Shoot Down a Spy Satellite?

[catbirdseat]

So the military says they want to shoot down a disabled spy satellite that will reenter the atmosphere in March. They say that the reason is to protect people on earth from the 1000lbs of hydrazine fuel on the satellite.

 

I don't think that's the real reason. My guess is that they are afraid enough of the sensitive optical sensor would survive reentry to be of use to other countries.

 

Now it may be that blowing it up would not destroy the sensor, but even if it did not, the satellite would enter the atmosphere as a bunch of pieces in vastly different locations, making it very difficult to find the part.

 

Story

[rob]

I thought they wanted to do it because China did something similar, and they want to show that they can, too.

[tvashtarkatena]

Have a shuttle astronaut tie a spent party balloon to the part. That way I'm guaranteed to find it in the mountains somewhere.

 

Fucking balloons.

[ZONK]

I would say for practice, and to show we can do it

[selkirk]

Yes but little pieces don't tend to survive reentry as well as big pieces.

 

Plus, it's you know, fun to blow stuff up!

[ZONK]

several ways to do it, they could sling shot up a Sidewinder from a fighter or shoot it with a beam. its all practice and fun

[Hugh Conway]

My guess is that they are afraid enough of the sensitive optical sensor would survive reentry to be of use to other countries.

 

uh, no

[builder206]

I thought they wanted to do it because China did something similar, and they want to show that they can, too.

 

We established our anti-satellite capability some years ago. The first generation weapons were launched from F15s at high altitude.

[chucK]

I think it's all about diverting attention away from the Texas Democratic primary where Republicans are going to sneakily (and illegaly I might add!) vote in droves for Hillary Clinton so as to get her nominated by the Dems because she'll be easy for the Republican machine to beat come November (at which time they will shoot down another spy satellite to divert attention away from Diebold)

[builder206]

several ways to do it, they could sling shot up a Sidewinder from a fighter or shoot it with a beam. its all practice and fun

 

No, Sidewinders are heat-seeking missles. They cannot have an application against anything that does not emit a sttrong heat signal like a jet exhaust. Also, the current iteration, the AIM-9M, has a mximum range of about 10 miles more or less. An air-launched ASAT weapon must fly 80 or more miles to get a target that is in a very low orbit of 100 miles; much further if the target is orbiting higher. By way of reference, geostationary communications satellites orbit at around 24,000 miles.

[JosephH]

It's an opportunistic response to China. Opportunistic in that China's actions give them tit-for-tat cover to play with their toys. They're talking about shooting it in orbit which likely means the geography necessary to shoot it on reentry is unsuitable or unavailable to them despite any remaining manuvering capabilities. That and it's far easier than hitting one on reentry. A pretty desparate play to sell the technology when you look past the surface of it given it obviously wasn't planned.

[G-spotter]

This guy says there's a 1 in 1000 chance they'll take out the ISS by accident with the debris.

 

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/02/skeptical-about.html

[builder206]

Clearly a case for The Decider to sort out.

[billcoe]

I don't think that's the real reason. My guess is that they are afraid enough of the sensitive optical sensor would survive reentry to be of use to other countries.

 

Now it may be that blowing it up would not destroy the sensor, but even if it did not, the satellite would enter the atmosphere as a bunch of pieces in vastly different locations, making it very difficult to find the part.

 

I'm gonna have to start paying attention to your posts I see as that water is deeper than it appears from the boat.

 

My time in the military taught me that even a .005 deep scratch on the ablation paint on the cone of a warhead would cause it to destroy itself and melt upon reentry. Who knew? These "little" things never get discussed. Like the true speed of a nuclear powered Aircraft Carrier or the actual distance a particular missile can fly. ...still secret and classified, the published numbers radically divergent from reality.

 

The real story is often so much more interesting than even we can guess. Like this. Link

 

The shocking knowledge gained from all this was that since the 1970's, at least, the United States could and did hear the positions of every other countries submarines and in fact also knew within a few feet where a whale had farted anywhere at anytime in any ocean anywhere in the world.

 

The Soviets had no such capability, and tried and did buy in the 80s the milling equipment from Mitsubishi which they knew could mill the subs props to such a tight tolerance to as evade leaving a trace which the US could hear with our extensive ocean listening program. The Pentagon estimated at the time that the few million dollars Mitsubishi would make on the sale (which from their actions and attempts to hide the transaction they knew to be illegal) had to be compensated by spending several billions of dollars by the US to regain that ground and that advantage.

 

 

[catbirdseat]

This guy says there's a 1 in 1000 chance they'll take out the ISS by accident with the debris.

 

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/02/skeptical-about.html

His estimate is about as "back of the envelope" as you can get.

[JosephH]

Bill, I think in this case it's fairly obvious it's an ad hoc publicity grab for the program. If it were anything deeper it would either have been announced in formal program releases months in advance, or, we'd never know anything about it at all unless something went bad and a piece of it hit somewhere too obvious to be kept quiet. It could also be they were pushing for the shoot all along but were told 'no' until someone on the political (campaign) side of things decided it might be a good idea in the mix.

[billcoe]

Possibly JH, however, something this public would be watched by the world, they'd need a good cover story......

 

We may not know for 30 years the real truth, which could in fact be just about any of the various speculations on this thread or perhaps something altogether different.

[pink]

maybe they'll miss and hit seahawks

[JosephH]

If they miss, then we have a missile with a warhead coming down on us which to my mind seems a bit more dangerous than the hydrazine fueld they're using as an excuse for the shoot.

[pink]

didn't china hit their target?

[Mal_Con]

lame.

[ZONK]

The truth is Never knowen but by a few when it comes to Military matters. China Did hit there target. We started working on this before the 80's a F-15 is still the bird they would use. The Weapon system they would use I'm at a loss to remember, its been a long time !

[spotly]

I heard it was going to be a Navy missile launch.

[Crux]

Fwiw:

"Satellite shoot-down plan provokes concern from Russia"

 

[JosephH]

Actually, these programs are fairly transparent by military standards. There are really no hidden agendas or technologies at the moment in the entire 'star wars' portfolio because the problems are very hard, they require and depend on a great deal of public sector research, and the shoots are all very public affairs. There is essentially none of the secrecy that there is in the otherwise highly successful military satellite sector. The vast majority of the secrecy in the 'star wars' portfolio is around the fact the technology does not really work and none of it will ever be able to shield our nation from a real nuclear missile attack.

 

The reasons for this shoot are almost entirely political. The Aegis BMD and SM-3 being used have been up and running for awhile with at least a reasonable single target kill rate in highly scripted test shots where the testers controlled both the kill and target vehicles. The only interesting aspect of this shoot - and likely why they want to do it - is that it is by its very nature essentially unscripted - they have no control over the target 'vehicle'.

 

[ Note: on looking at the SM-3 specs, it is a specialized version of the SM series with a kinetic warhead (with no explosives) so there is no danger of a conventional warhead coming back down, just a very dense chunk of metal designed to destroy things on impact. ]