This article in NewScientist (20 August 2016) is disconcerting:
CAN you hear me now? The US Air Force has plans to improve radio communication over long distances by detonating plasma bombs in the upper atmosphere using a fleet of micro satellites. …
The curvature of Earth stops most ground-based radio signals travelling more than 70 kilometres without a boost. But by bouncing between the ionosphere and the ground they can zigzag for much greater distances. At night the ionosphere is denser and more reflective. …
Now the USAF wants to do this more efficiently, with tiny satellites – such as CubeSats – carrying large volumes of ionised gas directly into the ionosphere.
There are at least two major challenges. One is building a plasma generator small enough to fit on a CubeSat. Then there’s the problem of controlling how the plasma disperses once released.
The current approaches appear to center around heating a metal beyond its melting point and using the result to generate plasma. Radio waves will then bounce off the plasma, permitting the radio to travel further.
I’m frowning over this one. What consideration has been given to side-effects?
And … why again? To make your radio signal go further? But you have this nifty satellite system for that. And if you’re thinking it’ll be jammed by the enemy – what about the communications with these micro-satellites? Won’t they be jammed as well?
ScienceAlert also covered this story and offered an extra tidbit, which might make some sense:
There’s another potential benefit too: a denser ionosphere should offer better protection against solar storms, which can interfere with GPS networks and other communications.
If it offered more protection against solar storms affecting the power grid then this would be very interesting, as that is one of the catastrophes against which we don’t have a lot of protection.
