Cosmos 1818, a Russian NUCLEAR Satellite, to be hit by space debris

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

job1207

Guest
<p>Really. I hope that they move this nuclear satellite. Someone call the Russians. PLEASE. Seriously.&nbsp; </p><table border="1" cellpadding="5"><tbody><tr align="center"><td>17369
 
N

nimbus

Guest
Is this debris from the recent ASAT impact near Hawaii?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Is this debris from the recent ASAT impact near Hawaii? <br />Posted by nimbus</DIV><br /><br />No.</p><h5>this is just regular space junk...</h5><p>Sorry, for some reason the sentence above insists on being bold. That was not my intent.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<p>All of the Russian nuclear satellites have passed the end of their mission and been decomissioned.&nbsp; They can no longer be controlled.&nbsp; When decomissionsed the separated into two parts, the main part, which remained in the original orbit, and the reactor, which was boosted into a much higher one.&nbsp; So which bit is going to be hit?&nbsp; The inert bit or the reactor?</p><p>Jon</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
J

job1207

Guest
Socrates does not distinguish between the two. We will have to find out. Either way, this is not good. If the vehicle is decommissioned then they probably cannot control it, in order to make it move out of the way.
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
<p>Seems like there has been some error or then either one has been moved:</p><p><table border="1" cellpadding="5"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#87ceeb"><th rowspan="2">NORAD<br />Catalog<br />Number</th><th rowspan="2" width="150">Name</th><th rowspan="2">Days<br />Since<br />Epoch</th><th>Max<br />Probability</th><th>Dilution<br />Threshold<br />(km)</th><th>Min<br />Range<br />(km)</th><th rowspan="2">Relative<br />Velocity<br />(km/sec)</th></tr><tr bgcolor="#87ceeb"><th>Start<br />(UTC)</th><th>TCA<br />(UTC)</th><th>Stop<br />(UTC)</th></tr><tr height="3" bgcolor="#000000"><td colspan="8">&nbsp;
 
J

job1207

Guest
maybe they moved it. Oh I see, you mentioned that possibility at the end of your posts...sorry.
 
J

job1207

Guest
Rb stands for rocket body. the second object is just a rocket body. So they would not be moving that.
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
Googling with Cosmos 1818 shows that the satellite was lauched 1987 and was operational at 6 months... So it seems that it should be more or less inert nowadays. I just wonder can this satellite really be moved away from debris threats? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Googling with Cosmos 1818 shows that the satellite was lauched 1987 and was operational at 6 months... So it seems that it should be more or less inert nowadays. I just wonder can this satellite really be moved away from debris threats? <br /> Posted by Zipi</DIV></p><p>Probably not.&nbsp; A decommissioned satellite is generally incapable of maneuvering itself, since usually they're not discarded until they're about to fail anyway.&nbsp; There may not be anything that can be done.</p><p>We really need to invest in some kind of space debris boosting system.&nbsp; I always liked the idea of a big laser which wouldn't actually destroy the stuff, but would ablate enough material to produce just enough thrust to deflect the object's trajectory.&nbsp; It'd be tricky in practice, though, especially since debris is generally not helpfully spherical and perfectly identical all around.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Probably not.&nbsp; A decommissioned satellite is generally incapable of maneuvering itself, since usually they're not discarded until they're about to fail anyway.&nbsp; There may not be anything that can be done.We really need to invest in some kind of space debris boosting system.&nbsp; I always liked the idea of a big laser which wouldn't actually destroy the stuff, but would ablate enough material to produce just enough thrust to deflect the object's trajectory.&nbsp; It'd be tricky in practice, though, especially since debris is generally not helpfully spherical and perfectly identical all around.&nbsp; <br />Posted by CalliArcale</DIV><br /><br />At this light this case has probably been a Socrates computing error... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>At this light this case has probably been a Socrates computing error... <br /> Posted by Zipi</DIV></p><p>As I reread the thread, I see that now.&nbsp; Sorry for my alarmism.&nbsp; ;-)&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
J

job1207

Guest
Since BOTH objects are non functional, this must have been a computing error. I emailed the fellow who runs the system. Perhaps he will write back.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Since BOTH objects are non functional, this must have been a computing error. I emailed the fellow who runs the system. Perhaps he will write back. <br />Posted by job1207</DIV></p><p>This is a warning for any automated searches, not only for satellites, but possible earth impactors and close approaches. An automated search for close approaches is just that, automated. Whatever Quality Control that is in the system is set by the creators. So that they don't exclude low probability events, the parameters are set very loosely. You still have to think about the detail in the information you are presented with.</p><p>It's not necessarily easy, but the more you work with a search program, the more you understand the working of the gears...</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
J

job1207

Guest
Yes, this could be a page out of the story, The sky is falling.
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
<p>It seems to still be a pretty close... At least the propability is quite high. Hopefully it misses:</p><p><table border="1" cellpadding="5"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#87ceeb"><th rowspan="2">NORAD<br />Catalog<br />Number</th><th rowspan="2" width="150">Name</th><th rowspan="2">Days<br />Since<br />Epoch</th><th>Max<br />Probability</th><th>Dilution<br />Threshold<br />(km)</th><th>Min<br />Range<br />(km)</th><th rowspan="2">Relative<br />Velocity<br />(km/sec)</th></tr><tr bgcolor="#87ceeb"><th>Start<br />(UTC)</th><th>TCA<br />(UTC)</th><th>Stop<br />(UTC)</th></tr><tr height="3" bgcolor="#000000"><td colspan="8">&nbsp;
 
J

job1207

Guest
Actually those numbers are changing again. They ARE closer than the last set, and essenially say that the first set of numbers was VERY CLOSE. The last set, noted they would be a little less than a kilometer apart.
 
