Russian official suggest a weapon might have down one of their satellites, page
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 11-1-2012 @ 02:25 AM by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
A Russian scientific spacecraft whizzing out of control around the Earth, and expected to re-enter the atmosphere on Saturday, may have failed because it was struck by some type of antisatellite weapon, the director of Russia’s space agency said in an interview published Tuesday.


The question is who or why would someone do this? Surely this is not something that will be taken lightly by the Russians.
With the tensions regarding the situation in Iran, this just cannot be good, especially since the Russians are also involved there.

This part was also rather interesting.

Mr. Popovkin’s remarks to the newspaper Izvestia were the first high-level suggestion of nefarious interference. A retired commander of Russia’s missile warning system had speculated in November that strong radar signals from installations in Alaska might have damaged the spacecraft.

“We don’t want to accuse anybody, but there are very powerful devices that can influence spacecraft now,” Mr. Popovkin said in the interview. “The possibility they were used cannot be ruled out.”


I might be reaching here, but could he possibly be referring to Haarp?

However, like the article states, Russia often likes to blame or hint at foreign involvement in some situations, like this.


Mr. Popovkin did not directly implicate the United States in the interview. But he said “the frequent failure of our space launches, which occur at a time when they are flying over the part of Earth not visible from Russia, where we do not see the spacecraft and do not receive telemetric information, are not clear to us,” an apparent reference to the Americas.


Full article

Am i reading to much into this, or might there just be a bit more to it?

vvv








edit on 11-1-2012 by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 02:38 AM by NeoVain
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Considering all their failures lately, i would say they have a pretty good reason to be suspicious.

Not blaming the U.S of course... Plenty of other countries out there able to down some satellites with HAARP arrays and whatnot, im sure.


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 11:00 AM by premierepastimes
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Not implying that the United States is above actions such as these, but I find our involvement unlikely as we are closely tied with Russia's space program and perform joint operations often. It would be close to sabotaging our own space exploration efforts if our government chose to interfere with Russian space missions in this way.


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 12:39 PM by mkgandhas
reply to post by Pervius


Russia has similiar systems like HAARP.Check Sura ionspheric station in Russia.


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 02:07 PM by FortAnthem
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Apparently this isn't the first time something like this has happened. Russians are disturbed that many of their space projects are going bad on what they call the Shady Side of the Earth which just happens to be the American side.

Shady side of Earth: Western trace in space probe’s failure?

Doomed Martian probe Phobos-Grunt, which was due to fulfill a Russian mission on one of the Red Planet’s moons, might have been a target of external influence. The probe failed while flying over the western hemisphere, outside of Russia’s control.
In an interview to the Russian newspaper Izvestia, head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, Vladimir Popovkin, said that intended influence on the probe cannot be completely excluded.

”I do not want to blame anyone, but these days there are very powerful means to influence space vehicles,” he told the newspaper, adding that it is still unclear why the probe’s engine failed to start in the first place.

The official also made a more generic allegation on possible reasons behind the accident with the probe station.

“We do not understand frequent failures of our space vehicles when they fly over the shadow, for Russia, part of the Earth,” Popovkin said. “Right there we are unable to see the vehicle and to receive its telemetry.”

RT


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 03:07 PM by Subjective Truth
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep






If the Russians were so advanced they would not really have problems like this would they.



This goes out to all the posters who think Russian tech is so great. I have news for ya there tech has never been and never will be ahead of the times.


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 06:28 PM by samkent
reply to post by howmuch4another




I've mentioned on other threads that I think the x-37b is up there "nudging" satellites out of the sky.
It makes no sense that there have been more satellite's come down in the last 2 years than in the previous 20, coincidentally after we launched the first of these orbiters.

Firstly even armature astronomers would notice xb37 getting close to another sat. It’s a slow process to rendezvous in orbit. You don’t sneak up and fly off in a couple of hours.

Second where is your source for more sats deorbiting in the past 2 years? Is this something you are making up?


reply posted on 11-1-2012 @ 07:00 PM by AlphaExray
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

I believe the altitude for sovereignty is still 90 miles, so regardless of the location of the attack, space belongs to whomever has the technology to dominate it. It may not be very civilized but it is the simple truth.

The error in the tactic is in assuming that the Russians will not be able to adapt to the technology thrown at them, which is highly questionable. Furthermore, the Russian have proven their willingness to attack American targets that the military has kept secret from the public, which makes disclosure impossible. It is the same old cold war games of the late 70’s and 80’s. Similar mistakes were made in the days of the chem. Laser development.

With the advent of attenuating reentry spheres, it is really hard to imagine any country willing to send up these antiquated satellite designs. Satellites need to be far more dynamic and resilient, with more effort going into the development of the vehicle, rather than just focusing on the mission package. Besides, the effectiveness of today’s transponders far exceed our needs, they can afford to focus their attention elsewhere.

AX
FTNWO


reply posted on 12-1-2012 @ 06:47 AM by samkent
reply to post by AlphaExray




Furthermore, the Russian have proven their willingness to attack American targets that the military has kept secret from the public, which makes disclosure impossible.


The Russians have attacked us???????
Where?
When?
Pages:     ^^TOP^^