cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12796409

Archive link: https://archive.ph/iWKnz (Links omitted)

The United States has weapons in orbit to defend its forces against hostile action, Air Force Secretary Troy Meink said on September 14, 2026, publicly acknowledging a capability whose details remain murky.

Speaking at the Air & Space Forces Association’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, Meink said the US now has “on-orbit space control weapons,” according to Breaking Defense.

He did not identify the systems, explain how they work or say when they were deployed. The Department of the Air Force declined to provide further details, the publication reported.

Meink later confirmed that the disclosure was deliberate, describing the wording as “very well thought out,” according to Air & Space Forces Magazine. He declined to say whether the weapons physically strike targets or use other means to disable them.

The announcement leaves unanswered what the systems can attack and how they would be used. Meink also did not identify any particular satellite or spacecraft carrying the weapons.

During a subsequent briefing, Meink argued that acknowledging the weapons’ existence could help deter adversaries, while discussing their capabilities or testing would undermine that purpose. He pointed to Chinese and Russian weapons development as a reason the US needs to protect its ability to operate in space, Breaking Defense reported.

Weapons in orbit raise concerns

Weapons in orbit raise concerns about an arms race and the risks to satellites used for civilian communications, navigation and other essential services. Attacks that break satellites apart can also leave debris threatening other spacecraft, including those belonging to countries outside the conflict. The International Committee of the Red Cross has warned about these potential consequences of fighting in space.

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans placing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in orbit, but does not impose a blanket ban on conventional weapons there.

Golden Dome and satellite surveillance

Separately, Meink provided an update on space-based interceptors being developed for the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile defense initiative. He said that effort had progressed from an initial contract to flight-ready hardware in less than a year.

He did not identify those interceptors as the weapons already in orbit. The interceptor program still requires demonstrations in space and integration with the wider missile defense system, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine.

Meink also said the first satellites in a new system for tracking airborne targets would launch this month. That effort would add space-based surveillance to a mission performed by radar aircraft, including the E-7 Wedgetail, Breaking Defense reported.


Stolen from: https://lemmy.ca/post/70913356

The X-37b is everything you could want in an orbital surveillance, espionage and sabotage platform and it has existed for years…?

all 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"I have a girlfriend that goes to another school"

  • source
  • [–] 53 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Wow, sounds really useful when your main problem is that your weapons are way more expensive than your enemy's and you have really limited production capacity

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 day ago

    He said that effort had progressed from an initial contract to flight-ready hardware in less than a year.

    AHAHAHAH! Unless the flight ready hardware was built before the initial contract was offered, no it didn't.

    Aerospace engineering requires a level of precision so high that it's literally impossible to do this.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago*

    He's saying this because isntrael is seeking or already has space based weapons. To normalize it or to give congress excuse to make legal what is illegal by us.

    After getting their asses kicked by Iran's missles they think the way to prevent it is to knock them out from space.

    A huge backlash tofreedom-and-democracy was Star Wars. To not allow space to be weaponized due to the danger. But now that cat is out of the bag either because isntrael is forcing a hand in the supposed or realized ambitions. This gives excuse for other nations to fully weaponize space.

    Slap AI in it or in the chain Skynet is real.

  • source
  • [–] 56 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    wow that's crazy. you're still losing to Iran tho?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 49 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    During a subsequent briefing, Meink argued that acknowledging the weapons’ existence could help deter adversaries, while discussing their capabilities or testing would undermine that purpose.

    Sounds like the tests/capabilities aren't very impressive.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 day ago

    Sounds like the tests/capabilities aren't very impressive.

    Yeah, sounds like maybe a handful of prototypes at most and even then I'm skeptical. It's pretty much impossible to hide orbital rocket launches. They need massive ground infrastructure. They're easy for random tourists to watch even if the payloads are kept secret. The US government also needs rockets to be certified for national security launches. Mostly on the basis of reliability, safety, and the ability of the launch provider to maintain security in their facilities. So I think we can safely rely on public launch records of the very few NSSL-certified rockets and narrow down from there.

    There's very few past NSSL launches that could realistically be for weapons placement in low Earth orbit (LEO). A space-based conventional missile designed to hit something on Earth is going to need a decent fuel reserve and heat shielding in order to point at the right target and make it through the atmosphere intact. Those quickly add to the size and mass of the missile. The higher the altitude, the worse the problem gets because you're coming in faster and need to use more fuel to get on course.

    Once you rule out launches to geostationary orbit (very poor place for Earth-aimed missiles), the X-37 (small payload door, only 2 x 1 meters), and Falcon 9 launches where they recovered the first stage (cuts the payload mass in half), there's almost nothing previously launched that could realistically be for orbit-based Earth-aimed missiles.

  • source
  • parent