SATELLITE EARTH CIRCUMNAVIGATION TO CIRCUMPLANETARY BATTLE

Orbital Warfare begins with the concept of satellite Earth circumnavigation in the 1950s, then the notion of Circumplanetary Battle between satellites in Earth Orbit. In more recent years, with evolving Orbital Space technology emerged the notion of Orbital Warfare. Orbital Warfare, continues to evolve along with recent historical development of Space and Aerospace Forces, Commands and Squadrons in military forces around the world today.

Circumplanetary Battle - Orbital Warfare has one of its earliest public formulations in 1958 with how the Space Battle was conceived:

“Instead - as a battlefield - Space would serve as the ‘high ground’ for reconnaissance and missilry, as envisioned in the earlier suggestions of … [Brigadier General H.A.Boushey, Director - Office of Advanced Technology] … As we approach the reality of Space travel, the science fiction buffs among us will have to leave much of our romance behind. For it would be difficult indeed, if not impossible, for great Space fleets to meet in combat, unless they both left from the same place at the same time in the same predetermined paths. This is hardly likely. Otherwise, moments after they had ‘passed’ each other in Space, they would be thousands of miles apart, and the weapons, again in the classic use of the word, they ranged at each other would be utterly useless. This does not, of course, preclude combat in near Space between orbiting satellites of opposing nations. It would be possible, indeed quite simple, to demolish or puncture a manned satellite with a missile fired into its orbit. And there could, of course, be combat on the Moon, a battle to gain sole control.” [Leavitt, W. Loosbrock, J.F. Skinner, R.M. Witze, C. 1958 The Space Frontier. Space Weapons: A Handbook of Military Astronautics. Air Force Magazine Volume 41. Number 3 (March)]

SPACE HIGH GROUND

By the 1980s, both United States and Soviets looked at Orbital Space as the ‘high ground’, and Soviet Co-Orbital Antisatellite Weapons were to be an important factor in a campaign to capture the ‘high ground of Space’ [Bateman, A. 2024 Weapons in Space: Technology, Politics, and the Rise and Fall of the Strategic Defense Initiative. The MIT Press].

SPEEDWAY TRACK ANALYSIS

The tactical problem of two opponent objects in Orbital Space, begins with how satellites in Low Earth Orbit complete an orbit in about 90 minutes, at around 17,000 miles per hour, orbiting 15 times per day, as the Earth completes its one rotation. Each opponent object moves along its orbital path, and one of these could use a series of engine burns to converge on the other opponent, rendezvous and capture it, while both satellites employ attack, defend, or avoidance and chase tactics▼.

SPACE-TO-SPACE (ORBITAL WARFARE)

Space Domain Conflict has three permutations: Space Segment to Ground Segment, Ground to Space Segments, and Space to Space [Gleason, M. P. Hays, P. L. 2020 A Roadmap for Assessing Space Weapons. Center for Space Policy and Strategy. Space Policy Paper (5 October)]. The phrase, “Space-to-Space Warfare” [Harrison, T. 2020 International Perspectives on Space Weapons. CSIS (May); Gleason, 2020; Egeli, S. 2021 Space-to-Space Warfare and Proximity Operations: The Impact on Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications and Strategic Stability. Journal For Peace and Nuclear Disarmament. Volume 4. Number 1], describes: “attacks, harassment, and obstruction against satellites conducted by other satellites and spacecraft.” [Egeli, 2021] Alternatively, framed in terms of the concept of ‘Orbital Warfare’, this can be distinguished from other forms of combat involving the Space Domain by imagining Earth has around it a type of speed-way track race orbiting, where a satellite-spacecraft, on one speed-way track catches-up with its opponent (which is on another). Opponent craft manoeuvre on a continuous loop circumnavigating the planet. Orbital Warfare is also heavily constrained by the limits physics imposes on movement in Space, and the limitations imposed by time:

