# How fast could we nuke...the ISS? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 24, 2017, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968 "2017-03-24T23:51:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2017, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/1 "2017-03-24T23:51:50Z")
Inspired by a recent movie or two, and in my tradition of contemplating contingency plans for every horrific occasion, I was just wondering…how quickly could the International Space Station—or a spaceborne target with a similar orbital altitude and inclination, if you’d prefer—be destroyed with a nuclear weapon, should the need suddenly arise?\* Assuming it was an official government/military operation, of course, with full cooperation and support from any or all countries planetside. And not just “destroyed” as in “left wrecked and inoperable,” I mean literally reduced to plasma by a nuclear weapon detonating as close as possible to the target. Now, there are a few ASATs in service or in development, but none I know of is nuclear armed. I also don’t know if any nuclear-armed ballistic missiles _could_ be used to attack a target in Earth orbit (something a bit outside of the original operational requirements), at least without considerable re-engineering; or how long it would take to prepare an existing space launch system (Progress? Dragon? Pegasus, even?) for a rapid trip to the ISS, even _aside_ from how long it would take to rig up a special weapon “cargo” (the latter probably being unanswerable, unless some _really_ unnerving Field Manuals got declassified when I wasn’t looking). So…any Dr. Strangeloves in the crowd willing or able to take a guess at this one? \*Say…Mathilda May and her space-cadre of space-fanatics have holed up there, and are consolidating their power. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2017, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/2 "2017-03-24T23:53:08Z")
My WAG is a few hours. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/3 "2017-03-25T00:09:20Z")
Well, the [Minuteman III](https://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/lgm-30_3.htm) could easily reach high enough to hit it, but targeting a fast-moving object like the ISS would be a whole 'nother problem. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/4 "2017-03-25T00:11:01Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Well, the [Minuteman III](https://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/lgm-30_3.htm) could easily reach high enough to hit it, but targeting a fast-moving object like the ISS would be a whole 'nother problem. That’s what computers are for. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/5 "2017-03-25T00:21:18Z")
> [@snfaulkner](#): > > That’s what computers are for. Yeah, sure. But the guidance system in the missile may have limitations on trajectories. Also, the arming of the Nuke would need to be modified. And, since the missile is ballistic, it would all come down to how precisely the launch could be timed - something that isn’t a big deal for a terrestrial target. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/6 "2017-03-25T00:38:12Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Yeah, sure. > But the guidance system in the missile may have limitations on trajectories. Also, the arming of the Nuke would need to be modified. And, since the missile is ballistic, it would all come down to how precisely the launch could be timed - something that isn’t a big deal for a terrestrial target. The ISS orbital speed is 4.6 miles per second. I would guess you need to be within at least a mile to destroy the ISS. That kind of makes it seem like you need to time the launch to within about 1/4 of a second. That seems pretty tough to me. I could be persuaded to believe that electromagnetic pulse could disable the the ISS at significantly greater range. So maybe you need to time the launch to about 3 seconds which seems more doable. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/7 "2017-03-25T00:41:12Z")
Send a spread, like a shotgun. ---
**Author:** ![markn\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@markn\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markn_1)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/8 "2017-03-25T00:54:35Z")
I don’t think targeting is a problem. We send rockets that rendezvous with the ISS all the time – that is, they come within inches of it. Worst case, you launch a crewed rocket with a nuclear weapon on board, they navigate to within feet of the target and then detonate the weapon. (The OP didn’t say there needed to be zero casualties.) But I’d bet a remotely piloted vehicle could do almost the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/9 "2017-03-25T01:04:08Z")
We have missiles that could hit the ISS … easy peasy … regular conventional explosive would be more than enough to blast the ISS to smithereens … I might be wrong but I don’t think there’s any armor plating on the thing … ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/10 "2017-03-25T01:34:23Z")
