Spy Satellite to Hit Earth by late February to March Options

[Guest_Bobby_*]

Just read at MSNBC that a large U.S. spy satellite will hit Earth by the end of February or early March.
Better keep our hard hats ready???

Here is the article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22857051/

[jaredGalen]

What I simply can't believe I'm reading is Chinese criticism of this. That defies belief.

The Chinese were never going to let the opportunity pass by without getting a dig or two into the US.

The 'we must protect our citizens from falling, toxic fuel soaked, shrapnel from the sky' angle seems to be part of it too.

They are going to milk it though.

Edit: How prompt was China's notice of their weapons test?

[djellison]

But fuel soaked shrapnel from their own failed LV's crashing into nearby villages is fine.

[jaredGalen]

But fuel soaked shrapnel from their own failed LV's crashing into nearby villages is fine.

That's my point

[ugordan]

Politics... I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear things like these... That's just insulting our intelligence on China's part.

[Tman]

There's a video from the military that shows the missile launch and the hit, represented in Pentagon Briefing from 21 Feb, 07:00

[stevesliva]

The BBC radio I heard in my car this morning included good info from the press conference...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7256741.stm

Although I must say that in the recorded press conference, it sounded like they had targeted the tank specifically with the KV. *That* may have been a sort of look-what-our-ABM can do demo.

[Jim from NSF.com]

The BBC radio I heard in my car this morning included good info from the press conference...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7256741.stm

Although I must say that in the recorded press conference, it sounded like they had targeted the tank specifically with the KV. *That* may have been a sort of look-what-our-ABM can do demo.

The sensor on the warhead wouldn't be able to discriminate the tank from the rest of the spacecraft. I is hard enough to just to target the spacecraft

[Tman]

There's more from the debris cloud right after the hit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvrP1ZQrk10

[djellison]

I presume the tank was fairly central in the spacecraft bus. They had mentioned reprogramming the head - I presume to identify the bus, and aim for the middle of it.

Doug

[stevesliva]

I was definitely ready to believe the implication that a specific area of the satellite was targeted because of the mention in this article:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/02/the-weapon-that.html
... that the kinetic warhead targets the "leathal payload area." In other words, the RV rather than the booster. Or, hopefully, decoys, clouds of chaff, etc. I can't recall the exact words used, so it may have been jumping to conclusions on my part, but the ability to discriminate the warhead from the booster and other junk *is* a key part of ABM technology, no? (well, at least post-boost-phase ABM)

[centsworth_II]

If the fuel tank is one meter in diameter, and they see nothing remaining
larger than a football, wouldn't that be proof of destruction? Where would
the tank be hiding?

[Jim from NSF.com]

I was definitely ready to believe the implication that a specific area of the satellite was targeted because of the mention in this article:

Where would you target the spacecraft in my avatar to hit its 1000lb propellant tank?

[stevesliva]

Where would you target the spacecraft in my avatar to hit its 1000lb propellant tank?

Definitely that bowl-shaped thigamabob on top.

[tedstryk]

Didn't say with respect to the satellite , I was referring with respect to the earth (basically hovering)

Not really...you were saying that the impactor's speed was irrelevant. With such a narrow margin (in other words, such a small, fast-moving target), nothing is irrelevant. Curt little defenses are your prerogative, but you were still wrong nonetheless.

[Jim from NSF.com]

Not really...you were saying that the impactor's speed was irrelevant. With such a narrow margin (in other words, such a small, fast-moving target), nothing is irrelevant. Curt little defenses are your prerogative, but you were still wrong nonetheless.

Huh? I disagree and rightly so. The destruct mechanism is the satellites velocity. The warhead only has to be fast enough to get in the way at the right time. The warhead's velocity (magnitude and direct) contribution to the destruction IS irrelevant