Watch Out!!


dancing-loon
#1
US plans to shoot down satellite

The Pentagon wants to shoot the craft down from a ship

The US military is planning to shoot down a broken spy satellite due to crash land on Earth in the next few weeks, the Pentagon has announced.


President George W Bush
approved the option to fire a missile from a US Navy ship to destroy the satellite before it enters the atmosphere, officials said. They say the satellite contains a hazardous material which could be fatal if inhaled by humans.
A US general denied claims that the main aim was to destroy secret parts.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7245578.stm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
We used to or still do dump our military garbage in the arctic, now we blow it up in outer space.
I recently read that some Toronto scientist/researcher has come up with a new invention that will make satellites as small as a milk carton!! Now, that certainly would cut down on overcrowding out there!!
Many of these satellites will remain in orbit, perhaps for centuries.

Here is a piece of info: Satellites are tracked by United States Space Surveillance Network (SSN), which has been tracking every object in orbit over 10 cm in diameter since it was founded in 1957. There are approximately 560 satellites operating in Earth orbit, out of ~8,000 man-made objects in total. In its entire history, the SSN has tracked more than 26,000 space objects orbiting Earth. The majority of these have fallen into unstable orbits and incinerated during reentry. The SSN also keeps track which piece of space junk belongs to which country.

According to Space.com, there are now over 10,000 man-made satellites orbiting the Earth. A few hundred are big enough and fly close enough to the Earth that they are visible. This list includes the International Space Station (ISS) and NASA’s space shuttles.
Interesting!!! What will be man's next challenge?
 
RomSpaceKnight
#2
I bet they miss.
 
Tonington
#3
It would be embarrassing to ask China to shoot it down, presumably someone they would like to keep from combing through the potential wreckage.

I bet they get it. Billions of dollars a year must get you something to shoot down low orbit satellites.
 
dancing-loon
#4
I was looking for the cost of launching a satellite.... found this:

Enlarge image
A ring of superconducting magnets fires a projectile off a ramp at 8 kilometres per second, fast enough to reach orbit (Artist’s conception: J Fiske/LaunchPoint) Enlarge image
An enormous ring of superconducting magnets similar to a particle accelerator could fling satellites into space, or perhaps weapons around the world, suggest the findings of a new study funded by the US air force.


....
Cheaper by the dozen If the ring launched hundreds of satellites a year, it would be cheaper than conventional rocket launches. With 300 launches per year, the team estimates the ring could put payloads into orbit for $745 per kilogram. If the launch rate reached 3000 launches per year, they calculate that would drop to $189 per kilogram. Today, it costs more than 100 times that to send payloads into space.
However, Epstein says he cannot imagine a demand for that many launches in the foreseeable future. Ricci counters that demand is currently being held back by the high cost of rocket launches: "If you had orbital launch capabilities at one-tenth or one-hundredth the cost, there'd be a lot more demand."

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...nto-orbit.html

I don't really have a mind for technical stuff, but I find it fascinating what it is capable of!
 
SpookyTheCat
#5
Oh....I see THIS going well
 
lone wolf
#6
There was something on CTV news about the missile. It's supposed to be launched from the North Pacific. Hey out there in BC land ... You guys got hard hats?

Woof!
 
dancing-loon
#7
Wouldn't you know.... the Russians figured it out!!! It's a "cover"!!!

Read here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7248995.stm
 
gerryh
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by dancing-loon View Post

Wouldn't you know.... the Russians figured it out!!! It's a "cover"!!!

Read here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7248995.stm


Of course it is.
 
Zzarchov
#9
The russians just miss the cold war, back when people paid attention to them.
 
#juan
#10
Two things come to mind about this launching system. One is that the payload will be achieving at least part of it's acceleration on that circular track and will be subjected to high, possibly damaging g-loads depending on the diameter of that circular track.

Two, The launch will have to be made at high altitude to avoid most of the atmosphere that could either burn up the satellite or scrub off some of that hard-won speed.
 
Lester
#11
It looks like a huge rail gun, the capcitors would have to be massive- never mind the power needs, probably need it's own reactor.
 
Scott Free
#12
When you consider a space shuttle launch produces 28 tons of carbon dioxide, 23 tons of harmful particulates and 13 tons of hydrochloric acid a rail gun launcher might not be such a bad idea. According to NASA a single space shuttle launch produces about the same pollution as New York city in a week! That is just one launch. A rail gun could launch hundreds of satellites and depending on the power plant used to generate electricity for it, might save a lot of pollution.

My facts are from the December 2007 issue of Discover magazine as quoted on another site.
 
dancing-loon
#13
U.S. could take potshot at satellite tonight


Associated Press
February 19, 2008 at 6:49 PM EST

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon says the military's attempt to shoot down a wayward U.S. spy satellite as it falls toward Earth could happen as early as Wednesday night, but no final decision on timing has been made.
Press secretary Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that senior military officers, including the head of the U.S. Strategic Command, are evaluating the situation and will advise Defense Secretary Robert Gates when is the best time to carry it out.
The plan is to fire a missile that would release a “kenetic kill vehicle,” — a non-explosive device — on a path that would enable it to collide with the satellite, destroying the spacecraft and its components by force of impact alone.
The satellite is orbiting about 210 kilometers above Earth's surface. It is carrying an almost-full tank of rocket fuel whose toxicity would pose a threat to human health in the event the satellite crashed in a populated area.
There is also a fear that some of the advanced technology aboard the satellite could fall into the wrong hands.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, and what about all the spied photos on board? I guess, they'll have to start all over again!
They better not miss!!
 
Praxius
#14
Yeah waking up this morning I heard on the news that they are trying to clear the entire area of flights and other traveling for safety concerns they say.....

Quote:

....The government issued notices to aviators and mariners to remain clear of a section of the Pacific Ocean beginning at 10:30 p.m. EST Wednesday, indicating the first window of opportunity to launch an SM-3 missile from a Navy cruiser, the USS Lake Erie, in an effort to hit the wayward satellite.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...0220?hub=World

once again the entire world halts for the US.

And what do they mean "Issued notices to remain clear of the area?" ~ What happens if they don't?
 
dancing-loon
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Praxius View Post

Yeah waking up this morning I heard on the news that they are trying to clear the entire area of flights and other traveling for safety concerns they say.....

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...0220?hub=World

once again the entire world halts for the US.

And what do they mean "Issued notices to remain clear of the area?" ~ What happens if they don't?

Then they can't hold the US responsible and sue. If they remain in the specified area, they do so at their own risk!!!

The last paragraph of your link is interesting:
Quote:

China and Russia have expressed concern at the planned shootdown, saying it could harm security in outer space. At the State Department on Tuesday, spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters that the U.S. action is meant to protect people from the hazardous fuel and is not a weapons test.

Does that mean, if they would miss their target and hit something else instead... perhaps a Russian Satellite... then there could be all sorts of destruction happening in outer space?
Perhaps someone could explain to me what the Russians and Chinese mean with their concern?
Thanks.
 
Tonington
#16
Come on guys, damned if they do and damned if they don't.

They fire the missile when the skies aren't clear, and some accident happens, well sh|t here comes a storm of poo.

They don't do anything, and that tetrazine or whatever the hell that fuel is lands in some poor third world country poisoning the local water supply, well sh|t here comes a storm of poo.

Or do nothing, and it lands in China or Russia or any other nation with a space program, and the parts are harvested. Hmmm, that wouldn't go over well domestically now would it?

Really, what would any of you folks choose to do? Even choosing to do nothing as Sartre wrote is still a choice that has consequences.
 
lone wolf
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by dancing-loon View Post

Then they can't hold the US responsible and sue. If they remain in the specified area, they do so at their own risk!!!

The last paragraph of your link is interestingoes that mean, if they would miss their target and hit something else instead... perhaps a Russian Satellite... then there could be all sorts of destruction happening in outer space?
Perhaps someone could explain to me what the Russians and Chinese mean with their concern?
Thanks.

Quite simply: What goes up must come down. To score a hit, considering the much-faster satellite has to collide with the projectile, the missile will have to be fired uprange - westward and in the general direction of both Russia and China. They might get a second chance if the first one goes FUBAR ... but it's not likely. No missile is fast enough to catch up with anything already in orbit.

Woof!
Last edited by lone wolf; Feb 20th, 2008 at 03:17 PM..
 
karrie
#18
Given the insinuations flying about the cutting of Iran's underwater communications cables, I find Russia's accusations that the US is target practicing for satellite destruction to be quite interesting.

