Pentagon to Have Dead Satellite Shot Down

yevaud · Feb 14, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon is planning to shoot down a broken spy satellite expected to hit the Earth in early March, The Associated Press has learned. U.S. officials said Thursday that the option preferred by the Bush administration will be to fire a missile from a U.S. Navy cruiser, and shoot down the satellite before it enters Earth's atmosphere. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the options will not be publicly discussed until a later Pentagon briefing. The disabled satellite is expected to hit the Earth the first week of March. Officials said the Navy would likely shoot it down before then, using a special missile modified for the task. Full Article <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

Boy, they better pick their time carefully. If they create more orbital debris, then we lose all credibility as far as being upset with the Chinese. From the article, there's supposed to be a Penatgom briefing later today. If anyone sees it on the news, post here to let us know. Thanx for the quick catch Yevaud!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

3488 · Feb 14, 2008

I would assume that the timing would be thought out so that all peices were in a decaying orbit over somewhere like the Pacific? It looks like a 'special missile' will be used, presumably one that breaks up the satellite, into peices small enough to not survive atmospheric re-entry, rather than reducing it to hypersonic shrapnel as the Chinese did. Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

This is pretty darn awesome. If they can do it, it will be a strong message to the rest of the world. It'll send a big message to China too: "Don't even think about ASAT tech. We've got you beat." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

yevaud · Feb 14, 2008

<img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Wouldn't it just... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

I don't know. I don't feel as warm and fuzzy about it as you two guys appear to. I don't see many good results of a "I can shoot down satellites better than you can" pissing contest. It could lead to the destruction of LEO as a safe place to orbit, or even pass through. The results could be no more GPS, no more blackberry's (oh the horror <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ), and eventually the inability to launch anything anywhere. No more weather satellites, no more Geosynch sats (once the current live ones fail), no more space exploration of any kind. Back to the technological stone age. We've become very comfortable with all the things satellites help us with in our daily lives. Now granted, that's a worst case scenario, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. That's not a world I'd like to see. Just my 2 cents. Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> One of the concerns with the Soviet Union during the end of the Cold War was that they couldn't keep pace with Western weapons development. If we can teach China that lesson, the World will be a better place for all of us, including them. Once we can get past the "blustering" phase, we can start working together. Of course, we'd better do that before China's rapidly growing consumer economy starts taking off. This would also send a message to Iran. They plan on launching a sat named "Omid" (Hope) in 2009. They will then join the ranks of "Self-Made Space-Capable Countries Club" while we join the upper ranks of "Lawlz, We Shootted Down Ur Space Thingie! We Roxxors" Club. Which one is cooler? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

vogon13 · Feb 14, 2008

While orbital debris concerns are not without merit, the low altitude of the target will assure a rapid burnup of the debris liberated in the test. Even materials 'lofted' from the event will retain perigee at or near the current low altitude and will still be subject to large drag forces. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

It's not really a test, this is a mission to destroy one of our orbiting spacecraft to prevent naughty bits from falling into the wrong hands. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

I agree that widespread demonstration of such ability would not be a real welcome thing. I don't feel good about it. But, demonstrating that we can shoot down an orbiting platform from the ground would be a powerful deterrent to up-and-coming and possibly hostile regimes. Nobody, but nobody, wants to shoot down comm satellites. They really don't. But, the capability of shooting down a platform puts possibly hostile nations "in their place" so to speak. IOW, just because you can get something into space doesn't mean you can do anything with it before we take it out. So, keep it peaceful. I'm reminded of "Red Storm Rising." There was a very neat subplot revolving around ASAT capabilities. Today, only the US would be capable of surviving an ASAT war. (China MIGHT be able to survive a limited one but only due to the availability of launch platforms, not necessarily satellites.) We're the only ones that have the ability to recover our losses. In Red Storm Rising, Russia's capability compared to ours was similar. We'd shoot one down and there'd be another one up in a few days. Today, I don't think that would happen. So, other countries may think twice of using their limited satellite capabilities for nefarious purposes if we have demonstrated a very good ability to take those satellites out using ground assets. Of course, in Jan of last year, China demonstrated that very same capability by shooting down a satellite using a ground-based missile. We're just demonstrating something similar. China's test used an indirect means - It launched a separate dead-weight payload that rammed the satellite. However, we're one-upping them. We're going to launch it as a ship-board asset. That means it would be a deployable system, capable of being carried by US Cruisers and above. That's a pretty big deal. China's test was a land-based system using a modified ICBM. We're basically saying "We've got you beat and can respond quicker to any space-born <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