J

job1207

Guest
<p>after looking into this, it is clear that there are HUNDREDS of objects floating in space that regularly come within site of one another. Actually it is thousands. This is totally amazing. All of the Cosmos vehicles are nuclear, and they come up in these searches regularly. All sorts of things, most of which cannot move on their own. </p><p>If a nuclear satellite strikes another object in space, would we ever really know?&nbsp; </p>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>after looking into this, it is clear that there are HUNDREDS of objects floating in space that regularly come within site of one another. Actually it is thousands. This is totally amazing. All of the Cosmos vehicles are nuclear, and they come up in these searches regularly. All sorts of things, most of which cannot move on their own. If a nuclear satellite strikes another object in space, would we ever really know?&nbsp; <br /> Posted by job1207</DIV></p><p>Minor correction: the Cosmos designator is actually pretty generic.&nbsp; There are military recon satellites, civilian research satellites, and even a lot of failed deep space probes which carry the name.&nbsp; In general, the name would be put onto any Earth-orbiting science spacecraft, and any spacecraft where the Russians didn't want to say what it really was.&nbsp; That includes spysats, but it also includes a whole fleet of interplanetary spacecraft which failed to leave Earth orbit.</p><p>If a nulcear satellite strikes another object, would we know?&nbsp; Depends mostly on the size of the impactor.&nbsp; All objects above a certain size are tracked by radar, and this would make it possible to tell when an impact occured, as long as it wasn't something like a paint chip punching through some foil or something similarly minor.&nbsp; Of course, one must also remember that we can't be 100% sure US Space Command actually knows which objects are nuclear and which are not . . . . </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
J

job1207

Guest
<div>I'm sorry I wasn't able to respond to your message earlier, but I was away on vacation at the time you sent it. As you probably noticed, though, the prediction for COSMOS 1818 changed somewhat over the subsequent reports. That's a result of the uncertainties involved in the prediction of the orbits. That's an issue I'm working on very hard to try to eliminate some of the false alarms which result from the current data.</div><br /> <div>Of course, the fact that there are satellites like this in orbit suggests that we do have a need to monitor them for potential collision, especially due to their composition. Unfortunately, even if we were able to predict a collision with confidence, it is unlikely that we would be able to do anything to avoid it since this satellite (and many others) are not able to maneuver. It just shows that more thought needs to go into the design of these systems, particularly with respect to their disposal at end of life.&nbsp; - TS</div><br /> <div>Dr. T.S. Kelso</div> <div>CelesTrak, http://celestrak.com</div> <div>E-Mail: TS.Kelso@celestrak.com</div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'></p><p>&nbsp; - TS Dr. T.S. Kelso CelesTrak, http://celestrak.com E-Mail: TS.Kelso@celestrak.com <br />Posted by job1207</DIV><br /><br />This is your site? It's superb.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>This is your site? It's superb. <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV><br /><br />I think job1207 posted a reply of a&nbsp;owner of that site. He has earlier posted the question about&nbsp;this collision prediction to the site owner. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

job1207

Guest
sorry if there was any confusion....I just posted the response quickly. The HEADLINE noted that it was Dr. Kelso's response, actually.
 
J

job1207

Guest
OK, Thorad agena D was scheduled to hit Iridium 44 on May 2. Having learned about this system, I waited a day, and checked again. Sure enough, it is just going to come close. Even so, there sure is a lot of dead debris floating in and around live satellites. <br />
 
E

edkyle99

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Really. I hope that they move this nuclear satellite. Someone call the Russians. PLEASE. Seriously.&nbsp; 17369 COSMOS 1818 5.192 1.000E+00 0.000 0.016 12.106 11166 SL-3 R/B 5.817 2008 Apr 16 14:11:27.090 2008 Apr 16 14:11:27.503 2008 Apr 16 14:11:27.916f the USSR nuclear reactor powered spacecraft, except for Cosmos 1818 and 1867, the spacecraft appear to be ocean reconnaissance satellites. These generally operated 2-4 months in low Earth orbit at an altitude of 250- 280 kin, with an inclination of 65 degrees. At the end of the missions, the reactor power supply is boosted to a longer lived orbit - an orbit that permits the fission product inventory to decay. Since 1978, this "parking" orbit has typically been on the order of 1000 km (which corresponds to an approximate 600-year lifetime). <br /> Posted by job1207</DIV></p><p>According to the following presentation, </p><p>http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep602/SPRING00/lecture35.pdf</p><p>the Topaz series reactors were designed to meet the following criteria:</p><p>"Spacecraft radiological release to the space environment shall not result in a significant adverse effect on other spacecraft.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;Radiological release from spacecraft shall have insignificant effect on Earth."</p><p>&nbsp;- Ed Kyle&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY