talk publicly about offensive space weapons, something US officials long considered taboo for fear of sparking a cosmic arms race.<\/p>\n

Officials took this a step further at the warfare symposium in Colorado. Saltzman said China and Russia, which military leaders consider America\u2019s foremost strategic competitors, are moving ahead of the United States with technologies and techniques to attack satellites in orbit.<\/p>\n

This new ocean<\/h2>\n

For the first time in more than a century, warfare is entering a new physical realm. By one popular measure, the era of air warfare began in 1911, when an Italian pilot threw bombs out of his airplane over Libya during the Italo-Turkish War. Some historians might trace airborne warfare to earlier conflicts, when reconnaissance balloons offered eagle-eyed views of battlefields and troop movements. Land and sea combat began in ancient times.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

\u201cNone of us were alive when the other domains started being contested,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cIt was just natural. It was just a part of the way things work.\u201d<\/p>\n

Five years since it became a new military service, the Space Force is in an early stage of defining what orbital warfare actually means. First, military leaders stopped considering space as a benign environment, where threats from the harsh environment of space reign supreme.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Artist\u2019s illustration of a satellite\u2019s destruction in space.<\/p>\n

Credit:
\n Aerospace Corporation<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n

\u201cThat shift from benign environment to a war-fighting domain, that was pretty abrupt,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cWe had to mature language. We had to understand what was the right way to talk about that progression. So as a Space Force dedicated to it, we\u2019ve been progressing our vocabulary. We\u2019ve been saying, \u2018This is what we want to focus on.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe realized, you know what, defending is one thing, but look at this architecture (from China). They\u2019re going to hold our forces at risk. Who\u2019s responsible for that? And clearly the answer is the Space Force,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cWe say, \u2018OK, we\u2019ve got to start to solve for that problem.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWell, how do militaries talk about that? We talk about conducting operations, and that includes offense and defense,\u201d he continued. \u201cSo it\u2019s more of a maturation of the role and the responsibilities that a new service has, just developing the vocabulary, developing the doctrine, operational concepts, and now the equipment and the training. It\u2019s just part of the process.\u201d<\/p>\n

Of course, this will all cost money. Congress approved a $29 billion budget for the Space Force in 2024, about $4 billion more than NASA received but just 3.5 percent of the Pentagon\u2019s overall budget. Frank Kendall, secretary of the Air Force under President Biden, said last year that the Space Force\u2019s budget is \u201cgoing to need to double or triple over time\u201d to fund everything the military needs to do in space.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

The six types of space weapons<\/h2>\n

Saltzman said the Space Force categorizes adversarial space weapons in six categories\u2014three that are space-based and three that are ground-based.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou have directed-energy, like lasers, you have RF (radio frequency) jamming capabilities, and you have kinetic, something that you\u2019re trying to destroy physically,\u201d Saltzman said. These three types of weapons could be positioned on the ground or in space, getting to Saltzman\u2019s list of six categories.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re seeing in our adversary developmental capabilities, they\u2019re pursuing all of those,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cWe\u2019re not pursuing all of those yet.\u201d<\/p>\n

But Saltzman argued that maybe the United States should. \u201cThere are good reasons to have all those categories,\u201d he said. Targeting an enemy satellite in low-Earth orbit, just a few hundred miles above the planet, requires a different set of weapons than a satellite parked more than 22,000 miles up\u2014roughly 36,000 kilometers\u2014in geosynchronous orbit.<\/p>\n

China is at the pinnacle of the US military\u2019s threat pyramid, followed by Russia and less sophisticated regional powers like North Korea and Iran.<\/p>\n

\u201cReally, what\u2019s most concerning\u2026 is the mix of weapons,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cThey are pursuing the broadest mix of weapons, which means they\u2019re going to hold a vast array of targets at risk if we can\u2019t defeat them. So our focus out of the gate has been on resiliency of our architectures. Make the targeting as hard on the adversary as possible.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Gen. Chance Saltzman, the chief of Space Operations, speaks at the Air & Space Forces Association\u2019s Warfare Symposium on March 3, 2025.<\/p>\n

Credit:
\n Jud McCrehin \/ Air & Space Forces Association<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n

