With that in mind, Yes, destroying satellites has that ability and yes, for the reasons I've mentioned. Nearly all long range, stand off guided munitions require satellite support, e.g. GPS & Tomahawk cruise missiles
GPS satellites are out of reach for current ASAT weapons which are kinetic energy weapons - read missiles. These missiles can only go up to lower orbits at which you find reconnaissance satellites.
GPS satellites AFAIK can only be reached by high energy lasers.
read
here for discussion of Chinese ASAT weapons believed to be under development, including jamming of GPS and the high energy lasers for use against satellites
@Dipsomaniac:
Tomahawks were also designed with ground mapping capabilities which they could also revert to if necessary.
Yes, but are inaccurate over long distances, why they were upgraded to GPS assisted guidance in the first instance. Even the US short range guided munitions order of battle is compromised by GPS destruction or jamming, e.g. Small diameter bombs. I'm not claiming this neutralizes US Air Forces, but that it severely hampers US operations is pretty straight forward. And we haven't even begun to consider Communications Satellites...
This is why i mentioned getting into technical details may obscure rather than help, earlier. For example, in this case, do you seriously believe that the development of substantial anti-satellite capabilities is not a threat to US given its dependence on satellite networks? yes or no? If you say no then I relaly give up...
Your published refutation is an interesting.
One, because of its irrelevance, because the approach involves both modified F-15E's
and F-22's working in tandem, hence involves 5th generation aircraft which were excluded from my claim
ex hypothesi. I restate my issue on evasiveness, therefore.
Two, because it emphasizes a premise you underplay, that the J-20 will possess serious stealth capabilities.
I actually said it may share the performance envelope of a 4th gen It just may not be all that good. Which I still stand by until better information becomes available. This does not mean the project is a failure merely that some of its goals are not as high as you assume. Adopting some of the qualities of a 5th gen aircraft yet not all of them. A possibility that is quite plausible depending on the intended design.
that's precisely what 4+ means. I don't there is any serious question that the program is intended as a full 5th generation aircraft. I have no Chinese primary sources on this, I'm not sure if those exists or not to the public, but all third parties I'm aware of consider the program as an intended 5th generation fighter. This would, again, seem to be supported by logical inference given that the PRC declined participation in the T-50 PAK FA.
No it isn't. Anyone with the ability to launch their own satellites have the capability to destroy others. This is nothing new and but another weapon system. Unreliable launch systems are more dangerous than this anti-satellite capability.
Again, you're being evasive. I discussed precisely why this was dangerous and will simply here refer to my previous post. I would also add the United States has never gone to war with a country with that capability -- the the possibility of war in the context of the great power cycle between the United States and China is precisely what is at point here, not whether the PRC capability to destroy satellites is novel or not.