My Assistant
Spy Satellite to Hit Earth by late February to March |
| Guest_Bobby_* |
Jan 27 2008, 04:47 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Guests |
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/ |
|
|
|
![]() |
Feb 20 2008, 03:09 AM
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
http://www.space.com/news/080219-satellite-shootdown.html
The collision between the fired missile and the satellite would not only break the massive hunk of metal into pieces but would also speed up its tumble through Earth's atmosphere. "If you want to bring something down, you slow it down. You apply a force on it which results in it being slowed down and decrease in its orbit," Carrico told SPACE.com. "Right at that point where they want to engage [the satellite] is at the edge of the atmosphere, so you're bringing it down faster." I believe that was the point I was trying to make above. -------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
|
Feb 20 2008, 06:05 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Cape Canaveral Member No.: 734 |
http://www.space.com/news/080219-satellite-shootdown.html [i]The collision between the fired missile and the satellite would not only break the massive hunk of metal into pieces but would also speed up its tumble through Earth's atmosphere. I believe that was the point I was trying to make above. The force that is going to bring down the fragments is drag, not the impact. The fragments have a lower ballistic coefficent |
|
|
|
Feb 20 2008, 07:07 PM
Post
#4
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
The force that is going to bring down the fragments is drag, not the impact. The fragments have a lower ballistic coefficent You left out this part: "If you want to bring something down, you slow it down. You apply a force on it which results in it being slowed down and decrease in its orbit," This is what I have been saying, and they weren't referring to atmospheric drag. The impactor will slow it down and it will begin to drop. -------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
|
Feb 20 2008, 08:22 PM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Dublin Correspondent ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 1799 Joined: 28-March 05 From: Celbridge, Ireland Member No.: 220 |
If I'm understanding ugordan's explanation of the dynamics correctly what will actually happen is that the ASAT will slow it all down a little. That situation is unstable so the debris cloud will fall lower into the atmosphere and speed up in the process as it swaps gravitational potential energy for kinetic energy.
The satellite is (believed to be) about 2600kg and is currently orbiting at around 7.8km/sec. I've no idea how the ASAT intercept is supposed to work but lets assume that they put it into a similar orbit moving in the opposite direction. The impact head of the ASAT is not likely to mass much more than 100kg and probably will mass less than 25kg if it's similar to the earlier US ASAT tests. For a perfect collision where a 100kg ASAT warhead transferred all it's momentum into the satellite the resulting object would be moving at 7.22km/sec. That's now unstable at that altitude and so it will fall until its rising velocity matches the orbital velocity at the altitude it finds itself. My [highly unreliable and full of gross simplifications] back of the envelope calculations put that at about 18 km lower down. That alone will significantly increase the drag but the really important factor is that the end result of a successfull intercept will be a debris cloud that has a massively increased effective cross section compared to the original satellite and that is what will really bring it down fast. |
|
|
|
Feb 20 2008, 09:31 PM
Post
#6
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3652 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
My [highly unreliable and full of gross simplifications] back of the envelope calculations put that at about 18 km lower down. According to my fooling around with Orbiter, a 7.22 km horizontal velocity at 250 km altitude brings you 700 km below the surface at perigee. Lithobraking is the word. My back of the envelope calculation says a head-on collision with a static 100 kg impactor should give a resulting velocity of 7.5 km/s, not 7.22 km/s. If the impactor is 10 kg, that comes down to 7.77 km/s (a perfect inelastic collision). I haven't done a check for 7.77, but my gut feeling say that, too, guarantees reentry in less than half an orbit. Depending on how solid the impactor and the satellite are, the impactor might partially rip-through the satellite implying an even smaller deceleration. -------------------- |
|
|
|
Bobby Spy Satellite to Hit Earth by late February to March Jan 27 2008, 04:47 AM
PhilCo126 CNN also has the story: http://www.cnn.com/2008/TE... Jan 27 2008, 01:01 PM
ElkGroveDan Of course there's the obligatory sensational A... Jan 27 2008, 03:58 PM
nprev Cosmos 954 was the first thing I thought of as wel... Jan 28 2008, 04:00 AM
Tman Hi, according Calsky it seems to be satellite ... Jan 28 2008, 01:06 PM
PDP8E Here are the images of US-193 in orbit.