About a decade ago, the military recognized an imperative to transition to a new generation of satellites. Where they could, Pentagon officials replaced or complemented their fleets of a few large multibillion-dollar satellites with constellations of many more cheaper, relatively expendable satellites. If an adversary took out just one of the military\u2019s legacy satellites, commanders would feel the pain. But the destruction of multiple smaller satellites in the newer constellations wouldn\u2019t have any meaningful effect.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

That\u2019s one of the reasons the military\u2019s Space Development Agency has started launching a network of small missile-tracking satellites in low-Earth orbit, and it\u2019s why the Pentagon is so interested in using services offered by SpaceX\u2019s Starlink broadband constellation. The Space Force is looking at ways to revamp its architecture for space-based navigation by potentially augmenting or replacing existing GPS satellites with an array of positioning platforms in different orbits.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you can disaggregate your missions from a few satellites to many satellites, you change the targeting calculus,\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cIf you can make things maneuverable, then it\u2019s harder to target, so that is the initial effort that we invested heavily on in the last few years to make us more resilient.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now, Saltzman said, the Space Force must go beyond reshaping how it designs its satellites and constellations to respond to potential threats. These new options include more potent offensive and defensive weapons. He declined to offer specifics, but some options are better than others.<\/p>\n

The cost of destruction<\/h2>\n

\u201cGenerally in a military setting, you don\u2019t say, \u2018Hey, here\u2019s all the weapons, and here\u2019s how I\u2019m going to use them, so get ready,\u2019\u201d Saltzman said. \u201cThat\u2019s not to our advantage\u2026 but I will generally [say] that I am far more enamored by systems that deny, disrupt, [and] degrade. There\u2019s a lot of room to leverage systems focused on those \u2018D words.\u2019 The destroy word comes at a cost in terms of debris.\u201d<\/p>\n

A high-speed collision between an interceptor weapon and an enemy satellite would spread thousands of pieces of shrapnel across busy orbital traffic lanes, putting US and allied spacecraft at risk.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe may get pushed into a corner where we need to execute some of those options, but I\u2019m really focused on weapons that deny, disrupt, degrade,\u201d Saltzman said.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

This tenet of environmental stewardship isn\u2019t usually part of the decision-making process for commanders in other military branches, like the Air Force or the Navy. \u201cI tell my air-breathing friends all the time: When you shoot an airplane down, it falls out of your domain,\u201d Saltzman said.<\/p>\n

China now operates more than 1,000 satellites, and more than a third of these are dedicated to intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. China\u2019s satellites can collect high-resolution spy imagery and relay the data to terrestrial forces for military targeting. The Chinese \u201cspace-enabled targeting architecture\u2026 [is] pretty impressive,\u201d Saltzman said.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This slide from a presentation by Space Systems Command illustrates a few of the counter-space weapons fielded by China and Russia.<\/p>\n

Credit:
\n Space Systems Command<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n

\u201cWe have a responsibility not only to defend the assets in space but to protect the war-fighter from space-enabled attack,\u201d said Lt. Gen. Doug Schiess, commander of Space Forces-Space. In this role, Schiess oversees Space Force units assigned to US Space Command.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat China has done with an increasing launch pace is put up intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance satellites that can then target our naval forces, our land forces, and our air forces at much greater distance,\u201d Schiess said. \u201cThey\u2019ve essentially built a huge kill chain, or kill web, if you will, to be able to target our forces much earlier.\u201d<\/p>\n

China\u2019s aerospace forces have either deployed or are developing direct-ascent anti-satellite missiles, co-orbital satellites, electronic warfare platforms like mobile jammers, and directed-energy, or laser, systems, according to a Pentagon report on China\u2019s military and security advancements. These weapons can reach targets from low-Earth orbit all the way up to geosynchronous orbit.<\/p>\n

In his role as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Saltzman advises the White House on military matters. Like most military commanders, he said he wants to offer his superiors as many options as possible. \u201cThe more weapons mix we have, the more options we can offer the president,\u201d Saltzman said.<\/p>\n

The US military has already demonstrated it can shoot down a satellite with a ground-based interceptor, and the Space Force is poised to field new ground-based satellite jammers in the coming months. The former head of the Space Force, Gen. Jay Raymond, told lawmakers in 2021 that the military was developing directed-energy weapons to assure dominance in space, although he declined to discuss details in an unclassified hearing.<\/p>\n

