I had to say when I read this article http://www.space.com/news/090610-military-fireballs.html I was shocked. Why would the US military hamper such necessary research data and analysis that could help save thousands of lives. First and foremost of course I thought of the slight possibility that they knew something we didn't. But with the amount of other resources available, I re-evaluated it to be unlikely. Besides the critical importance of the fireball data, what is the extent of the impact this will have on studying impactors?
- Status
Just to be clear, this does not affect the gathering and dissemination of information regarding detcted asteroids such as the 2009 KK thread we've all been involved in. This has to do with atmpospheric impacts that are detected by the satellites.
As for the decision, it's extremely stupid for the reasons outlined in the article....a few excerpts:
For 15 years, scientists have benefited from data gleaned by U.S. classified satellites of natural fireball events in Earth's atmosphere – but no longer.
A recent U.S. military policy decision now explicitly states that observations by hush-hush government spacecraft of incoming bolides and fireballs are classified secret and are not to be released, SPACE.com has learned.
The satellites' main objectives include detecting nuclear bomb tests, and their characterizations of asteroids and lesser meteoroids as they crash through the atmosphere has been a byproduct data bonanza for scientists.
"It's baffling to us why this would suddenly change," said one scientist familiar with the work. "It's unfortunate because there was this great synergy...a very good cooperative arrangement. Systems were put into dual-use mode where a lot of science was getting done that couldn't be done any other way. It's a regrettable change in policy."
Scientists say not only will research into the threat from space be hampered, but public understanding of sometimes dramatic sky explosions will be diminished, perhaps leading to hype and fear of the unknown.
Over the last decade or so, hundreds of these events have been spotted by the classified satellites. Priceless observational information derived from the spacecraft were made quickly available, giving researchers such insights as time, a location, height above the surface, as well as light-curves to help pin down the amount of energy churned out from the fireballs.
And in the shaky world we now live, it's nice to know that a sky-high detonation is natural versus a nuclear weapon blast.
Where the space-based surveillance truly shines is over remote stretches of ocean – far away from the prospect of ground-based data collection.
But all that ended within the last few months, leaving scientists blind-sided and miffed by the shift in policy. The hope is that the policy decision will be revisited and overturned.
Critical importance
"The fireball data from military or surveillance assets have been of critical importance for assessing the impact hazard," said David Morrison, a Near Earth Object (NEO) scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center. He noted that his views are his own, not as a NASA spokesperson.
The size of the average largest atmospheric impact from small asteroids is a key piece of experimental data to anchor the low-energy end of the power-law distribution of impactors, from asteroids greater than 6 miles (10 kilometers) in diameter down to the meter scale, Morrison told SPACE.com.
"These fireball data together with astronomical observations of larger near-Earth asteroids define the nature of the impact hazard and allow rational planning to deal with this issue," Morrison said.
Morrison said that fireball data are today playing additional important roles.
As example, the fireball data together with infrasound allowed scientists to verify the approximate size and energy of the unique Carancas impact in the Altiplano -- on the Peru-Bolivia border -- on Sept. 15, 2007.
Fireball information also played an important part in the story of the small asteroid 2008 TC3, Morrison said. That was the first-ever case of the astronomical detection of a small asteroid before it hit last year. The fireball data were key for locating the impact point and the subsequent recovery of fragments from this impact.
Link in public understanding
Astronomers are closing in on a years-long effort to find most of the potentially devastating large asteroids in our neck of the cosmic woods, those that could cause widespread regional or global devastation. Now they plan to look for the smaller stuff.
So it is ironic that the availability of these fireball data should be curtailed just at the time the NEO program is moving toward surveying the small impactors that are most likely to be picked up in the fireball monitoring program, Morrision said.
"These data have been available to the scientific community for the past decade," he said. "It is unfortunate this information is shut off just when it is becoming more valuable to the community interested in characterizing near Earth asteroids and protecting our planet from asteroid impacts."
The newly issued policy edict by the U.S. military of reporting fireball observations from satellites also caught the attention of Clark Chapman, a planetary scientist and asteroid impact expert at Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado.
"I think that this information is very important to make public," Chapman told SPACE.com.
"More important than the scientific value, I think, is that these rare, bright fireballs provide a link in public understanding to the asteroid impact hazard posed by still larger and less frequent asteroids," Chapman explained.
