| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Space - Shuttle Forum » Chinese test Anti-Satellite weapon
Page 2 of 4 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Jack Linthicum |
 Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Quote: Jack Linthicum wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
...
An administration official who had reviewed the intelligence about
China's test said the launching was detected by the United States in
the early evening of Jan. 11, which would have been early morning on
Jan. 12 in China. American satellites tracked the launching of the
medium-range ballistic missile, and later space radars saw the debris.
Could it be possible China remotely detonated
that old satellite? Only a few ounzes of TNT
would be necessary. Haven't quite read of a
precise radar confirmation of an interception.
A direct hit is an awesome achievement, I
doubt China can do it.
Ken
We apparently tracked the launch, thank someone for that. A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
As opposed to a "near miss"?
Really it's the old hitting a bullet with a bullet
problem that the most advanced US ABM
systems have problems with.
The Chinese have created a
lot of ill will by polluting an orbital area with this debris.
It'll be ironic if the next space-walking chinkonaut
gets a piece of space debris stuck in his bum, ouch!
The Chinese offered to duplicate the "no weapons in space" treaty and
the U.S. was the only nation to vote against it. We have been
supporting the military-industrial complex and their search for new
markets for new products by taking stances like that.
It's not that simple.
Ken
More like taking a scatter gun to a radio or TV. A stray piece of lead
will do the same damage as total distruction.
Hmm, I understand the BB thing would go right
threw the sat, recall ~ 16,000 mph. Ever shoot
a can with a .22? Damn thing justs sits there,
even when the bullet goes through it.
Most of the kinetic
warheads are just that, a shotgun, since hit-to-kill requires either
target cooperation or a very controlled situation not much different
from target cooperation.
Sure, that will disable a warhead if something
vital is damaged, but it won't blow it up, unless
a fuel tank or some pressurized system is hit,
but an old weather sat is a dead tin can.
Some of the earliest Chinese MRBMs carried warheads 2.5 times the mass
of this satellite, the occurence of significant debris suggests that
the hit was not direct.
I'm guessing your theory is the MRBM put a *cloud*
of shot on a ballistic trajectory for the sat to fly into,
(I shouldn't have to guess, you can explain you idea
better than I can!), and that shredded the tin can sat.
But even so, that requires extremely fine high speed
split second guidance, recall there's no air to fin with,
all final manuevers need to be done with thrusters.
The 16 variables are, sats: x,y,z,t ,dx,dy,dz (dv) and
MRBM's X,Y,Z,T, dX,dY,dZ (dV).
To intercept requires, xyzt = XYZT , by processing the
relative dV - dv in 3D. The Rusky's are 10-15 years
ahead of the US, and it's on the edge of their ability.
It's possible the interceptor stage was Rusky, but
no way they'd sell it and I don't see a motive from
an expansive demo.
Smell's fishy to me.
Ken
I would guess it missed by 10 miles or less, warhead a sort of super
Claymore, at a range of 540 nm up, say 1000 mile flight path, miss is
about what a MRBM of the Soviet vintage might do (SS-4) in a similar
path. Not really accurate, again, shooting a radio with a shot gun from
a range of 50 yards, announce it as a test if it fails. It is a form of
blackmail, like "we have other toys, want to see one in operation?"
http://www.gisdevelopment.net/aars/acrs/1999/ps6/ps6211.asp |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| buff82driver |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Quote: Jack Linthicum wrote:
...
An administration official who had reviewed the intelligence about
China's test said the launching was detected by the United States in
the early evening of Jan. 11, which would have been early morning on
Jan. 12 in China. American satellites tracked the launching of the
medium-range ballistic missile, and later space radars saw the debris.
Could it be possible China remotely detonated
that old satellite? Only a few ounzes of TNT
would be necessary. Haven't quite read of a
precise radar confirmation of an interception.
A direct hit is an awesome achievement, I
doubt China can do it.
Ken
The technology to hit a non-manuvuring satellite in low earth orbit is
not as advanced as you think it is. We did it using pre486 and PowerPC
processors in the 80s and could have done it sooner had we used a
shotgun pellet approach in the 70s as opposed to a direct hit. What
killed ABM work for the most part is MIRV technology. A satellite has a
relatively fixed orbit and is extremenly predictable. What would be
impressive is if the satellite was using its thrusters to change orbit
in a unknown way to the missile and it still scored a hit. If that had
been aiming at an american spy satellite I have my doubts of it hitting
it. We would have aggressively had it change orbit and I would not be
suprised if our sats have rocket flares to spoof any IR signature from
solar sat heating and chaff and jammers. At orbital speeds even a
slight change in oribt makes for a huge correction an interceptor must
adjust for which is not easy late in the game b/c of its inertia. Just
like evading a SAM. What the ChiComs did is like shooting down a SR-71
not speeding up or slowing down or turning at all. Its hard but it can
be done. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| T3 |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169301275.063898.66880@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
I would guess it missed by 10 miles or less, warhead a sort of super
Claymore, at a range of 540 nm up, say 1000 mile flight path, miss is
about what a MRBM of the Soviet vintage might do (SS-4) in a similar
path. Not really accurate, again, shooting a radio with a shot gun from
a range of 50 yards, announce it as a test if it fails. It is a form of
blackmail, like "we have other toys, want to see one in operation?"
