> My personal fear is the perturbation to MAD if routine LEO surveillance can track deep water nuclear subs of any nation in real time.
Maybe, maybe not. During the Cold War there were some pretty certifiably stupid submarine accidents[0] that didn't end up with escalation because rational people kept a level head. Neither side is going to press the red button because they saw a submarine they didn't like in their territorial waters - that's what anti-submarine weapons are for.
Similarly, I'd argue we saw how stuff like this plays out with the anti-shipping weapons used in the Cold War as well. Naval combat changed with the introduction of spy satellites that could scan vast areas of water for suspicious targets. But generating a firing solution on those vessels is not as simple as finding them on satellite, and the same goes for the F-22. Both maneuver, which is why you need some form of lock (either radar or optical - Russians use IRST to target stealth craft) which requires a some networked presence nearby to track them.
Developments like the one in the OP are interesting, but the real challenge has always been integrating it into the kill chain. Satellites are just one piece of the puzzle, and a rather small one when you can just send spies to watch your enemies airfield[1] for the same general "stealth detection" signal.
I am not a professional in either strategic planning or risk management, nor wargaming. Nor for that matter operations research. Some of what you wrote felt optimistic and I believe in risk management the triplet of risk, consequence and likelihood come together all the time.
If LEO sats can be augmented to perform real-time tracking and if the Chinese have a fleet of LEO at starlink density then a significant component of MAD operational practice ceases to exist. The deterrent threat of subs depends on inability to perform timely exact tracking. So that speaks to consequence.
Likelihood is where I think you may be optimistic.
An analogy here, is EMF protection. Nobody can afford to protect for all conceivable EMF pulses. So they defend for the worst they can afford. Uncertainty here MAY be enhancing of the protection. Likewise to sub and stealth visibility.
My personal fear is the perturbation to MAD if routine LEO surveillance can track deep water nuclear subs of any nation in real time.
Spy fiction implies thermoclines and haloclines in seawater provide some barriers but I suspect all spy fiction stories regarding what really happens.