It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chinese Space Station Set To "Crash Land" Within Next 6 Months

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Pretty cool just replying to keep up with how this pans out. If it's anything like the MIR space station burning up it would be nice to see it




posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You win. Skylab is a special memory, only because I was a child and thought it was going to kill us all. Or me, at the very least.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: MissSmartypants

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
a reply to: MissSmartypants
I am no expert MSP,but I think most of the space station would break into smaller bits and burn up during atmospheric re entry.
I think other satellites and space stuff has done this in the past.
It may make a nice light show for a lucky few,but I wouldn't worry too much in those smarty pants of yours.


Large pieces of Skylab landed in Australia so again...look up.


Ay,thats true-There was also a weird fuel tank that crashed in China a while back,lemme see if i can locate the article...

OK not the one I was looking for but here is one:
www.cnet.com...

Yeah,would not like that to land on my house..
There was also another event where people found something and got sick from radiation-some nuclear fueled satellite I seem to remember..

Watch the skies..



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: TiggersTheMan
a reply to: Phage

You win. Skylab is a special memory, only because I was a child and thought it was going to kill us all. Or me, at the very least.


Chicken little comes to life.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Got to admit, I had no idea there was a Chinese space station. Guess they need space based military experiments too?



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

There's 2. Actually.
Only one is active. The other one is...falling.
spaceflight101.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Silcone Synapse
Probably would cool down by the time it reached the ground. But there could be hydrazine or something even worse around. Best not be handling stuff like that.



Maybe thats the stuff that made people sick in the event I was thinking about,but how the heck does super combustible hydrazine survive re entry?
Man they must make those fuel tanks strong!
Or does the tank sort of partially melt during re entry,locking in some of that toxic juice?

I would love to find some kind of navigation/comms circuitry in one piece though..Hit the dark web auctions with it,make a fortune!!
But then again,next day along comes the feds to lock me up in a secret jail for breaking some secret laws I dont know about,sooo maybe not a great idea.

Would look great on my shelf though,along with my dinosaur tooth with a filing,and my bigfoots flip flops I found.
(SHHhhhh.Please dont tell)



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Silcone Synapse
Presumably the hydrazine would be frozen.

From a piece by "our own" Jim Oberg:

Responding to what he saw as widespread media misreporting of the basic physics of the controversy, he performed specific research and published the results on the Internet. His conclusion: claims that the tank would be destroyed were “written in apparent ignorance of well-established heat transfer relations for spacecraft reentry. Simple estimates of the total heat transfer to the tank upon reentry, available in any number of aerospace textbooks, show that the heating of the tank would probably not have been sufficient to melt the hydrazine entirely, much less vaporize or ignite it.”

Nor would the tank disintegrate from other forces. Johnson added that the deceleration forces—perhaps 8 to 10 Gs—were well within the structural strength of the tank to endure.

www.thespacereview.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
That is a great link,thanks.
So If I understand correctly,outside our atmosphere,the hydrazine is frozen so much,that the heat during re entry is not enough to heat it up enough to ignite.
That is literally so cool..



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Yeah. Cool.
Don't be touching it though.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MissSmartypants

I could think of a dozen places here I WISH it would land!



By the looks of ya, it's already landed.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Ran a zombie game at a small Convention that used this to trigger the start of the zombie apocalypse...

The world had a good run, here is to hoping for zombies.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indrasweb
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Haha.. you might be right...

......what if, for example, a large piece of the flaming debris smashed into the Pentagon or into MI5 HQ or something? Would it be considered some kind of negligence?


Not negligence, intelligence!



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Indrasweb

The chance of that would be extremely low, kinda like pinning the tail on a donkey, in a dark room, whilst wearing sunglasses and spinning around. All done after 10 shots of tequila.

I'm not that good at math, though I can get a sense of the scale... Considering how many squared miles of land exist, how much of that has human occupants then comparing it to how much debris will fall?

Chances are it won't fall near anyone never mind buildings.

So if such a scenario happened, it would probably end in war.

Or the greatest conspiracy so far.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Silcone Synapse
Probably would cool down by the time it reached the ground. But there could be hydrazine or something even worse around. Best not be handling stuff like that.

Yeah...always taste something before you touch it I always say.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Or at least poke it with a stick.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MissSmartypants




Remember...sometime within the next 6 months includes now. So look up.

As the time approaches it will become possible to refine the time and location. So, instead of looking up, look here:
www.aerospace.org...

I wanna see one!

Ride Along!


edit on 14-10-2017 by intrptr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Saw it. Dumb movie.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: intrptr

Saw it. Dumb movie.

Agreed, except for the final scene.



posted on Oct, 14 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indrasweb
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Haha.. you might be right...

Joking aside though; could China be held responsible if their failing technology was responsible for a serious incident... what if, for example, a large piece of the flaming debris smashed into the Pentagon or into MI5 HQ or something? Would it be considered some kind of negligence? Could they be blamed? I'm really not sure... my feeling is that surely there would have to be some kind of a response beyond "ahh well... # happens"
When parts of Skylab landed in Australia the United States was given a $400 fine for littering...so there's that.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join