Those objects are witnessed by unsuspecting people in far-flung places, Chapman said, often generating incorrect and exaggerated reports.
"The grounding achieved by associating these reports by untrained observers with the satellite measurements is very useful for calibrating the observer reports and closing the loop with folks who think they have seen something mysterious and extraordinary," Chapman said.
As for the decision, it's extremely stupid for the reasons outlined in the article....a few excerpts:
For 15 years, scientists have benefited from data gleaned by U.S. classified satellites of natural fireball events in Earth's atmosphere – but no longer.
A recent U.S. military policy decision now explicitly states that observations by hush-hush government spacecraft of incoming bolides and fireballs are classified secret and are not to be released, SPACE.com has learned.
The satellites' main objectives include detecting nuclear bomb tests, and their characterizations of asteroids and lesser meteoroids as they crash through the atmosphere has been a byproduct data bonanza for scientists.
"It's baffling to us why this would suddenly change," said one scientist familiar with the work. "It's unfortunate because there was this great synergy...a very good cooperative arrangement. Systems were put into dual-use mode where a lot of science was getting done that couldn't be done any other way. It's a regrettable change in policy."
Scientists say not only will research into the threat from space be hampered, but public understanding of sometimes dramatic sky explosions will be diminished, perhaps leading to hype and fear of the unknown.
Over the last decade or so, hundreds of these events have been spotted by the classified satellites. Priceless observational information derived from the spacecraft were made quickly available, giving researchers such insights as time, a location, height above the surface, as well as light-curves to help pin down the amount of energy churned out from the fireballs.
And in the shaky world we now live, it's nice to know that a sky-high detonation is natural versus a nuclear weapon blast.
Where the space-based surveillance truly shines is over remote stretches of ocean – far away from the prospect of ground-based data collection.
But all that ended within the last few months, leaving scientists blind-sided and miffed by the shift in policy. The hope is that the policy decision will be revisited and overturned.
Critical importance
"The fireball data from military or surveillance assets have been of critical importance for assessing the impact hazard," said David Morrison, a Near Earth Object (NEO) scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center. He noted that his views are his own, not as a NASA spokesperson.
The size of the average largest atmospheric impact from small asteroids is a key piece of experimental data to anchor the low-energy end of the power-law distribution of impactors, from asteroids greater than 6 miles (10 kilometers) in diameter down to the meter scale, Morrison told SPACE.com.
"These fireball data together with astronomical observations of larger near-Earth asteroids define the nature of the impact hazard and allow rational planning to deal with this issue," Morrison said.
Morrison said that fireball data are today playing additional important roles.
As example, the fireball data together with infrasound allowed scientists to verify the approximate size and energy of the unique Carancas impact in the Altiplano -- on the Peru-Bolivia border -- on Sept. 15, 2007.
Fireball information also played an important part in the story of the small asteroid 2008 TC3, Morrison said. That was the first-ever case of the astronomical detection of a small asteroid before it hit last year. The fireball data were key for locating the impact point and the subsequent recovery of fragments from this impact.
Link in public understanding
Astronomers are closing in on a years-long effort to find most of the potentially devastating large asteroids in our neck of the cosmic woods, those that could cause widespread regional or global devastation. Now they plan to look for the smaller stuff.
So it is ironic that the availability of these fireball data should be curtailed just at the time the NEO program is moving toward surveying the small impactors that are most likely to be picked up in the fireball monitoring program, Morrision said.
"These data have been available to the scientific community for the past decade," he said. "It is unfortunate this information is shut off just when it is becoming more valuable to the community interested in characterizing near Earth asteroids and protecting our planet from asteroid impacts."
The newly issued policy edict by the U.S. military of reporting fireball observations from satellites also caught the attention of Clark Chapman, a planetary scientist and asteroid impact expert at Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado.
"I think that this information is very important to make public," Chapman told SPACE.com.
"More important than the scientific value, I think, is that these rare, bright fireballs provide a link in public understanding to the asteroid impact hazard posed by still larger and less frequent asteroids," Chapman explained.
Those objects are witnessed by unsuspecting people in far-flung places, Chapman said, often generating incorrect and exaggerated reports.
"The grounding achieved by associating these reports by untrained observers with the satellite measurements is very useful for calibrating the observer reports and closing the loop with folks who think they have seen something mysterious and extraordinary," Chapman said.
