US to shoot down broken spy sat

US to shoot down broken spy sat

www.breitbart.com

WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. officials say the Pentagon is planning to shoot down a broken spy satellite expected to hit the Earth in early March.
The Associated Press has learned 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 Pentagon briefing later Thursday

(visit the link for the full news article)

That is all the info that is available right now.
This is crazy. So by doing this, are we SURE nothing will crash through my roof or car?
I wonder if Russia and China's latest plan to not use any space weapons had something to do with this "quick" and "secret" plan.

www.breitbart.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Here is another link :

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Um, if this is "the plan" for USA 193 (sat track at n2yo.com) I'd have some reservations about shooting it while still in orbit... mostly spacejunk concerns. I'd prefer if they had to blast it into a bazillion bits that this occur just above, at, or just below 140,000 feet altitude to avoid any extra bits of junk polluting LEO. Plug it as it enters the atmosphere would seem to be the safest method to insure that the least largest masses remaining hits the planet.

Can it be shot down? Yup. 100%. I'd prefer it happen over the open Pacific or over the Continental USA... hmmm, metal rain in Langley... that'd be apt.

Vic

This could be basically a middle finger to Russia and China. Were going to show them what we can do. Its an opportunity to show off and tell them they can't compare when it comes to space.

I wonder how long before video of the satellite being blown up will be played all over the news over and over.


[edit on 14/2/08 by MikeboydUS]

Could it be that whatever it is onboard the satellites is so super secret they can't risk part of it getting in the hands of adversaries, and decided to blast it to bits just to be sure?

I can think of several of reasons for the US to try and "shoot down" this satellite:

1. I read on another site (I will try to find the link) that the thruster fuel in this satellite is very dangerous and could cause a large explosion. Shooting the satellite while it is still fairly high could insure that this explosion occurs high enough that nobody is hurt.

2. If they shoot the satellite and break it up into smaller pieces as it is entering the atmosphere it will be more likely that the smaller pieces will completely burn up and nothing will reach the ground.

3. It may also be a good opportunity to show some of our "adversaries" that we have the capability to hit a really high, fast moving object. This will, of course, be done in order to save lives and property so it won't look like a weapons demonstration.

4. Maybe there are things on this satellite that the US simply cannot risk being found or seen by anyone else - even badly damaged. We may simply need to protect the technology or other secrets.

as the other poster said the safest bet would be to hit it while its in entry phase. Thus the entry speed plus frag'ing should ensure limiting the chance of a larger piece actually striking the earths surface as smaller bits + high velocity should hopefully burn them up in the atmosphere.

And yes it will show off the fact that we can hit objects coming through re-entry into the atmosphere such as warheads or other space fairing aircraft.



[edit on 14-2-2008 by robertfenix]

Dude you gotta find that link! Outside of the "normal" thruster fuels used, nothing I can think of is that explosive (more than the usual). Is it a fuel of radioactive nature - like used in Cassini to keep the electronics warm and for a small thrust? My curiosity is getting the better of me...

Whoa... fire a missile from a boat? I didn't even know we had SSMs (Surface to Space Missile). Thing must be huge. ICBMs are one thing but to target something in orbit and then fire a missile at it from the surface... that's crazy significant. If we've got that kind of ability big surprise the Chinese were able to shoot down one of our spy planes. Should make for quite the demonstration.


[edit on 14-2-2008 by apc]

More here BBC the trouble with blowing it up is there could be debris sent back into space threatening satellites and spacecraft in the future? and anything that doesn't burn up on the way down could surely be spread over a wider area?

reply to post by V Kaminski


Vic, do you have any idea how this plan effects the beryllium and other nasty things on this satellite? Is this safer or no? I ask you coz you were so insanely cool on the TU24 thread with what you knew and your calming delivery...not that i am in the mood to panic over this situation; there are soo many other disconcerting subjects here amongst the threads.

reply to post by apc


You think this is just for a show of might? I thought about taking it out because of any electronics that may not burn up upon reentry, but that would make one awesome show...and yeah a SSM has gotta be pretty big - but do you think there is a "warhead" on board or do you think its just a projectile to smash it? A nose cone will weigh less than an explosive charge in a nose cone...right?