So the Pentagon is working on at least three of the six space weapons categories identified by Saltzman. China and Russia appear to have the edge in space-based weapons, at least for now.<\/p>\n

,<\/p>\n

In the last several years, Russia has tested a satellite that can fire a projectile capable of destroying another spacecraft in orbit, an example of a space-based kinetic weapon. Last year, news leaked that US intelligence officials are concerned about Russian plans to put a nuclear weapon in orbit. China launched a satellite named Shijian-17 in 2016 with a robotic arm that could be used to grapple and capture other satellites in space. Then, in 2021, China launched Shijian-21, which docked with a defunct Chinese satellite to take over its maneuvering and move it to a different orbit.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s no evidence that the US Space Force has demonstrated kinetic space-based anti-satellite weapons, and Pentagon officials have roundly criticized the possibility of Russia placing a nuclear weapon in space. But the US military might soon develop space-based interceptors as part of the Trump administration\u2019s \u201cGolden Dome\u201d missile defense shield. These interceptors might also be useful in countering enemy satellites during conflict.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The Sodium Guidestar at the Air Force Research Laboratory\u2019s Starfire Optical Range in New Mexico. Researchers with AFRL\u2019s Directed Energy Directorate use the Guidestar laser for real-time, high-fidelity tracking and imaging of satellites too faint for conventional adaptive optical imaging systems.<\/p>\n

Credit:
\n US Air Force<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n

The Air Force used a robotic arm on a 2007 technology demonstration mission to snag free-flying satellites out of orbit, but this was part of a controlled experiment with a spacecraft designed for robotic capture. Several companies, such as Maxar and Northrop Grumman, are developing robotic arms that could grapple \u201cnon-cooperative\u201d satellites in orbit.<\/p>\n

While the destruction of an enemy satellite is likely to be the Space Force\u2019s last option in a war, military commanders would like to be able to choose to do so. Schiess said the military \u201ccontinues to have gaps\u201d in this area.<\/p>\n

\u201cWith destroy, we need that capability, just like any other domain needs that capability, but we have to make sure that we do that with responsibility because the space domain is so important,\u201d Schiess said.<\/p>\n

Matching the rhetoric of today<\/h2>\n

The Space Force\u2019s fresh candor about orbital warfare should be self-evident, according to Saltzman. \u201cWhy would you have a military space service if not to execute space control?\u201d<\/p>\n

This new comfort speaking about space weapons comes as the Trump administration strikes a more bellicose tone in foreign policy and national security. Pete Hegseth, Trump\u2019s secretary of defense, has pledged to reinforce a \u201cwarrior ethos\u201d in the US armed services.<\/p>\n

Space Force officials are doing their best to match Hegseth\u2019s rhetoric.<\/p>\n

\u201cEvery guardian is a war-fighter, regardless of your functional specialty, and every guardian contributes to Space Force readiness,\u201d Saltzman said. Guardian is the military\u2019s term for a member of the Space Force, comparable to airmen, sailors, soldiers, and marines. \u201cWhether you built the gun, pointed the gun, or pulled the trigger, you are a part of combat capability.\u201d<\/p>\n

Echoing Hegseth, the senior enlisted member of the Space Force, Chief Master Sgt. John Bentivegna, said he\u2019s focused on developing a \u201cwar-fighter ethos\u201d within the service. This involves training on scenarios of orbital warfare, even before the Space Force fields any next-generation weapons systems.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs Gen. Saltzman is advocating for the money and the resources to get the kit, the culture, the space-minded war-fighter, that work has been going on and continues today,\u201d Bentivegna said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

DENVER\u2014The US Space Force lacks the full range of space weapons China and Russia are adding to their arsenals, and military leaders say it\u2019s time to close the gap. Gen. Chance Saltzman, the Space Force\u2019s chief of space operations, told reporters at the Air & Space Forces Association Warfare Symposium last week that he wants […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":44393,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[6455,257,452,2118],"class_list":["post-44392","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-chance-saltzman","tag-military-space","tag-space-warfare","tag-us-space-force"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44392"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=44392"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44392\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/44393"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44392"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44392"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44392"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}