This is the kind of information I think people want to know Wayne. What out of the article is actually the work of an untrained reporter trying to make a buck, and what REAL impact it will have on true data collecting.
Actually the reporting was pretty good, especially much was quotes from long time workers in the field of asteroids and impacts.
The satellites provided the most accurate measurements of the energy of the dozens to hundreds of moderate sized objects that burn up in the atmosphere every year. This allows correleations of ground observations with actual energy.
The satellites cover the whole earth, not just where people see and report them. This leads to much more robust statistics in estimating the background flux of such objects with precise statistics of the size/freqency slope.
Next time a big fieball lights up the coast from New Bruswick to New Jersey, we will be lacking critical information about the energy, time, atmospheric detonation height, etc.
What a stupid decision, because there's no reason not to share the data with the scientific community. It's not like there's any reason I can see for it to be classified. If there is, I assume the black helicopters will land and explain it to me.
The satellites provided the most accurate measurements of the energy of the dozens to hundreds of moderate sized objects that burn up in the atmosphere every year. This allows correleations of ground observations with actual energy.
The satellites cover the whole earth, not just where people see and report them. This leads to much more robust statistics in estimating the background flux of such objects with precise statistics of the size/freqency slope.
Next time a big fieball lights up the coast from New Bruswick to New Jersey, we will be lacking critical information about the energy, time, atmospheric detonation height, etc.
What a stupid decision, because there's no reason not to share the data with the scientific community. It's not like there's any reason I can see for it to be classified. If there is, I assume the black helicopters will land and explain it to me.
In addition, classifying this data also introduces the risk of escalating international tensions.
For example, suppose there is a fireball from a meteor airblast over another country, and this observation creates fear, political apprehension and misunderstanding if that country interprets this as an attack, or nuclear blast, or an aggressive incident. Russia and China have enough knowledge, and there own assetts to monitor their airspace, so they aren't a concern....but suppose there was an airblast over Iran or N. Korea or Pakistan or India or Syria. At least in the last 15 years, the data was quickly released to the international community of scientists, and this anomalous data was quickly explained away, reducing tensions. However, I worry now that this information will be kept secret, and as a result, these countries could misinterpret natural events as acts of war and aggression.
We have everything to gain by releasing this information to the scientific community, and a lot to lose by keeping it secretly classified.
For example, suppose there is a fireball from a meteor airblast over another country, and this observation creates fear, political apprehension and misunderstanding if that country interprets this as an attack, or nuclear blast, or an aggressive incident. Russia and China have enough knowledge, and there own assetts to monitor their airspace, so they aren't a concern....but suppose there was an airblast over Iran or N. Korea or Pakistan or India or Syria. At least in the last 15 years, the data was quickly released to the international community of scientists, and this anomalous data was quickly explained away, reducing tensions. However, I worry now that this information will be kept secret, and as a result, these countries could misinterpret natural events as acts of war and aggression.
We have everything to gain by releasing this information to the scientific community, and a lot to lose by keeping it secretly classified.
That's a very good point. I was just so incensed over the scientific loss, I hadn't gotten there yet 
IIRC, there was one incident where the scenario you proposed has occurred, but if I told you I'd have to kill you
IIRC, there was one incident where the scenario you proposed has occurred, but if I told you I'd have to kill you
Great point Silyene. In this day and age it doesn't take much to set another country off by a misinterpretation of such an event. Also to mention I believe the research data was also used to track the trajectery of peices of this asteroid in the Sudan: http://www.chinapost.com.tw/life/science-&-technology/2009/03/28/201976/Scientists-watch.htm from the China Post. I can imagine the valuable research in collecting these peices lost because of some big shot making blind decissions. I think this new ruling was made without a single ounce of thought process behind it... or if it had, I think they should wait until this person graduates from Kindergarden before they let them make anymore decissions
Well I (and probably quite a few others in the meteor/asteroid community) will be writing some letters to get the reasoning and hopefully get the decisiom reversed.
As I understand it, under current law/regulations, you can't just make something classified because you say so. It has to be justified.
As I understand it, under current law/regulations, you can't just make something classified because you say so. It has to be justified.
This is very likely the government trying to keep the capabilities of their systems unknown.
The space-rock explosion detection was a nice side effect of the nuclear explosion detection systems, but still not the systems' primary mission.
The asteroid explosions were primarily useful (I presume) for determing a baseline of how often impacts occur...determining the background rate, as it were.
Scientific missions dedicated to that purpose would probably yield better data anyhow.
I can _understand_ the need for military secrecy. It just means the space program needs tools of its own.
The space-rock explosion detection was a nice side effect of the nuclear explosion detection systems, but still not the systems' primary mission.
The asteroid explosions were primarily useful (I presume) for determing a baseline of how often impacts occur...determining the background rate, as it were.
Scientific missions dedicated to that purpose would probably yield better data anyhow.
I can _understand_ the need for military secrecy. It just means the space program needs tools of its own.
MeteorWayne":32a8y3d3 said:
Even if that was the law, the threshold to convince a judge that you would rather keep the capabilties of your military satelites confidential would be pretty low. I doubt a judge would side with scientists over the military if a military satellite is being used.
You make good points, to a point
However, under current circumstances, the budget for such a dedicated mission does not exist, even if it helped determine how to save our planet from an impact or judge the risk. And I should point out, that we taxpayers paid for the military sats as well, so are entitled to data that need not be classified.
Since this data has been revealed in the past, any capability revealing issues have floated downstream.
If there was a need to protect data from a new sat with different capabilities, I can understand that.
But to turn off the spigot of useful scientific data when the cat's already out of the bag on existing sats makes no sense to me.
MW
However, under current circumstances, the budget for such a dedicated mission does not exist, even if it helped determine how to save our planet from an impact or judge the risk. And I should point out, that we taxpayers paid for the military sats as well, so are entitled to data that need not be classified.
Since this data has been revealed in the past, any capability revealing issues have floated downstream.
If there was a need to protect data from a new sat with different capabilities, I can understand that.
But to turn off the spigot of useful scientific data when the cat's already out of the bag on existing sats makes no sense to me.
MW
I had once watched a program that made the case that asteroids are the _single greatest threat to an individual's life, once averaged out over sufficient time scale.
IE, an asteroid that could, say, wipe out just half of earth's population (say, 2.5 billion people) stikes once every X years.
so the annual death rate from that size of asteriod is 2.5 billion/X. combine that with smaller asteroids, and asteroids on a yearly average _will kill_ more people than earthquake, tornado, etc.
With that in mind, the best case to make, IMHO, is that this data is crucial to saving lives _over the long haul_.
won't fly, but it's an interesting angle to take....
IE, an asteroid that could, say, wipe out just half of earth's population (say, 2.5 billion people) stikes once every X years.
so the annual death rate from that size of asteriod is 2.5 billion/X. combine that with smaller asteroids, and asteroids on a yearly average _will kill_ more people than earthquake, tornado, etc.
With that in mind, the best case to make, IMHO, is that this data is crucial to saving lives _over the long haul_.
won't fly, but it's an interesting angle to take....
Yeah, that's kind of what I was aiming at. Understanding the background risk anchors all our estimates such as the Palermo scale. After all, it (the PS) is a risk compared to the background; anything we can do to define that background risk helps us determine our observational needs and future potential interdiction requirements.
What was the exact wording the government used in their release? hmmmm... how about a copy of the entire release?
...can anyone find it?
...can anyone find it?
Welcome to Space.com.
Good point. That I'd like to see. So far it's only media reports, and we know what they are worth far too often.
Good point. That I'd like to see. So far it's only media reports, and we know what they are worth far too often.
Welcome spacewaves
Now its funny that I just did a wide news media search for coverage of this topic, and there is surprisingly very little being discussed about this topic. I thought it would have received a lot more attention. Mainly that tax payers sunk millions into these satellites and are suddenly cut off from this resource. The even bigger question is WHO exactly made this judgment call and why. Personally the "justifiable" reason should have been made more public. I think the US military thought they can just quietly take this action. So far their not too far away from doing just that. Might I also point out there are numerous website ripping off this article and the reporting of Leonard David, Space.com's Space Inside Columnist. Including but not limited to Yahoo News, MSNBC, reddit.com, abovetopsecret.com, just to name a VERY minor few. There are dozens more wreaking the benefits of Leonard's work and hosting it on their own websites. It's sad that they rip off his work instead of not only gathering their own information, but even MSNBC being as big as they are with the number of reporters they have. You would think they would actually do a bit of work themselves.