MW - It's not really a test, this is a mission to destroy one of our orbiting spacecraft to prevent naughty bits from falling into the wrong hands. There is that. Identifiable components could propose a breach of security should they fall into the wrong hands. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

yevaud · Feb 14, 2008

Thank you. That thought occurred to me as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

propforce · Feb 14, 2008

While orbital debris concerns are not without merit, the low altitude of the target will assure a rapid burnup of the debris liberated in the test. Absolutely! MW said: It's not really a test, this is a mission to destroy one of our orbiting spacecraft to prevent naughty bits from falling into the wrong hands. Absol-fricking-lutely !!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

a_l_p "I'm reminded of "Red Storm Rising." There was a very neat subplot revolving around ASAT capabilities. Today, only the US would be capable of surviving an ASAT war. (China MIGHT be able to survive a limited one but only due to the availability of launch platforms, not necessarily satellites.) We're the only ones that have the ability to recover our losses. In Red Storm Rising, Russia's capability compared to ours was similar. We'd shoot one down and there'd be another one up in a few days. Today, I don't think that would happen. So, other countries may think twice of using their limited satellite capabilities for nefarious purposes if we have demonstrated a very good ability to take those satellites out using ground assets. " See I think that doesn't work. Once LEO is filled with shrapnel from the destroyed satellites, then the process goes on and on as that shrapnel destroys more satellites, which create more shrapnel, which destroy more satellites...... It quickly reaches the point wher no object can survive in, or even pass through such a ring (or sphere) of debris. There are no winners then, only losers, IMHO. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

"While orbital debris concerns are not without merit, the low altitude of the target will assure a rapid burnup of the debris liberated in the test." Of course this assumes they will wait until the orbit is low enough that no debris qill survive for long. As I said, it all depends on when they pull the trigger... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Testing · Feb 14, 2008

They had best not miss..... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

Indeed. That would be real bad, even for those who are inclined to think this display of our ability is a good thing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

vogon13 · Feb 14, 2008

using a special missile modified for the task. Yeah, it's a test. First time out for any new gadget or an old gadget in a new mode is, by definition a test. While I hope it succeeds, recalling the tortuous THAAD experience to date, I am not hopefull. A failure at this is not exactly the message the Chinese need to be receiving right now. I admire the cajones it takes to proceed with this, but I note not a single piece of the 100+ STS external tanks so far burned up on reentry has ever been found, and I conclude any possibility of an un-shot down Keyhole harming anyone or divulging any secrets as quite remote. Additionally, Walker sold the instruction manual to the damn thing to the Soviets, so the uncontrolled reentry is an even more moot point. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

propforce · Feb 14, 2008

I don't know. I don't feel as warm and fuzzy about it as you two guys appear to. I don't see many good results of a "I can shoot down satellites better than you can" pissing contest. It could lead to the destruction of LEO as a safe place to orbit, or even pass through. The results could be no more GPS, no more blackberry's (oh the horror ), and eventually the inability to launch anything anywhere. No more weather satellites, no more Geosynch sats (once the current live ones fail), no more space exploration of any kind. 1) GPS are a lot higher altitude than LEO, more like MEO 2) GEO is very very far away. 3) Shooting down U.S. satellites is considered a declaration of war against the U.S. 4) It is far easier to destroy a ground target (such as a city), via ICBMs, than a space target So relax. The sky is not falling (except tiny space debris <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

yevaud · Feb 14, 2008

(except tiny space debris ). Two orbiting U.S. spacecraft were forced to change course to avoid being damaged soon after the incident. Air Force Brig. Gen. Ted Kresge, director of air, space and information operations at the Air Force Space Command in Colorado, estimates that "essentially (Chinese anti-satellite tests) increase the amount of space debris orbiting the Earth by about 20 percent", and the debris might threaten spacecraft for up to 100 years." Link So apparently that's not correct. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

