Russia's controversial plan to use rocket-launched debris faces major challenges

BulgarianMilitary unveils in its recent article that space warfare strategies have been a subject of growing interest and debate, particularly with emerging technologies and escalating global tensions. 

While the US is making substantial investments in advanced missile defence systems to counter space threats, Russia’s strategists are exploring a much more straightforward, though controversial, tactic—firing rockets packed with nails or gunpowder to disperse them in orbit.

This concept is not new; it has been around since the 1990s and has gained renewed attention in recent years. The rationale behind it is simple: by creating debris in orbit, enemy satellites could be rendered inoperable.

At first glance, this approach may seem like a swift and effective solution that could provide Russia with a strategic edge in space combat. However, a closer examination of the technical details quickly reveals its impracticality.

Picture a “wall” of metallic particles—such as nails or grains of gunpowder—dispersed in orbit with the intent of disabling enemy satellites. To the untrained observer, this might appear straightforward—just launch a few rockets, scatter the debris, and let it do its work.

Yet, calculations indicate that even a minimal impact would require millions of these particles, each precisely positioned in orbit. While rockets might be capable of launching such materials, keeping them stable in space would present a far more difficult problem. These fragments would soon become unstable and drift out of orbit, creating disorder instead of providing a strategic advantage.

To put this into perspective, imagine an orbital “wall” made up of small debris particles spaced just one meter apart. The math suggests that creating a modest barrier 20 kilometers wide and high would require an overwhelming amount of material.

In reality, the number of particles needed for such a “wall” is astronomical—potentially in the hundreds of millions—and would result in an unmanageable weight that couldn’t easily be launched into space.

Even if an orbital defense system like this could somehow be built, its operational lifespan would be incredibly brief. Space debris is constantly influenced by gravitational forces and atmospheric drag, making the creation of a stable structure highly unlikely. The "wall" of debris would quickly disintegrate as particles were pushed out of orbit by the inevitable instability.

Aside from the sheer impracticality of this plan, the potential consequences could be catastrophic. Creating such an artificial debris field would almost certainly trigger the "Kessler Syndrome," a scenario where collisions between satellites and debris generate more fragments, leading to a cascading effect that makes vast portions of low Earth orbit (LEO) unusable. 

This would not only disrupt the satellites targeted, but could also jeopardize the space operations of the country responsible for creating the debris field. 

Even if the objective is simply to temporarily disable rival space assets rather than permanently destroy satellites, this strategy would likely backfire. Operating in space demands far more precision than merely creating a cloud of metal fragments. 

Satellites are vital for a wide range of purposes, from communications and GPS to military reconnaissance, meaning any disruption could deal a significant strategic blow. However, despite advanced military technologies, space defense remains incredibly complex, and there's no straightforward solution.

Using space debris as a weapon might offer a temporary tactical advantage, but maintaining it over an extended period would be nearly impossible without escalating the situation to an uncontrollable scale.

By Naila Huseynova