Spy satellite to make uncontrolled re-entry.

MeteorWayne · Mar 16, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wouldn't have shot it down. Posted by meteorwayne</DIV>Todays list of endangered satellites includes Genesis 2, in a 536x580 km orbit, and NOAA 12, in a 797x816 km orbit.Shooting this thing down has endangered the entire satellite community p) <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>

Zipi · Mar 16, 2008

Here is a direct link to Socrates search of USA 193 DEB:http://celestrak.com/cgi-bin/searchSOCRATES.pl?IDENT=NAME&NAME_TEXT=USA%20193%20deb&ORDER=MAXPROB&MAX=25  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

job1207 · Mar 17, 2008

Hey guys, THAT IS REALLY CLOSE, he said as the Satellite debris passed WITHIN A MILE......Really, Look at the minimum range data.  WOW

CalliArcale · Mar 17, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Hey guys, THAT IS REALLY CLOSE, he said as the Satellite debris passed WITHIN A MILE......Really, Look at the minimum range data.  WOW  Posted by job1207</DIV> DUDE!  Yeah, that's close.  I remember when a piece of debris was due to come that close to ISS.  They moved the station out of the way.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "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." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

job1207 · Mar 17, 2008

I tell you, I wrote to the PTBs about this. NYT and Wash Post. They are MISSING the real story of USA 193.

MeteorWayne · Mar 17, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Hey guys, THAT IS REALLY CLOSE, he said as the Satellite debris passed WITHIN A MILE......Really, Look at the minimum range data.  WOW  Posted by job1207</DIV> Which sat was that close approach to?I note Iridium 61 is now threatened, that's in a 776x779 km orbit.It's amazing that the debris is now threatening satellites in such high orbits. POOR planning and justification for the shootdown. <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>

job1207 · Mar 17, 2008

[url=www.celestrak.com/cgi-bin/searchSOCRATES.pl?IDENT=NAME&NAME_TEXT=USA%20193%20deb&ORDER=MAXPROB&MAX=25]Space junk is dangerous [/url]  See the list and minimum distace to the right. I can't seem to shorten this, if someone could fix it I would appreciate it.

MeteorWayne · Mar 17, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Space junk is dangerous  See the list and minimum distace to the right. I can't seem to shorten this, if someone could fix it I would appreciate it.  Posted by job1207</DIV>OK, you're talking about ETS 7.There have been a few others with intercept distances of under .250 km, so I was just wondering if this was something special. I have the SOCRATES page open constantly and update it daily.It ain't a pretty picture.Thanx, MWW <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>

job1207 · Mar 17, 2008

I see .25 what, km?

MeteorWayne · Mar 17, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I see .25 what, km?   Posted by job1207</DIV>Yes, as it says, .250 km. <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>

job1207 · Mar 17, 2008

I think we crashed celestrak. Well, probably not, but it is not working. Bummer.

scottb50 · Mar 18, 2008

Let's seeKyotoThe ABM treatyIraqGeneva ConventionsHabeus CorpusPrivacy ActTortureRendition to facilitate tortureHand feeding of HaliburtonI'm sure there are at least a couple more, but you said off the top of my head.    <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

silylene old · Mar 18, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Yes, as it says, .250 km. Posted by meteorwayne</DIV> This would be a real interesting thread to forward to a newspaper or magazine science editor.  I do think that this story needs to be told, to prevent the government (US or Chinese or whomever) from blowing up more satellites.  Susan Begley at Newsweek would be a good science editor to forward this story to, as she does reasonably well in investigating stories. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

billslugg · Mar 18, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Let's seeKyotoThe ABM treatyIraqGeneva ConventionsHabeus CorpusPrivacy ActTortureRendition to facilitate tortureHand feeding of HaliburtonI'm sure there are at least a couple more, but you said off the top of my head.    Posted by scottb50</DIV>Kyoto - was signed byAl Gore and rejected by the Senate by a vote of 95-0, therefore it was never an international obligation. Wrong.ABM Treaty - Was negotiated with the Soviet Union.When the SU collapsed the treaty became void. Wrong.Iraq - can you be more specific? Our invasion was justified by the 1991 ceasefire violations, Resolution 1441 and our own declaration of the use of force. Wrong.Geneva Convention does not apply to illegal combatants. They are granted under Hague and Geneva only a field tribunal, with the commanding officer as judge, the second in command as defense counsel, if found guilty, a bullet to the head, a proper burial and return of their effects to the family through the IRC. Wrong.Habeus corpus does not apply to illegal combatants. The President has the sole authority to declare you an illegal combatant. Wrong.The Privacy Act is a Federal Law, not an international obligation. Although the privacy act allows the government to go through your records, they do it only to catch terrorists (who fall outside the civil courts). If you are caught in something illegal (non terrorist) and it was done without a warrant, they cannot use that evidence in court. Wrong.The legality of rendition remains highly controversial. I will grant you this one however. Right.Hand feeding of Haliburton is an urban myth. Clinton first hired them for use in Haiti. They bid along with Bechtel and Slumberger for future combat zone contracts. Clinton allowed them 3.5% profit on their activities. Bush cut it down to 2.5%. Wrong.Therefore your claim of numerous violations of international obligations remains unproven.Bill Slugg  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

CalliArcale · Mar 18, 2008

*mod hat on*Good points, both of you, but I'd like to remind you that we are in Missions & Launches.  Let's try to avoid derailing this dicussion of the USA 193 shootdown into a debate about politics, particularly the status/implications of treaties which are largely unrelated to space.  You can discuss that stuff over in the Lounge: Open Topic forum, okay?Thanks, guys.  *mod hat off* <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "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." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

billslugg · Mar 18, 2008

Scott has made an assertion that he needs to prove or retract. I have made my point, and I will wait for him to open a thread in the Lounge, or simply defer.Bill Slugg  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

job1207 · Mar 18, 2008

Hi Does anyone have any contacts in the media? This is a real story and no one has picked it up. Bummer.

Zipi · Mar 18, 2008

At March 24 there will be yet again a debris passing closer than 1km...<table border="1" cellpadding="5"><tbody><tr><td>02873

silylene old · Mar 18, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Hi Does anyone have any contacts in the media? This is a real story and no one has picked it up. Bummer.  Posted by job1207</DIV> As I said, this story, this thread, should be sent to Susan Begley at Newsweek.  She'll do it well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

Cygnus_X_1 · Mar 18, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>As I said, this story, this thread, should be sent to Susan Begley at Newsweek.  She'll do it well. Posted by silylene</DIV> This is a non story.  A yawner.  Airplanes and ships get closer  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

billslugg · Mar 18, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Hi Does anyone have any contacts in the media? This is a real story and no one has picked it up. Bummer.  Posted by job1207</DIV>Might I extend your remarks to include the debris from the Chinese weather satellite they shot down at 870 Km altitude on Jan 11, 2007? Celestrak shows FENGYUN 1C DEB approaching within 68 meters of Iridium 74 on Mar 23, 2008 at 23:17.Bill Slugg  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

job1207 · Mar 19, 2008

do you have a link for that. Certainly the chinese event should be part of this story.Sorry, I did not see the link at first. That is even more horrible. It should be noted that these satellites will not survive a hit from a piece of debris that is much smaller than 10 cm. This is a really big mess.

Zipi · Mar 19, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Might I extend your remarks to include the debris from the Chinese weather satellite they shot down at 870 Km altitude on Jan 11, 2007? Celestrak shows FENGYUN 1C DEB approaching within 68 meters of Iridium 74 on Mar 23, 2008 at 23:17.Bill Slugg  Posted by billslugg</DIV> You are correct about your comment of Chinese experiment, it is much worse than USA 193 case. Still this won't justify USA's satellite "shoot down" event. If everything had gone as they informed (which by my memory was "most of it is deorbited after 3-5 orbits") we won't be now discussing this here. The plan was good and the press conferences were excellent, but the actual operation itself scrubbed the whole "good" thing. The truth is that they did this too early and whole carefully planned operation got a bad reputation. After all this sounds like a human error (or miscalculation of the risks) to maximize the possibility to hit the satellite.And now some slight off topic about this issue: I too have a strong patriotic attitude towards my own country, Finland. I understand that you Bill have such attitude towards your country and that is only a good thing to have. I personally have nothing against to USA (actually quite opposite), but I think that this kind of events have to be published exactly as they happened. Unless this, we could soon see ASAT tests from Russia, Iran, etc... I expect that USA will take the full responsibility and admits that this didn't go as planned, even at the moment there is no damage done or accidents happened. Humankind should learn the lessions like this to avoid them at the future. Seems that at this time we were lucky, but how at the next time?Let's hope that we can somehow avoid the hits of those Fengyun 1C debs as well... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

billslugg · Mar 19, 2008

ZipiRecognize that the USA shot the satellite down at the first opportunity so that they could have time to fire off the remaining two missiles. The first and best opportunity came during the Feb 20, 2008 lunar eclipse.As I recall, the official estimates showed that it would take maybe 30 days for 90 percent of the pieces to reenter. Look at my link above. There is a graph showing that after 100 years only 20 percent of the Chinese debris will have reentered. The Chinese test was 1000 times worse that our test. Also we had a full hydrazine tank, containing enough to kill 400,000 people if dispersed fully. The tanks are known to survive reentry. Every major city in the world other than Helsinki and Stockholm fell under the danger area.Can yo imagine the damage to the US if it fell in downtown Peking and a few thousand people were injured or killed? It could have started a war.Bill Slugg  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

job1207 · Mar 19, 2008

"To make matters worse, debris eventually begets more debris. Bits of space junk constantly collide with their neighbors, with the current smash-ups involving small pieces hitting larger vehicles and producing little extra debris. But that could change. "It's a regeneration process that is going to happen," Johnson told SPACE.com. "The only way to prevent it would be to go up there and start removing these large derelict spacecraft and launch vehicles."" Basically the comminity is expecting a weeding out of space debris, along with active satellites to occur. The only current possible response is to send up new satellites.   That is MORE reason to never sanction a shoot down of a satellite again.  http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/080319-tw-space-debris.html

Spy satellite to make uncontrolled re-entry.

MeteorWayne

Guest

Zipi

Guest

job1207

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

job1207

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

job1207

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

job1207

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

job1207

Guest

scottb50

Guest

silylene old

Guest

billslugg

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

billslugg

Guest

job1207

Guest

Zipi

Guest

silylene old

Guest

Cygnus_X_1

Guest

billslugg

Guest

job1207

Guest

Zipi

Guest

billslugg

Guest

job1207

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page