Orbital satellite destruction on a large scale would produce tracts of orbital debris that would seriously pose substantial risks to future satellites and other space endeavors. But, aside from orbits that are "strategic" in and of themselves, some limited operations could still be carried out in a hostile, ASAT environment by countries capable of engaging in it. The thing is, the goal of ASAT warfare is to limit an enemy's capability as it relates to warfare on the ground. Limiting intelligence and communication, for example. Those effect ground-based strategies. Sure, somewhere in the decision tree is a checkbox that asks "Will this hurt long-term operations in space?" But, right beside that is another that says "Which is more important - Winning the War or Worrying About Long-Term Operations in Space?" I agree with you: ASAT warfare doesn't do anyone much good in the long-term as the results will pose serious risks for future plans in space. But, in the short-term (What the guys standing over the buttons worry about.) it's a necessary-risk consideration. These demonstration flights are part of the old Cold War dance we learned so well, IMO. It's not that anyone truly wants to use such things. The costs to all countries involved would be extremely high. Satellites aren't very robust. They're extremely expensive, delicate little flowers orbiting in space with a huge, ginormous benefit to the host/user country. But, it's a reminder that if it ever came down to that, ASAT-MAD could happen so it's best not to engage in it at all. I suppose that's what it is, in the end-run: ASAT-MAD demonstrations. Except, with the US's demonstration, it is showing an advanced ASAT capability that isn't limited to static launch systems and one that is capable of being deployed anywhere in the world in order to quickly and efficiently remove a satellite threat. Hopefully, that sets the bar sufficiently high so that any competition would <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

grdja · Feb 14, 2008

I think above was saying, that after LEO debris goes over certain point, your MEO and GEO sats wont live to reach their high and clean orbital altitudes.

MeteorWayne · Feb 14, 2008

You missed the point. If a few satellites in LEO are destroyed, then we could be surrounded by a shell of debris thick enough to prevent launches to GPS or Geosynch orbits. Then nothing ever again can safely leave the atmosphere. That's very bad. It's not a declaration of war to shoot down your own satellites as a demonstration of the abilty, but the net result could be an impermeable layer of debris around our planet. And even tiny space debris can destroy other craft, continuing the process of irretrievably polluting the near earth environment, so I reject your smiley <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

propforce · Feb 14, 2008

Yeah, it's a test. First time out for any new gadget or an old gadget in a new mode is, by definition a test. While I hope it succeeds, recalling the tortuous THAAD experience to date, I am not hopefull. We demonstrated this successfully before, back in 1985, it's called ASAT. It has probably help the Russian in agreeing with Ronald Reagan in tearing down the wall. For a guarantee result, you can call NASA. They just did this not long ago, it was called DART. They were suppose to meet and grab a satellite but instead they knocked it so hard that it was out of its orbit. Now imagine if they just knock it harder.... <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 14, 2008

1207 - As noted, this is a test. We won't know if it works or not. IOW, if it does not work, would you think that it gets out to the public? If there wasn't extremely high-confidence that this would work, they wouldn't announce it in such a dramatic fashion. Now, they're on the line and it HAS to work or it'll be a major black-eye for the US-ASAT program. It'll work.... /fingers crossed <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

Pentagon to Have Dead Satellite Shot Down

yevaud

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

3488

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

yevaud

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

vogon13

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

yevaud

Guest

propforce

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Testing

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

vogon13

Guest

propforce

Guest

yevaud

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

grdja

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

propforce

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page