Credit Jo... Jan 30 2008, 08:37 PM
PDP8E Breaking: US Military to Shoot Down USA-193 Spy S... Feb 14 2008, 06:42 PM
ElkGroveDan QUOTE (PDP8E @ Feb 14 2008, 10:42 AM) Bre... Feb 14 2008, 08:21 PM
Floyd I think they are more interested in destroying sec... Feb 14 2008, 09:10 PM
ugordan All that debris will probably end up reentering fa... Feb 14 2008, 09:16 PM
edstrick "I think they are more interested in destroyi... Feb 15 2008, 07:49 AM
helvick Excellent summary Ed - the reporting has certainly... Feb 15 2008, 08:58 AM
nprev QUOTE (helvick @ Feb 15 2008, 12:58 AM) T... Feb 15 2008, 09:53 AM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (helvick @ Feb 15 2008, 03:58 AM) T... Feb 15 2008, 05:05 PM
edstrick I gather the spooks like to deorbit their birds, r... Feb 15 2008, 10:21 AM
nprev I was wondering why they'd design the thing wi... Feb 15 2008, 10:53 AM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 15 2008, 05:53 AM) I w... Feb 15 2008, 05:08 PM
Tom Tamlyn Ed,
Thanks for that thoughtful and knowledgeable ... Feb 15 2008, 07:16 PM
nprev QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 15 2008, 09... Feb 15 2008, 08:55 PM
tty If this was launched on a Delta 2 it must have bee... Feb 15 2008, 01:36 PM
Jim from NSF.com Highly doubtful
1. NRO hasn't used a west co... Feb 15 2008, 05:03 PM
djellison Strong enough to maintain pressure on orbit, but w... Feb 15 2008, 11:25 PM
nprev I was thinking of something with a lower melting p... Feb 15 2008, 11:57 PM
edstrick The problem is that there is NO good replacement f... Feb 16 2008, 10:02 AM
mchan Well, it's good that the US has the capability... Feb 16 2008, 05:04 PM
nprev Ahh, I'm chemically illiterate...I meant N2H4,... Feb 16 2008, 05:25 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 16 2008, 12:25 PM) Ahh... Feb 16 2008, 10:27 PM
mchan If the intercept is successful in mitigating the h... Feb 16 2008, 05:55 PM
nprev I don't know if the US Navy, nor the DoD itsel... Feb 16 2008, 06:10 PM
nprev ...NRO might see it differently, Jim; bet that the... Feb 16 2008, 11:17 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 16 2008, 06:17 PM) ..... Feb 17 2008, 02:24 AM
NGC3314 QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 16 2008, 05:17 PM) ..... Feb 19 2008, 05:54 PM
nprev I wouldn't advocate adding more penetrations t... Feb 17 2008, 02:47 AM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 16 2008, 09:47 PM) 1. ... Feb 17 2008, 07:08 PM
mchan QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 16 2008, 06:47 PM) I w... Feb 21 2008, 08:07 AM
Sunspot Some questions:
The intention is to break the spa... Feb 18 2008, 07:33 PM
nprev QUOTE (Sunspot @ Feb 18 2008, 11:33 AM) W... Feb 18 2008, 10:50 PM
jaredGalen Do we have any idea what the debris field will be ... Feb 19 2008, 10:37 AM
PhilCo126 I'm a bit amazed that anti-satellite missiles ... Feb 18 2008, 07:39 PM
tty Firing a missile to 200 km altitude isn't that... Feb 18 2008, 09:34 PM
Tman http://spaceweather.com/ (19. Feb) reports that ru... Feb 19 2008, 11:10 AM
ElkGroveDan QUOTE (Tman @ Feb 19 2008, 03:10 AM) If t... Feb 19 2008, 04:28 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (ElkGroveDan @ Feb 19 2008, 11:28 A... Feb 19 2008, 06:45 PM
ElkGroveDan I get your point, but come on now there is no such... Feb 19 2008, 08:42 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (ElkGroveDan @ Feb 19 2008, 03:42 P... Feb 20 2008, 12:49 AM
tedstryk QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 12... Feb 21 2008, 11:57 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (tedstryk @ Feb 21 2008, 06:57 PM) ... Feb 22 2008, 01:53 AM
tedstryk That's fine. The conversation was not only... Feb 22 2008, 02:28 PM
ugordan QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 07... Feb 20 2008, 06:09 PM

helvick I know this is a stupid question and I'm sure ... Feb 20 2008, 06:55 PM

ugordan QUOTE (helvick @ Feb 20 2008, 07:55 PM) w... Feb 20 2008, 06:59 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (ugordan @ Feb 20 2008, 04:31 PM) A... Feb 21 2008, 02:59 AM
Tman Time and location of this first shot down attempt ... Feb 20 2008, 05:43 PM
stevesliva I heard somewhere that the KV was only 10kg... can... Feb 20 2008, 09:13 PM
rlorenz A couple of things crack me up about this whole bu... Feb 20 2008, 11:31 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (rlorenz @ Feb 20 2008, 06:31 PM) A... Feb 20 2008, 11:34 PM
helvick ugordan - yeah I got a better quality envelope and... Feb 21 2008, 02:22 AM
rlorenz QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 06... Feb 21 2008, 06:31 AM
Pavel http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=24802... Feb 21 2008, 03:04 AM
centsworth_II MSNBC.com and CNN.com reporting a hit.
