Satellite being shot down? Missle test/showing of power?

That sure is a tight intercept...to hit the incoming such that the debris burns up and does not remain on orbit... that said though...

I sure would rather all that fuel burn up in the upper atmosphere than in my backyard...LOL

And...if we can use this opportunity to do a little testing...cool...

Of course...I'm an aerospace geek...:)

Dave

Teaching Flying...and talking Ron Paul...and Liberty!

This isnt as far fetched an idea as it may seem to some. The first news article i saw today was about how the missile they are going to shoot at the satellite will be launched from a ship! This is without a doubt a show of force and technology.
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_8269044
This governement thinks you are so stupid and willing to believe anything they tell you that they do just that...tell you anything. Welcome to bliss , ignorant friends!

because we openly do testing of our weapon defenses. Except for secret bombs. Do you guys remember back about 7-8 years ago they did that Star Wars thing with the laser thing? Anyways, they are shooting it down because it is a spy satellite. It has secrets in it.

Sorry, but this is one of those situations I just can't fall into a conspiracy over.

The satellite has been ailing for quite some time. It just made it to the news recently, but its demise has been known for quite a while.

Satellites have fallen many times before. This is not new. Usually though, satellites fall because they no longer have the fuel to maintain orbit. This time however, the satellite stopped responding and still had plenty of unspent, toxic fuel, which poses a problem we don't normally encounter: a re-entry...trajectory unknown without working engines...that will emit a toxic cloud. That's not good for anyone.

So, the option is either to ignore it, or to blow it up to vent the toxic cloud into space and ensure all the little bits burn up efficiently during re-entry.

It's easy to think there is much more to it than this, but think about what hat would happen if our satellite were to land in Brazil.

Being intact during re-entry, a large part of it lands in a city and the toxic cloud kills hundreds and severely injures many more. A National Secret recovery mission would be mandatory. That alone would cost millions, but we'd also have to cover funeral and medical expenses for the Brazilians, as well as pay government damages to Brazil and undergo another investigation as to why the government didn't act responsibly in the first place and shoot the thing down. A commission would be formed in America, which would obviously fail to cite many problems and would instantly earn the criticism we give to the 9/11 Commission (rightfully so).

Or... why doesn't Bush just let it fall in America so he can implement his Martial Law, so he doesn't have to leave the White House?

And as far as the means to blow it up, I'm sure the bombs will be ferried by a rocket or high altitude planes. And to address the comment below, the government is planning on shooting it down at the precise time it starts to enter the atmosphere so all those little pieces aren't left floating around in space.

..... it could come crashing down to earth, maybe hitting McCain's Double Talk Express Bus or the Louisiana GOP headquarters!! Haven't those two suffered enough?

On a more serious note, I seem to recall the Chinese, last year, successfully firing a missile at one of it's old weather satellites (Link here).

Check out this scary quote: "A U.S. official, who would not agree to be identified, said the event was the first successful test of the missile after three failures." Did you get that last part, after three failures!

There's more craziness; and I quote: "...the collision produced "hundreds of pieces of debris," that also are being tracked.

Then, check out the mock indignation by various assorted western 'powers': "The United States logged a formal diplomatic protest. "We are aware of it and we are concerned, and we made it known," White House spokesman Tony Snow said.

Several U.S. allies, including Canada and Australia, have also registered protests, and the Japanese government said it was worrisome. "Naturally, we are concerned about it from the viewpoint of security as well as peaceful use of space," said Yashuhisa Shiozaki, chief cabinet secretary. He said Japan has asked the Chinese government for an explanation. Britain has complained about lack of consultation before the test and potential damage from the debris it left behind, The Associated Press reported.

I'll be waiting with baited breath next week for the same protests.

Okay, two problems with this story.

The first is that this is an admission that the US has high-altitude interception missiles on Navy ships; a violation of the ABM treaty.

More to the point,, the problem with destroying a satellite in orbit, even a decaying one, is that instead of having one large object whizzing around or crashing to Earth, now you have thousands of smaller objects, impossible to track with radar, and for every fragment the explosion brings down to Earth more quickly, a fragment of equal mass will be shoved back up into a high orbit, where it will be a threat to other low Earth orbit satellites.

When you destroy an object on the ground, or even up in the air, gravity sweeps up the debris and brings it down to the ground. But up in orbit, debris from a destroyed satellite continues in new orbits, and if those fragments hit other satellites, they too will shatter into thousands of new fragments, in new orbits, geometrically increasing the hazard. In a worst case scenario, we could see all of the satellites around Earth destroying each other with shrapnel, and creating a barrier of debris through which future spaceflights would have to travel, at great peril.

Whoever is dreaming up this missile idea is not very knowledgeable about orbital mechanics.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

Dont forget the satellite that is supposed to fall on us in the near future. But where?

that they might "miss" the satellite and "accidentally" hit Iran?

Wouldn't that be Zany? (said with such an exorbitant abundance of sarcasm and overlaid with facetiousness you could literally suffocate while hearing it if it were spoken aloud)

Anyone else notice I'm going crazy?

They're probably just testing the new SPY-3 tracking systems and the new intercept missiles. Oridnarily they'd use a missile launched from somewhere, which costs money, but in this case the target is a freebie of sorts and somebody probably said, "Hey, why not?"

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/02/some-time-in-th.html

I was wondering too why this popped up all of a sudden. Like we had no idea is was there until now?

Yes, it would be a real-life test of the space war system, but the primary motivations are: 1) keep the satellite technology out of the hands of other parties 2) avoid contamination with the toxic fuels aboard the spacecraft (liability issues) and 3) any chance of hitting urbanized areas (also liability issues). The satellite has lost all communication with the ground so they cannot steer it into an ocean crash, which is the usual procedure.