Now its funny that I just did a wide news media search for coverage of this topic, and there is surprisingly very little being discussed about this topic. I thought it would have received a lot more attention. Mainly that tax payers sunk millions into these satellites and are suddenly cut off from this resource. The even bigger question is WHO exactly made this judgment call and why. Personally the "justifiable" reason should have been made more public. I think the US military thought they can just quietly take this action. So far their not too far away from doing just that. Might I also point out there are numerous website ripping off this article and the reporting of Leonard David, Space.com's Space Inside Columnist. Including but not limited to Yahoo News, MSNBC, reddit.com, abovetopsecret.com, just to name a VERY minor few. There are dozens more wreaking the benefits of Leonard's work and hosting it on their own websites. It's sad that they rip off his work instead of not only gathering their own information, but even MSNBC being as big as they are with the number of reporters they have. You would think they would actually do a bit of work themselves.
As has been stated, there is enough civilian observation going on that a big impactor won't be secret for very long. However, it intrigues me as to why the Government would choose to classify their observations knowing full well that impactors are being searched for on a regular basis by non-military entities....
Something tells me that meteors and comets are no longer what the Air Force is looking for or at. What that might be is up to speculation.
Something tells me that meteors and comets are no longer what the Air Force is looking for or at. What that might be is up to speculation.
Just be sure you understand here, dragon, this has nothing to do with observations of asteroids or any other celestial object.
It only refers to data that the military satellites collected about objects that had already impacted the atmosphere. The detonation/burn up of asteroids produces a certain amount of energy depending on the charachteristics of the asteroid, and the famous equation KE= 1/2 mass X Velocity squared.
That is all these sats detected; the energy release in the atmosphere. and the precise timing.
It has nothing to do with the search for, and tracking of such objects.
Hope this helps
Wayne
It only refers to data that the military satellites collected about objects that had already impacted the atmosphere. The detonation/burn up of asteroids produces a certain amount of energy depending on the charachteristics of the asteroid, and the famous equation KE= 1/2 mass X Velocity squared.
That is all these sats detected; the energy release in the atmosphere. and the precise timing.
It has nothing to do with the search for, and tracking of such objects.
Hope this helps
Wayne
Fox News has just released Leonard's article on their site as well. You would think we would have had some live coverage from the news media by now. Neither CNN or the Canadian CTV NewsNET are covering this story. I would have expected that these two media giants would have been right on top of something like this.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525832,00.html?sPage=fnc/scitech/space
Seems Leonard David is the only resource to this information thus far. I would like to see a copy of the document or at least live coverage of this topic Leonard used as his reference. As I said, I believe the military really wanted to do this quietly, but it seems we have Leonard nipping at their heels. Leonard's report on this matter is now all over the internet. Maybe this will spawn some pencil pusher to actually speak to the public and give us some insight.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525832,00.html?sPage=fnc/scitech/space
Seems Leonard David is the only resource to this information thus far. I would like to see a copy of the document or at least live coverage of this topic Leonard used as his reference. As I said, I believe the military really wanted to do this quietly, but it seems we have Leonard nipping at their heels. Leonard's report on this matter is now all over the internet. Maybe this will spawn some pencil pusher to actually speak to the public and give us some insight.
A Regrettable Loss of Scientific Data
I thought this would be of particular interest to everyone here. This is, IMHO, an ill-considered policy, and I trust they will rethink their decisions and retract it.
Military Hush-Up: Incoming Space Rocks Now Classified
For 15 years, scientists have benefited from data gleaned by U.S. classified satellites of natural fireball events in Earth's atmosphere – but no longer.
A recent U.S. military policy decision now explicitly states that observations by hush-hush government spacecraft of incoming bolides and fireballs are classified secret and are not to be released, SPACE.com has learned.
The satellites' main objectives include detecting nuclear bomb tests, and their characterizations of asteroids and lesser meteoroids as they crash through the atmosphere has been a byproduct data bonanza for scientists.
The upshot: Space rocks that explode in the atmosphere are now classified.
"It's baffling to us why this would suddenly change," said one scientist familiar with the work. "It's unfortunate because there was this great synergy...a very good cooperative arrangement. Systems were put into dual-use mode where a lot of science was getting done that couldn't be done any other way. It's a regrettable change in policy."
Scientists say not only will research into the threat from space be hampered, but public understanding of sometimes dramatic sky explosions will be diminished, perhaps leading to hype and fear of the unknown.
Incoming!