“[requiring] … deliberate … [planning] … with satellites manoeuvring for days, if not weeks or months, beforehand to get into position to have meaningful operational effects. But once an orbital threat has matched planes and set up the timing through precise orbital phasing, many opportunities can arise to manoeuvre close enough to engage a target quickly.” [Reesman, R. Wilson, J.R. 2020 The Physics of Space War: How Orbital Dynamics Constrain Space-to-Space Engagements. The Aerospace Corporation (October)]

EARTH’S PERMANENT SATELLITE LAYER

The Orbital Age has led to a permanent satellite layer around the planet Earth. It is expected as the Orbital Age develops the Human-made artificial layer that now surrounds our planet will increase in density, and strategic significance. In a highly contested Earth Satellite Layer, this will not only increasingly fill with critically dependant national and international infrastructures technology, such as our communications, but also potentially Human habitation:

“civilization pivots from flying a handful of Astronauts to a government-run Space Station, to transporting thousands of people on a fleet of spaceplanes to a constellation of commercial space destinations where they live and work for months at a time.” [Vice, T. 2022 The Most Significant Industrial Revolution in History is Underway in Space and the U.S. Must Lead It. Sierra Space (13 July)]

EARTH’S SEVERAL ORBIT TYPES AND TACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Satellites can be in, (1) Low Earth, (2) Low Earth Polar Orbit, (3) Sun-Synchronous, (4) Geostationary, (5) Geosynchronous, or (6) Molniya Orbits. Each orbit has specific tactical implications. Fundamentally, from a tactical perspective, “the lower the orbital altitude the more vulnerable a space vehicle would be” [Chun, C.K.S. 2000 Shooting Down a “Star” Program 437, the US Nuclear ASAT System and Present-Day Copycat Killers. Air Force Academy Institute of National Security Studies. CADRE Paper Number 6. Air University Press (April)]. Broadly, speaking, in terms of developing an attack strategy into the Earth’s Satellite Layer:

“Nations trying to establish an Antisatellite capability would need to select key targets and assess their ability to attack satellites given the orbit. Depending on its booster capability, a country might have a limited range of targets. Some countries may have the capacity only to launch Antisatellite weapons into Low Earth Orbits. They potentially could put their Antisatellite weapons into co-orbits to intercept targets or use a nuclear warhead or other Electromagnetic Pulse device in a direct ascent mode to disable or destroy targets. Other countries may have the capacity to use multistage boosters to put an Antisatellite system into a Low Earth Orbit and then transfer the warhead to a higher orbit.” [Chun, 2000]

Earth Orbits’ Tactical Properties:

“MANEUVERABLE SATELLITES - Adding a manoeuvre capability to satellites decreases their vulnerability to orbital interception, particularly if the satellite is in a medium altitude orbit or higher. Although manoeuvre of Low Earth Orbit satellites complicates the enemy’s targeting problem, the difficulty is obtaining sufficient warning to enable a manoeuvre prior to interception. Intercepting satellites in higher orbits requires a much longer time of flight, provides more warning time and, therefore, provides more time for the satellite to manoeuvre out of range of the interceptor's terminal guidance system. Minimum time of flight to Geosynchronous altitude, for example, is from three to six hours. A small manoeuvre a couple of hours prior to interception can place the target well out of range.” [Giffen, R.B. 1982 US Space System Survivability: Strategic Alternatives for the 1990s. National Security Affairs Monograph Series 82-4. National Defense University Press]

(1) Low Earth Orbit: is only one of several orbit types. Low Earth Orbits range in altitude 200 to 1,600 kilometres, and generally below the Van Allen Radiation Belts [Collins, J.M. 1989 Military Space Forces. New York: Pergamon-Brassey’s]. A satellite in Low Earth Orbit will not stay in orbit, as long as one in a comparatively higher orbit, because drag from Earth’s gravity is stronger at lower altitudes. A satellite in Low Earth Orbit requires more frequent engine or thruster use to maintain its orbit, and would eventually exhaust its fuel supply, pulled out of orbit, likely burning up in Earth’s atmosphere upon re-entry. Another drawback is that closer a satellite’s orbit is to the Earth’s surface, the more vulnerable it is to a Direct Ascent Antisatellite Weapons attack [Chun, 2000; Suss, J. 2024 Asymmetric Warfare in Space: Five Proposals from Chinese Strategic Thought. Æther: A Journal of Strategic Airpower & Spacepower. Volume 3. Number 1 (Spring)]. The most intense radiation effects would occur in Low Earth Orbit, if a nation detonated a nuclear device with sufficient strength at the appropriate altitude, then orbiting satellites in the general target area could be rendered useless [Chun, 2000]. Radiation trapped in a radiation belt can disable satellites up to 2,000 kilometres away in the same orbital plane (well in range of the Global Positioning System) given a 50-kiloton nuclear explosion at a burst altitude of 250 kilometres [Chun, 2000]. A recent United States Space Force Intelligence Fact Sheet has stated:

“Russia is also developing a very concerning Antisatellite capability using a new satellite designed to carry a nuclear weapon. Such a capability could pose a threat to all satellites operated by countries and companies around the globe, as well as to the vital space-enabled communications, scientific, meteorological, agricultural, commercial, and national security services which the world depends on.” [Headquarters Space Force Intelligence. 2024 Space Threat Fact Sheet (16 July)]

(2) Low Earth Polar Orbit: When the inclination angle is 90 degrees, the orbital plane contains the Earth’s axis and the orbit passes over the Earth’s poles. This highly inclined, low-altitude orientation is called a Polar Orbit, “[and] … satellite in a Polar Orbit (an orbit that passes over both poles) travels directly over every point on Earth.” [Wright, D. Grego, L. Gronlund, L. 2005 The Physics of Space Security: A Reference Manual. American Academy of Arts and Sciences] Using a Polar Orbital regime, a single satellite could observe every point on Earth twice in one 24 hour day [Wright, 2005]. In 2020, there was a reported orbital chase by a Russian satellite Kosmos 2542 near an American KH-11 KENNEN reconnaissance satellite identified as USA 245. The KH-11 form, “[a] … constellation, which consists of four satellites that maintain constant Earth observation, operate in a Polar Orbit above the rotating Earth, enabling them to cover its entire surface.” [Hennigan, W.J. 2020 Exclusive: Strange Russian Spacecraft Shadowing U.S. Spy Satellite, General Says. Time Magazine (10 February); Davis, M. 2020 Spy Games in the Grey Zone of Outer Space. The Strategist (12 February); Zak, A. 2023 Soyuz-2-1V Launches a Possible Military Inspector Satellite. Russian Space Web (25 October)]. However, the KH-11 is also stated to, “operate in Molniya Orbits and Geostationary Orbits.” [Krebs, G.D. 2024 KH-11/Kennen/Crystal. Gunter’s Space Page]

(3) Sun-Synchronous Orbit: is a Low Earth Orbit, inclined from the equator so as to maintain the same relative orientation in relation to the Sun. France’s CSO military observation program has three satellites in Sun-Synchronous Orbit, providing higher resolution and day/night imaging [Thales Group. 2018 France’s CSO-1 Military Observation Satellite in Orbit (19 December)]. The United States has its Defense Meteorological Satellite Program satellites in Sun-Synchronous Low-Earth Polar Orbits collecting weather data for U.S. military operations [United States Space Force. 2020 Defense Meteorological Satellite Program. Fact Sheet (October)]. Canada’s first military satellite, launched in 2013, operates in a Dawn–Dusk Sun-Synchronous Orbit primarily used to identify medium and high-orbit space debris from low orbit [Xie, D. et al. 2022 Determination of Field of View of a Dawn–Dusk Sun-Synchronous Orbit Satellite Based on Improved Observation Mode. Applied Sciences. Volume 12. Number 15].

(5) Geosynchronous Orbit: A variant of Geostationary Orbit, a Geosynchronous Orbit has an inclined orbit. Commonly used for communications satellites. For a satellite in Geosynchronous Orbit its ground track will have a ‘figure eight’ shape over a fixed location on the Earth, crossing the equator twice each day [Soop, E.M. 1994 Handbook of Geostationary Orbits. Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht].

Geosynchronous Orbit and ‘Patrol Orbits’ for a satellite for Space Situational Awareness Missions:

“This type of orbit is called a Patrol Orbit because the spacecraft remains in the vicinity of a designated section of the … [Geosynchronous Orbit Belt] … with continuous relative motion. It is patrolling a section of the … Belt analogous to a neighbourhood patrol program on Earth. A spacecraft in a Patrol Orbit is well poised to provide observation of (and perhaps assistance to) objects in its neighbourhood as needed. Furthermore, a spacecraft in a Patrol Orbit does not occupy any fixed slot in the … Belt, and (with inclination) crosses the equator at an altitude different than the nominal … Belt, significantly reducing collision hazard.” [Thompson, B. et al. 2017 Geosynchronous Patrol Orbit for Space Situational Awareness. Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference]

There can be several tactical uses for a Patrol Orbit in regards to Space Situational Awareness Missions, such as enabling relatively close surveillance or inspection of resident space objects, “within or near the neighbourhood zone of interest, which also allows smaller sensors compared to Earth-bound sensors observing the same region” [Thompson, 2017]. A Patrol Orbit guarantees observation ranges will fall within pre-specified limits, and also results in greater angular viewing diversity over time and allows observation of an object from multiple viewing angles, which is especially significant for imaging missions [Thompson, 2017]. A Patrol Orbit may also serve as a convenient launching point for a sub-satellite for rendezvous and servicing or close flyby inspection of resident space objects [Thompson, 2017].

In 2024, it was reported, the People’s Liberation Army was preparing its satellite operators to perform on-orbit satellite refuelling, for peacetime and wartime space logistics, and creating an In-Space Logistics Force, further: “a Chinese defense contractor has indicated, for the last six years, that it has a mission ready satellite refueler for Geosynchronous Orbit” [Burke, K. 2024 PLA On-Orbit Satellite Logistics. China Aerospace Studies Institute (March)].

See Cislunar Space Patrolling.

(6) Molniya Orbit: have an elliptical path that has a 12 hour orbital period, and the orbit keeps a satellite over the Northern Hemisphere for 8 hours of that orbit. The Soviet Union, during the Cold War, maintained nine Oko Satellites, for ballistic missile early-warning, designed to detect launches of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles from continental United States in Molniya-type orbits [Pike, J. 2002 The Military Uses of Outer Space. SIPRI Yearbook]. Historically, the Soviet Union had a large number of attack warning and communications satellites in Molniya Orbits instead of in Geosynchronous Orbit [Fetter, S. 1988 Protecting Our Military Space Systems. Muskie, E.S. Editor. The U.S. in Space: Issues and Policy Choices for a New Era. Washington, DC: Center for National Policy Press]. However, “because satellites in Molniya Orbits pass much closer to the Earth than satellites in Geosynchronous Orbit, and therefore are much more vulnerable to Antisatellite Weapons based on Earth.” [Fetter, 1988]

Satellites in Molniya Orbits are vulnerable to attacks over the Southern Hemisphere where they are at their lowest altitude [Gottfried, K. Lebrow, R.N. 1986 Anti-Satellite Weapons: Weighing the Risks. Long, R.A. Hafner, D. Boutwell, J. Editors. Weapons in Space. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.] This is because: “Air-launched Antisatellite Weapons, such as the current U.S. Antisatellite Weapons can be launched from the Southern Hemisphere and therefore can attack these satellites at perigee, though to destroy an entire satellite system one would have to wait for all satellites to pass through perigee, which would take up to 12 hours.” [Fetter, 1988]

KEY POINTS ABOUT ORBITAL WARFARE

Satellites and Satellite Layer, Space to Space, Orbital Manoeuvre and Rendezvous Between Satellites, Circumplanetary Battle.