No story,... Feb 21 2008, 03:53 AM
dvandorn CNN just ran the story about 20 minutes ago, repor... Feb 21 2008, 04:01 AM
ElkGroveDan Space/AP
Navy Hits Satellite With Heat-Seeking Mi... Feb 21 2008, 05:14 AM
volcanopele I am still waiting for the video from the missile.... Feb 21 2008, 07:42 AM
ugordan They need time to clean out the aliens from the fo... Feb 21 2008, 07:49 AM
mchan QUOTE (ugordan @ Feb 20 2008, 11:49 PM) T... Feb 21 2008, 08:19 AM
CAP-Team How much more space debree is now orbiting Earth? Feb 21 2008, 09:00 AM
ugordan And, more importantly, anyone know if there's ... Feb 21 2008, 09:44 AM
djellison QUOTE (CAP-Team @ Feb 21 2008, 09:00... Feb 21 2008, 09:54 AM
helvick Immediately after the impact there was quite a lot... Feb 21 2008, 09:58 AM
jaredGalen Apparent FEMA document outlining the satellite ree... Feb 21 2008, 11:12 AM
Sunspot As expected some of the British press are using th... Feb 21 2008, 11:12 AM
djellison Which bits of the British Media? I've got som... Feb 21 2008, 11:23 AM
jaredGalen QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 21 2008, 11:23 AM)... Feb 21 2008, 11:38 AM
Sunspot It was the lead story on Newsnight last night....a... Feb 21 2008, 11:29 AM
djellison But fuel soaked shrapnel from their own failed LV... Feb 21 2008, 11:41 AM
jaredGalen QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 21 2008, 11:41 AM)... Feb 21 2008, 11:42 AM
ugordan Politics... I don't know whether to laugh or c... Feb 21 2008, 11:46 AM
Tman There's a video from the military that shows t... Feb 21 2008, 01:57 PM
stevesliva The BBC radio I heard in my car this morning inclu... Feb 21 2008, 02:42 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (stevesliva @ Feb 21 2008, 09:42 AM... Feb 21 2008, 02:50 PM
djellison I presume the tank was fairly central in the space... Feb 21 2008, 02:58 PM
Tman There's more from the debris cloud right after... Feb 21 2008, 02:52 PM
stevesliva I was definitely ready to believe the implication ... Feb 21 2008, 03:40 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (stevesliva @ Feb 21 2008, 10:40 AM... Feb 21 2008, 05:50 PM
stevesliva QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 21 2008, 12... Feb 21 2008, 09:32 PM
centsworth_II If the fuel tank is one meter in diameter, and the... Feb 21 2008, 04:03 PM
PhilHorzempa Now that we see that we are able to successfully d... Feb 26 2008, 11:02 PM
ugordan QUOTE (PhilHorzempa @ Feb 27 2008, 12:02 ... Feb 26 2008, 11:10 PM
nprev Not a bad idea! It'll take a few more year... Feb 26 2008, 11:14 PM
Stu Might be more "cost effective", but afte... Feb 26 2008, 11:37 PM
nprev Yeah...<sigh>...I feel ya, Stu, but this act... Feb 27 2008, 12:24 AM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 26 2008, 07:24 PM) Yea... Feb 27 2008, 12:29 AM
dvandorn QUOTE (nprev @ Feb 26 2008, 06:24 PM) I d... Feb 27 2008, 03:39 AM
nprev Thanks for the clarification/feedback, guys. Botto... Feb 27 2008, 04:10 AM
mchan HST does not have a big tank of frozen hydrazine l... Feb 27 2008, 07:48 AM![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 15th December 2024 - 11:36 PM |
|
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |
|