Most "shooting stars" are caused by natural space debris no larger than peas. But routinely, rocks as big as basketballs and even small cars crash into the atmosphere. Most vaporize or explode on the way in, but some reach the surface or explode above the surface. Understandably, scientists want to know about these events so they can better predict the risk here on Earth.
Yet because the world is two-thirds ocean, most incoming objects aren't visible to observers on the ground. Many other incoming space rocks go unnoticed because daylight drowns them out.
Over the last decade or so, hundreds of these events have been spotted by the classified satellites. Priceless observational information derived from the spacecraft were made quickly available, giving researchers such insights as time, a location, height above the surface, as well as light-curves to help pin down the amount of energy churned out from the fireballs.
And in the shaky world we now live, it's nice to know that a sky-high detonation is natural versus a nuclear weapon blast.
Where the space-based surveillance truly shines is over remote stretches of ocean – far away from the prospect of ground-based data collection.
But all that ended within the last few months, leaving scientists blind-sided and miffed by the shift in policy. The hope is that the policy decision will be revisited and overturned.
http://www.space.com/news/090610-milita ... balls.html
I thought this would be of particular interest to everyone here. This is, IMHO, an ill-considered policy, and I trust they will rethink their decisions and retract it.
Military Hush-Up: Incoming Space Rocks Now Classified
For 15 years, scientists have benefited from data gleaned by U.S. classified satellites of natural fireball events in Earth's atmosphere – but no longer.
A recent U.S. military policy decision now explicitly states that observations by hush-hush government spacecraft of incoming bolides and fireballs are classified secret and are not to be released, SPACE.com has learned.
The satellites' main objectives include detecting nuclear bomb tests, and their characterizations of asteroids and lesser meteoroids as they crash through the atmosphere has been a byproduct data bonanza for scientists.
The upshot: Space rocks that explode in the atmosphere are now classified.
"It's baffling to us why this would suddenly change," said one scientist familiar with the work. "It's unfortunate because there was this great synergy...a very good cooperative arrangement. Systems were put into dual-use mode where a lot of science was getting done that couldn't be done any other way. It's a regrettable change in policy."
Scientists say not only will research into the threat from space be hampered, but public understanding of sometimes dramatic sky explosions will be diminished, perhaps leading to hype and fear of the unknown.
Incoming!
Most "shooting stars" are caused by natural space debris no larger than peas. But routinely, rocks as big as basketballs and even small cars crash into the atmosphere. Most vaporize or explode on the way in, but some reach the surface or explode above the surface. Understandably, scientists want to know about these events so they can better predict the risk here on Earth.
Yet because the world is two-thirds ocean, most incoming objects aren't visible to observers on the ground. Many other incoming space rocks go unnoticed because daylight drowns them out.
Over the last decade or so, hundreds of these events have been spotted by the classified satellites. Priceless observational information derived from the spacecraft were made quickly available, giving researchers such insights as time, a location, height above the surface, as well as light-curves to help pin down the amount of energy churned out from the fireballs.
And in the shaky world we now live, it's nice to know that a sky-high detonation is natural versus a nuclear weapon blast.
Where the space-based surveillance truly shines is over remote stretches of ocean – far away from the prospect of ground-based data collection.
But all that ended within the last few months, leaving scientists blind-sided and miffed by the shift in policy. The hope is that the policy decision will be revisited and overturned.
http://www.space.com/news/090610-milita ... balls.html
Re: A Regrettable Loss of Scientific Data
What a fortuitous circumstance that this article would be published at the time this very subject is being discussed in this thread!yevaud":1fcpfjf7 said:
xXTheOneRavenXx":3o3rpmo5 said:
Unfortunately, all the news services and newspapers have been losing serious money, and their staff reporting has been decimated as a result by layoffs.
Yes, but you would think that they would still be after the big stories instead of this persons dog has flee's, or that person got diarrhea eating at that restaurant. This is news that most of them should be all over. It just shows how certain military agencies weasel their way into getting in the way of good science.
There was a news item in the June 18 Nature about this. Not much there...here's a few tidbits. It quoted the SDC report as the primary source.
Peter Brown (well known in meteor land) U of Western Ontario Astronomer:
"These systems are extremely useful, I think the scientific community benefited enormously"
Brown says he was told at the beginning of the year that there would be no further data releaases.