I would think it would have to be a warhead. Just trying to skewer the thing you'd probably end up with two satellites and a renegade rocket! I still can't get over that capability though... we all know about lasers being used to target satellites, but if we can knock birds out of orbit with conventional rockets... wow.

Originally posted by solidshot

More here BBC the trouble with blowing it up is there could be debris sent back into space threatening satellites and spacecraft in the future? and anything that doesn't burn up on the way down could surely be spread over a wider area?

I don't know much if anything about sats in space in such. My thinking is that maybe when they do this they will say... oops, it just knocked out all of our communication devices (an excuse) and leave us all in the dark while they do their business that they don't want us knowing about... I guess my question is, what is the worst case scenario for what the debris could take out? Not that I think it would happen but they could say oh yeah, thats what happened. Am I making any sense to anyone???

Here's the old thread if you care. They were talking about the possibility earlier but now they sound more serious? We (humanity) will have to deal with falling space junk for centuries unless they figure out a way to take them to the moon to use as salvage or something.

I have always thought it a waste to send up single purpose machinery when it is so expensive to launch each pound. We should make all the parts interchangeable or dual use. We could have a couple impressive space stations up there.

Maybe some company in the future will salvage the satellites for precious metals or ???

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 14-2-2008 by stikkinikki]

reply to post by stellawayten


Well, they commented that the sat would be landing in North America without "assistance". I guess this would make us (sheeple) feel good that the government wouldn't let anything crash or kill us. But you bring up a good point, and so did APC. If it's blown up, can the debris that goes up and not down take out any other sat? And if it does, will we all be in the dark? Time to get the AM radio and HAM radio out..

Does anyone else think that a surface to low-earth orbit missle being shot to take it out is maybe cover bs? I mean if it is near enough the HAARP arrays we have worldwide, couldn't they initiate the defense phase and put up the plasma shield and deflect it away (if they really are concerned with where it will land) or shoot it with some other DEW and effectively vaporize or cause "molecular disassembly" rather than blowing it into bits? People seem concerned about the causing of more space junk, so why not get rid of it as completely as possible. That would be best accomplished with a directed energy weapon, not a missle with convential explosives. I would think that that their main concern is definetly for national security reasons (they do not want foreigners getting this thing) not for safety of the American people. Just my personal thoughts at the moment...

reply to post by althea041724


The Be (beryllium) is a non-starter... just don't breathe the fumes and/or approach the impact zone. I've machined Be valves and valve seats for race motors without a respirator or OSHA chit sheet... I'm still walking around 20 some years later (it smells just awful) while being lathed.

Frankly, plugging it with a missile is the "way to go"... the monomethylhydrazine will vaporize, regardless of a missile strike... the tanks are highly pressurized and unlikely to survive unexploded with or without a missile strike.

It, (NROL21) is claimed by some to have a "synthetic aperture radar" imaging system onboard... which may or may not have an ionizing radiation source and may or may not have an RTG (nuke) "battery". That'd be not so good... not nuke weapon bad... but measurable.

Yeah, the orbit is decaying... I make it to deorbit by itself (on scanty and conflicting data) and to go terminal-phase Feb 27th... leaning toward the 28th. I'd make the kill-shot on the 27th based on what little data I can gather.

A fellow named Ted M. has some different calculations... putiing it into the first week of March. He follows this very closely... no matter how I "shade" the numbers I can't get it to indicate anything later than the 28th of Feb. Guess we'll all know soon enough... perhaps too soon.

I'd expect a fairly large downrange contingent should they choose to shoot it with a missile ship... me? I'd use an F-15 like they did before and I'd shoot it from the exact opposite direction of it's ground track to take advantage of any "stopping power".

Is there a worry? Yes, but small at this time. The sitch could change.

Cheers, and thanks for the compliments,

Vic


[edit on 14-2-2008 by V Kaminski]

Originally posted by apc
I would think it would have to be a warhead. Just trying to skewer the thing you'd probably end up with two satellites and a renegade rocket! I still can't get over that capability though... we all know about lasers being used to target satellites, but if we can knock birds out of orbit with conventional rockets... wow.

Didn't the Chinese destroy one of their weather satellites last year? If so, how was it done? Did they also use a surface to space missile? I just cannot remember.