The current US gov has complained an awful lot about the media.
 
Praxius
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

Given the insinuations flying about the cutting of Iran's underwater communications cables, I find Russia's accusations that the US is target practicing for satellite destruction to be quite interesting.

The current US gov has complained an awful lot about the media.

Which I find connects to dancing-loon's question about the security in outerspace.

• China has been testing their own technology for shooting down satellites, which the US has been moaning about for a while.

• The US uses the media for the entire world to know that they have a spy satellite that requires destruction because it became faulty and poses a risk to people living back on earth and have been quickly testing previous technology to pretty much match what China has been working on.

Now hypothetically what would occur if the US just all of a sudden went "Whoops!" and missed their so-called satellite and made contact with another satellite in orbit.... possibly another country's like Russia or China? The US could of course use their media blabbing as defense, and basically claim it was an accident.

But come to think about it.... when was the last time the US ever mentioned anything in regards to their spying technology or tactics in the media unless forced?

In my experience reading news in the past, this sort of situation would have never been mentioned, as most wouldn't have been aware of it in the first place and US officials wouldn't mention anything unless something got screwed up and was made known.

A perfect example of this would be that time when a bomber shipped nukes across the US by accident:

Air Force admits nukes flown over U.S. was 'unacceptable mistake'
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/1...ar-flight.html

Quote:

...... After arriving at Barksdale, the B-52 sat on a runway for hours with the missiles before the breach was realized — meaning a total of 36 hours passed before the missiles were properly secured, officials said.

The Air Combat Command ordered a command-wide stand-down — instituted base by base and completed Sept. 14 — to set aside time for personnel to review procedures, officials said.

The incident was so serious that it required President George W. Bush and Gates to be quickly informed.

Wynne prefaced his remarks about the B-52 incident by saying that in publicly confirming that nuclear weapons were involved he had authorized a one-time exception to U.S. policy, which states that the location of nuclear weapons will never be confirmed publicly. He said he made the exception because of the seriousness of the episode and its importance to the nation.

Or because of the situation and how many troops, bases and the concern level of such a situation which occured, it wouldn't have been kept secret to begin with, so they attempted to PR it....... Another Whoops. But see, nobody heard about it until it was all said and done. They could have gone off, they could have been stolen/smuggled by who knows for whatever reason, and pretty much could have been a very big blunder (Which is was) which could have smacked them in the arse if they tried to cover it up anymore then what they had.

By the way the 6 missles were supposed to be sent for decommissioning, but were supposed to be disarmed first..... which they wern't... which was the big stink. Which means that 6 armed nuclear missles flew across the US from North Dakota to Louisiana, so anything in between here and there could have happened.

But back on topic, if the US somehow threatens China or Russia more so then what has already been occuring, and "Accidentally" shoots down the wrong satellite, then obviously they will respond in kind, and the security of outerspace and the technology we hold dear to everyday will be at risk.

Mainly communications.
Last edited by Praxius; Feb 20th, 2008 at 03:17 PM..
 
dancing-loon
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolf View Post

Quite simply: What goes up must come down. To score a hit, considering the much-faster satellite has to collide with the projectile, the missile will have to be fired uprange - westward and in the general direction of both Russia and China. They might get a second chance if the first one goes FUBAR ... but it's not likely. No missile is fast enough to catch up with anything already in orbit.

Woof!

Thanks, Wolf, for explanation about having to shoot up-range, which I interpret as shooting at a point ahead of the missile, right? They would have to aim ahead of the target anyway, because it takes awhile for the rocket to get there. I would say that is a pretty difficult task!! But, they were mentioning something about a heat sensor, although there hardly is any heat to sense. So, what will happen is that the rocket gets up there and as close as possible to the orbit track of the satellite, it then senses where exactly the satellite is and goes straight for it. True? That means the rocket can change its direction... the heat sensor steers it towards the target. In that case it should be relatively easy for a direct hit, but they want to hit the small gas tank!!!

Now, what is a FUBAR?
 