Mark Boslough, pysacist at Sandia National Labs says he was told this spring that he could no longer publicly discuss the classified data to which he had some access.
Neither scientist could give a reason for the end of the agreement, and the US Air Force, which operates the satellites, did not respond in time for Nature's deadline.
"The USAF did issue a Mar 16 memo on the military classification of fireball data, but Nature could not confirm it's contents."
"The Defense Support Program satellite network is part of the Pentagon's early warning system. Since 1970, 23 Infrared satellites in the series have been launched into geosyncronous orbit to monitor the globe for missile launches or atmospheric nuclear blasts.
But the same IR sensors were perfect for spotting fireballs as they streaked across the atmosphere, according to Brian Weeden, a former Air Force captain..."
The satellites could precisely detect the time, position, altitude and brightness of meteors as they entered the Earth's atmosphere. Weeden said the military didn't consider that information particularly useful, or classified. 'It was being dropped on the floor', he says."
(Due to the IE8 problem, I have to start a new post)
Peter Brown (well known in meteor land) U of Western Ontario Astronomer:
"These systems are extremely useful, I think the scientific community benefited enormously"
Brown says he was told at the beginning of the year that there would be no further data releaases.
Mark Boslough, pysacist at Sandia National Labs says he was told this spring that he could no longer publicly discuss the classified data to which he had some access.
Neither scientist could give a reason for the end of the agreement, and the US Air Force, which operates the satellites, did not respond in time for Nature's deadline.
"The USAF did issue a Mar 16 memo on the military classification of fireball data, but Nature could not confirm it's contents."
"The Defense Support Program satellite network is part of the Pentagon's early warning system. Since 1970, 23 Infrared satellites in the series have been launched into geosyncronous orbit to monitor the globe for missile launches or atmospheric nuclear blasts.
But the same IR sensors were perfect for spotting fireballs as they streaked across the atmosphere, according to Brian Weeden, a former Air Force captain..."
The satellites could precisely detect the time, position, altitude and brightness of meteors as they entered the Earth's atmosphere. Weeden said the military didn't consider that information particularly useful, or classified. 'It was being dropped on the floor', he says."
(Due to the IE8 problem, I have to start a new post)
Under an informal arrangement, at least some of the data seem to have been provided on an ad-hoc basis to scientists studying meteorites. Often it came as an anonymous, tersly worded e-mail describing the coordinates, altitude and size of a fireball.
Even the short description of events were enormously helpful
In 2002 Brown and his colleagues used a larger data set from the sats to quatify the number of objects striking the earth each year.
Last year they were used to narrow the search for remnants of asteroid 2008 TC over the Sudan, which allowed pieces of this unique object to be recovered; and they were also crucial in recovering fragnents from the Tagish Lake in northern Canada (2000)
While the reasons for the change are unclear, it coincides with a new generation of satellites. Weeden speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellite's capabilities to be made public, or it may siimply lack the expensive software needed to handle classsified and unclassified data simultaneously.
Brown says that the end of the relationsfip has left the meteor community smarting. The global reach of the satellites and the data they supplied were unparalleled. "There's nothing else that even comes close", he says.
MW
Even the short description of events were enormously helpful
In 2002 Brown and his colleagues used a larger data set from the sats to quatify the number of objects striking the earth each year.
Last year they were used to narrow the search for remnants of asteroid 2008 TC over the Sudan, which allowed pieces of this unique object to be recovered; and they were also crucial in recovering fragnents from the Tagish Lake in northern Canada (2000)
While the reasons for the change are unclear, it coincides with a new generation of satellites. Weeden speculates that the Pentagon may not want details of the new satellite's capabilities to be made public, or it may siimply lack the expensive software needed to handle classsified and unclassified data simultaneously.
Brown says that the end of the relationsfip has left the meteor community smarting. The global reach of the satellites and the data they supplied were unparalleled. "There's nothing else that even comes close", he says.
MW
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 174
-
UFO whistleblowers tell Congress 'we are not alone in the cosmos' (video)- Started by Admin
- Replies: 38
-
-
Blue Origin stacks huge New Glenn rocket ahead of 1st launch (photo)
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 3
-
FAA creating new committee to update launch regulations
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Is this the best Black Friday camera deal ever? The Canon EOS R5 is nearly $1500 off the MSRP
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Brilliant fireball explodes over North America as satellites watch (video)
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram