Those familiar with my posts over the years will understand at once that I speak as an advcate for the potentially superior theatre application/s of obital strikes vs. air.

I post this having read in the most recent Janes that a 2010 test of an hypersonic, weaponised ( I do hate that term ) hypersonic missile will shew and show that precision strikes of conventional nature may be effected to global threats in under two hours.

All well and good. The M.20 vehicle must currently be mounted on a ballistic conversion; straight up then glide down and along. Problems regarding airspace
were not addressed. It will not be an orbital craft. Overfly thus becomes an treaty breaker.

The ironic advance in DEW tech. that began with "Star Wars" and will soon reach application in the air now makes possible the obital strike. Think "Diamonds are Forever".

No longer the objections raised to the Behemoths of Reagan, I consider that the mass and power constraints are now financially acceceptable - sticking toys into orbit ain't cheap -but are soon reduce geometrically. They are already reducing arithmetically.

This post does not cover Obital Kinetic Weapons. Arty. will always be the local master of the battlefield. Local being an ever expanding term.

100nm will still take time and the munition will do things that feasible orbital lasers will not for a long lime yet. Particle beams, yes. But they have not reached the puberty of deployability!

Call in a strike? 5-10 secs?

I repeat, this is EM wavelength before objections. And let us not ignore that the less atmosphere the beam may be attenuated by, the lower the power requirements. The ideal way to deny the skies to any foe ...