Tonington
#21
Wouldn't it depend on how fast the orbiting satellite is moving? If the Chinese can shoot down a satellite, I see no reason why the Americans can't. Maybe they should arm the shuttles and future vehicles with weapons Oh wouldn't that bring cries
 
dancing-loon
#22
High seas could delay U.S. satellite potshot


February 20, 2008 at 12:17 PM EST
WASHINGTON — High seas in the north Pacific may force the Navy to wait another day before launching a heat-seeking missile on a mission to shoot down a wayward U.S. spy satellite, the Pentagon said Wednesday.
Weather conditions are one of many factors that U.S. military officers are taking into account as they decide whether to proceed with the mission Wednesday or to put it off, according to a senior military officer who briefed reporters at the Pentagon on condition that he not be identified.
The officer said the assumption had been that the mission would go forward Wednesday night, unless conditions are determined to be unfavorable. Earlier in the day, bad weather in the north Pacific was causing rough seas, which may be a problem for the USS Lake Erie, a cruiser armed with two SM-3 missiles.
Read whole story here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...y/Science/home

Don't you just love this mystery suspense story?? Everybody cleared the sea and the sky for tonight, and nothing is going to happen.... maybe!! May have to start all over again tomorrow!
I just realize I've been making a mistake by naming the missile a rocket! Sorry!
 
dancing-loon
#23
The sky is falling. So what?


February 20, 2008 at 4:52 PM EST
Washington — Giant chunks of man-made space junk — like the dead satellite that the U.S. government is trying to shoot down — regularly fall to Earth. Yet no one has ever been reported hurt by them.
Chunks of debris weighing two tonnes or more from satellites and rocket parts fall uncontrolled every three weeks or so, according to an analysis by a Harvard University astronomer who tracks satellites and space debris.
And that's just based on the last three years. Go back a decade or so when countries didn't try to control these falling objects. Back then, two-ton chunks fell to Earth much more frequently said Jonathan McDowell, who runs Jonathan's Space Report, which tracks the world's space launches and satellites.
It's likely that 50 to 200 “large” pieces of man-made space debris return to Earth every year, according to the Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies. Bill Ailor, the center's director, like those at NASA's Johnson Space Center, said he was asked by the government not to comment specifically on the current satellite re-entry issue.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...y/Science/home

Amazing, how much junk we have carted up there!! Put that in dollars!!!!
 
lone wolf
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Tonington View Post

Wouldn't it depend on how fast the orbiting satellite is moving? If the Chinese can shoot down a satellite, I see no reason why the Americans can't. Maybe they should arm the shuttles and future vehicles with weapons Oh wouldn't that bring cries

I'm sort of guessing that's why US is trying for the shot. Seems to me there was something in the news about a fuel dump from a satellite being visible in the night skies over Nothern Ontario, Quebec and on into the Maritimes just about a month ago. Bad for the ego to be outshone by the new kid on the block.

FUBAR = Fu**ed Up Beyond Any Recovery

Woof!
 
dancing-loon
#25
We can all rest in peace now!

Got it!

U.S. Navy missile hits wayward spy satellite on first attempt


ROBERT BURNS
February 21, 2008 at 12:47 AM EST
WASHINGTON — A U.S. navy missile soaring 209 kilometres above the Pacific smashed a dying and potentially deadly spy satellite Wednesday and probably destroyed a tank carrying 454 kilograms of toxic fuel.
And the lunar eclipse is over, too .... now I can go to bed - all is well!
 
lone wolf
#26
Not yet.... Remember that "must come down" part? That satellite was zipping along at 35 thousand MPH. It's not stopped - there's just a lot more pieces.

Woof!
 
MikeyDB
#27
Let's see now...

America builds and launches "spy satellites" that fail and then they have to shoot it down...

No wonder there were conflicting reports about WMDs in Iraq!

Maybe the U.S. should launch Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell into orbit!

If you tell enough Americans that "We need to spend billions of spy satellites to ensure the safety of America....but then we might have to shoot them down so we need a missile defence system...and we have to act on "intelligence" we've gleaned from our web of spy satellites that told us that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.......

Gosh but it does get confusing....
 

Similar Threads

0
Who used to watch He-Man?
by Frappuccino Dibs | May 17th, 2005
5
Do you watch the CBC?
by Andem | Oct 5th, 2004
4
What News do you watch?
by Andem | Mar 14th, 2004