Anti Satellite missiles are already a thing and have been tested successfully: > **[Anti-satellite weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon)** > > Anti-satellite weapons (ASAT) are space weapons designed to incapacitate or destroy satellites for strategic or tactical > purposes. Although no ASAT system has yet\[update\] been utilised in warfare, a few countries (China, India, Russia, and the United States) have successfully shot down their own satellites to demonstrate their ASAT capabilities in a show of force. ASATs have also been used to remove decommissioned satellites. > ASAT roles include: defensive measures against an adversary's spac... So the only question is how fast you can mount a nuclear warhead on a RIM-161 Standard missile: > **[RIM-161 Standard Missile 3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3)** > > The RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) is a ship-based surface-to-air missile system used by the United States Navy to intercept short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles as a part of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. Although primarily designed as an anti-ballistic missile, the SM-3 has also been employed in an anti-satellite capacity against a satellite at the lower end of low Earth orbit. The SM-3 is primarily used and tested by the United States Navy and also operated by the The S... ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/11 "2017-03-25T09:22:28Z")
Yes, but you want a nuke to adequately sterilise everything, don’t you? Given that we’re using a nuke, would there be any EMP effects on the ground? ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 9:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/12 "2017-03-25T09:27:53Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Given that we’re using a nuke, would there be any EMP effects on the ground? Yes… oh yes… so much EMP. Here: > **[Starfish Prime](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime)** > > Starfish Prime was a high-altitude nuclear test conducted by the United States, a joint effort of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and the Defense Atomic Support Agency. It was launched from Johnston Atoll on July 9, 1962, and was the largest nuclear test conducted in outer space, and one of five conducted by the US in space. > A Thor rocket carrying a W49 thermonuclear warhead (designed at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory) and a Mk. 2 reentry vehicle was launched from Johnston Atoll in the Pa... "Starfish Prime caused an electromagnetic pulse (EMP), which was far larger than expected, so much larger that it drove much of the instrumentation off scale, causing great difficulty in getting accurate measurements. The Starfish Prime electromagnetic pulse also made those effects known to the public by causing electrical damage in Hawaii, about 1,445 kilometres (898 mi) away from the detonation point, knocking out about 300 streetlights, setting off numerous burglar alarms and damaging a telephone company microwave link. " Although that was 1.4 megatonnes… I don’t think we need quite that much to finish off the ISS. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/13 "2017-03-25T11:18:08Z")
Wow, amazing (Starfish Prime). The visible effects from Honolulu and elsewhere sound like a brilliant public art piece – something along the lines of a Christo work, or a fireworks display – if you weren’t aware of the deadly weapon connection. ---
**Author:** ![joema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a9adbd/32.png) [@joema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joema)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/14 "2017-03-25T13:31:00Z")
> [@markn\_1](#): > > I don’t think targeting is a problem. We send rockets that rendezvous with the ISS all the time – that is, they come within inches of it. Worst case, you launch a crewed rocket with a nuclear weapon on board, they navigate to within feet of the target and then detonate the weapon. (The OP didn’t say there needed to be zero casualties.) But I’d bet a remotely piloted vehicle could do almost the same thing. Using a partial payload, an existing ICBM has plenty of delta-V to reach ISS. The Titan II ICBM launched the Clementine space probe to the moon. The former Peacekeeper ICBM is used as a satellite launcher: [Minotaur IV - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur_IV) However an ICBM has no terminal guidance, not even mid-course guidance to a moving target. The post-boost bus does not have maneuvering capability to rendezvous with an orbital target. There is no ground-based on onboard radar guidance. I doubt an unmodified ICBM could get within miles of ISS – it would be flying blind. The OP scenario – vaporizing ISS – would require (at a minimum) a near miss, even using a nuclear warhead. The SM-3 ABM missile has terminal guidance and been used for ASAT tests but the Block I versions are limited to about 300 km altitude (186 miles), whereas ISS is at about 250 miles. It also doesn’t have a nuclear warhead: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaKpJ7i-JXA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaKpJ7i-JXA) The SM-3 Block IIA missile which was recently tested probably has the delta-V to reach ISS. The OP question is “how rapidly” could this be achieved. Fitting a nuclear warhead and the required fuzing technology to a SM-3 Block II would take a while – probably weeks or months. There are 44 Ground-Based Interceptor ABMs in Fort Greely Alaska and Vandenberg AFB CA. These are much larger and higher performance and have reached 1,100 mile altitudes in tests. They have terminal seeking but (like the SM-3) would require fitting with a nuclear warhead and fuzing technology. Like the SM-3 this would likely take weeks or months, even in a contingency: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW-WROYdTP8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW-WROYdTP8) There are multiple unmanned supply vehicles which fly to ISS periodically. If one of these was ready, it would be easy to put a warhead on it and detonate it by remote control. Re “how rapidly”, this totally depends on the launch prep cycle for booth booster and cargo vehicle. This could vary from days to months: [Uncrewed spaceflights to the International Space Station - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_spaceflights_to_the_International_Space_Station) ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/15 "2017-03-25T15:41:01Z")
There’s also the, um, lack of targeting precision needed for even a small-yield nuke in an unobstructed environment. A 50kt warhead within a mile of the ISS would destroy it physically and likely vaporize all but the big chunks. Getting within a few hundred yards, even in the hastiest launch with errors, should be no problem. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/16 "2017-03-25T17:40:07Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > A 50kt warhead within a mile of the ISS would destroy it physically and likely vaporize all but the big chunks. Doubtful. In the vacuum of space, there would be no blast - just a whole lot of hard radiation. Some of that would end up vaporizing the skin of the ISS, but a lot of it would just penetrate and keep on going. ---
**Author:** ![Folacin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folacin/32/3195_2.png) [@Folacin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folacin)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/17 "2017-03-25T18:17:47Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Doubtful. > In the vacuum of space, there would be no blast - just a whole lot of hard radiation. Some of that would end up vaporizing the skin of the ISS, but a lot of it would just penetrate and keep on going. So, does that imply that the best plan would be to put it in either a manned capsule or a SpaceX cargo shuttle? Then the explosion would have something to accelerate beyond it’s own casing. ---
**Author:** ![joema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a9adbd/32.png) [@joema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joema)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/18 "2017-03-25T18:19:39Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Doubtful. > In the vacuum of space, there would be no blast - just a whole lot of hard radiation. Some of that would end up vaporizing the skin of the ISS, but a lot of it would just penetrate and keep on going. This is correct and often misunderstood. There is no blast, no fireball and no thermal radiation from a nuclear detonation in space. Within earth’s atmosphere, the fireball only happens due to X-rays interacting with surrounding matter. IOW it’s the atmosphere itself absorbing and re-emitting energy that creates the fireball. In the vacuum of space there is no atmosphere, hence no fireball. In an atmospheric detonation, the fireball is what gives the impression of sustained energy release over several seconds. However in a vacuum, the total energy release from a nuclear bomb finishes within one microsecond – one millionth of a second. There is likewise no blast effect in space since that’s also caused by an atmosphere. A nuclear detonation in space is more like the instantaneous blink of a strobe light, only vastly more powerful. It is very different than happens within the atmosphere or how space detonations are depicted in fiction: > **[History Publications and Resources - NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/history/history-publications-and-resources/)** > > The NASA History Series includes over 200 books and monographs on a wide range of topics from rockets and wind tunnels to the psychology and sociology of ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/19 "2017-03-25T20:47:43Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Doubtful. > In the vacuum of space, there would be no blast - just a whole lot of hard radiation. Some of that would end up vaporizing the skin of the ISS, but a lot of it would just penetrate and keep on going. Are you saying there would be no heat - that a ton or so of vaporized material at stellar temperatures would be of no consequence to a nearby object? ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968/20 "2017-03-25T20:57:42Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Are you saying there would be no heat - that a ton or so of vaporized material at stellar temperatures would be of no consequence to a nearby object? You said a mile away… [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-fast-could-we-nuke-the-iss/782968.md?page=2)