http://www.gisdevelopment.net/aars/acrs/1999/ps6/ps6211.asp
The big deal was if it (Kill vehicle) used a manuvering type IR seeker, if
so, it was a fairly significant event. If it was a shotgun type thing, not
so much. In any event, they really seemed to have pissed some folks off, how
long all that crap stays in orbit and whether it ends up destroying
something valuable will determine how long they stay po'd...
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/China_Anti_Satellite_Test_Sparks_Space_Junk_Outcry_999.html
by Richard Ingham
Paris (AFP) Jan 19, 2007
China's test of an anti-satellite weapon triggered charges Friday that it
had caused dangerous debris to scatter into low Earth orbit, posing a
potential threat to commercial, scientific and military satellites of other
nations.
"It looks really terrible. I am shocked," said a space scientist, explaining
that the reported test took place in a region thickly populated by
satellites, including those used for monitoring storms and climate change.
"Space is not a playground for playing games," the scientist, outraged, said
in an interview with AFP. "It's meant for the benefit of mankind."
The website space.com, quoting sources that it did not identify, said the
January 11 strike against the old Chinese weather satellite had caused it to
smash up into "hundreds of hundreds of pieces, fluttering through low Earth
orbit."
"The mess of space junk does put other satellites, including the
International Space Station, at some risk," space.com's Leonard David said,
adding though that the chances of this were "very small."
The main repercussion of Chinese test has been fears of an arms race in
space -- but debris is another big source of concern.
The space age reaches 50 years on October 4 this year -- the anniversary of
the launch of the Soviet satellite Sputnik -- and there are hundreds of
thousands of pieces whirling in orbit, the result mainly of exploded rocket
stages and broken-up satellites.
David Wright, co-director of the Global Security Programme at the Union of
Concerned Scientists (UCS), a US private advocacy group, said the satellite
that was destroyed had a mass of 750 kilos (1,650 pounds) and had been
orbiting at an altitude of 850 kilometers (520 miles).
Many commercial, military and navigational satellites orbit in the region of
900 kilometers (560 miles), he said. The maximum altitude of the
International Space Station is around 450 kilometers (280 miles).
"The collision would be expected to completely fragment the satellite into
millions of pieces of debris -- nearly 800 debris fragments of size 10
centimeters (four inches) or larger, nearly 40,000 debris fragments with
size between one and 10 centimeters (half to four inches) and some two
million fragments of size one millimeter (0.04 inch) or larger," said
Wright.
"At the very high speeds these debris particles would have, particles as
small as one millimeter (0.04 inch) can be very destructive."
Most satellites do not carry sufficient shielding for even tiny particles
like this, and in any case shielding is ineffective against any debris
larger than about one centimetre (half an inch) in size," said Wright in a
statement.
The orbital region "is very heavily used by satellites for both civil and
military uses, which are threatened by the added debris," he warned
Among those who voiced fears was Australia, which said on Friday that, in
addition to worries about the militarisation of space, "we're concerned
about the impact that debris from destroyed satellites could have on other
satellites, which are very expensive pieces of equipment."
The danger from debris comes from the enormous speeds at which they travel,
which means even very small pieces impact with high energy.
In 1996, a French spy satellite, Cerise, was wacked at about 50,000
kilometers (30,000 miles) per hour by a wheeling fragment left from an
exploded Ariane rocket.
In June 1983, the windscreen of the US space shuttle Challenger had to be
replaced after it was chipped by a fleck of paint measuring 0.3mm (0.01 of
an inch), that impacted at four kms (2.5 miles) per second.
The worst debris clouds are in two main areas -- in low Earth orbit (LEO),
which is at an altitude of between 800 and 1,500 kilometers (500 and 950
miles) above the Earth, and in geostationary orbit, about 35,000 kms (22,000
miles) away. In LEO, debris can take a decade or longer before eventually
burning up on contact with Earth's atmosphere.
The Chinese test was first reported by US magazine Aviation Week and Space
Technology and confirmed by the White House.
The only other anti-satellite test that has been carried out was in
September 1985 by the United States. Its method, as China's, was a "kinetic
energy" weapon, essentially slamming a projectile into the target.
Source: Agence France-Presse |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Tex Houston |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
Quote: A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jack Linthicum |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Tex Houston wrote:
Quote: "Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
DF-2 MEDIUM-RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILE
The DF-2 (NATO code name: CSS-1) is a single-stage, liquid-propellant,
road-mobile, medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM)
Re-entry Vehicle Weight: 1,500kg
DF-3 INTERMEDIATE-RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILE
The DongFeng-3 (DF-3, NATO designation: CSS-2) is a single-warhead,
single-stage, liquid-propellant, intermediate-range ballistic missile
(IRBM).
Re-entry Vehicle Mass: 2,150kg
http://www.sinodefence.com/strategic/missile/df2.asp |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Monte Davis |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
Quote: Really it's the old hitting a bullet with a bullet
problem that the most advanced US ABM
systems have problems with.
Do you really see no difference between hitting your own weather
satellite, in a well-known orbit, with multiple windows of opportunity
every day and unlimited time to prepare...
And hitting one or more ballistic missiles/warheads on very short
notice -- possibly from many launch pads and/or subs, possibly
stealthed and/or jinking evasively, possibly among many decoys?
It's not silly to describe the former as a first step in the direction
of the latter. It *is* silly to say they're the same thing.
Monte Davis
http://montedavis.livejournal.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Tex Houston |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169310620.087028.187750@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
Did the missile HIT the satellite or not? You better read your statement
again.
Tex |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jack Linthicum |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Tex Houston wrote:
Quote: "Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169310620.087028.187750@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
Did the missile HIT the satellite or not? You better read your statement
again.
Tex
How the hell should I know? If you read my two statements you will see
I did not state one way or other, but implied (heard that word?) that
if the missile had hit the bird there would not have been all those big
pieces around. I estimate closing speed on these two objects to be
around 35,000 miles per hour. Work out how much energy is expended when
two objects collide, one at 4000 pounds and the other at 1600.
Assume the satellite will travel the equivalent of the circumference
of each orbit, approximately 38,850 miles. in 102 minutes, therefore
speed is something around 22k mph, the missile is at least 10k mph and
possibly more, and is not closing from behind. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La N |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169314351.625598.185570@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169310620.087028.187750@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
Did the missile HIT the satellite or not? You better read your statement
again.
Tex
How the hell should I know? If you read my two statements you will see
I did not state one way or other, but implied (heard that word?) that
if the missile had hit the bird there would not have been all those big
pieces around. I estimate closing speed on these two objects to be
around 35,000 miles per hour. Work out how much energy is expended when
two objects collide, one at 4000 pounds and the other at 1600.
Assume the satellite will travel the equivalent of the circumference
of each orbit, approximately 38,850 miles. in 102 minutes, therefore
speed is something around 22k mph, the missile is at least 10k mph and
possibly more, and is not closing from behind.
Nothing to do with the topic ... but ... since this is being x-posted to the
space shuttle group, Jack, do you have any idea of future shuttle launching
dates?
And could the Chinese shoot down a space shuttle if they wanted? ..%)
- nil |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jack Linthicum |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
La N wrote:
Quote: "Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169314351.625598.185570@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169310620.087028.187750@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
Did the missile HIT the satellite or not? You better read your statement
again.
Tex
How the hell should I know? If you read my two statements you will see
I did not state one way or other, but implied (heard that word?) that
if the missile had hit the bird there would not have been all those big
pieces around. I estimate closing speed on these two objects to be
around 35,000 miles per hour. Work out how much energy is expended when
two objects collide, one at 4000 pounds and the other at 1600.
Assume the satellite will travel the equivalent of the circumference
of each orbit, approximately 38,850 miles. in 102 minutes, therefore
speed is something around 22k mph, the missile is at least 10k mph and
possibly more, and is not closing from behind.
Nothing to do with the topic ... but ... since this is being x-posted to the
space shuttle group, Jack, do you have any idea of future shuttle launching
dates?
And could the Chinese shoot down a space shuttle if they wanted? ..%)
- nil
launch dates at
http://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/launches/scheduleStatus.asp
March 16 on this but I heard it may slide up.
Given that the shuttle is at 166 nm, 17k mph and passes over China
several times a day a similar shot is possible. Some of the background
on Gen. Hackett's WWIII books had a 1980s era laser blinding the
shuttle pilots. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| La N |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169315253.356053.211200@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
La N wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169314351.625598.185570@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169310620.087028.187750@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Tex Houston wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1169293023.822730.257440@51g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
A direct hit
by an MRBM warhead that splinters a 1600 pound satellite into
large
significant pieces is hardly a direct hit.
Would you please decode the above statement.
Tex
Big thing hit small thing destroy called direct hit. Big thing
explode
not hit small thing and not destroy small thing called miss.
The statements made say the 1600 pound satellite was in multiple
pieces
in orbit
"The Chinese test, which Beijing has not acknowledged but was
tracked
by intelligence agencies, destroyed an aging communications
satellite
some 500 miles above the Earth. The missile smashed the satellite
into
hundreds of pieces large enough to pose a danger for a decade or
more
to spacecraft or satellites that pass through the debris." NYT
Did the missile HIT the satellite or not? You better read your
statement
again.
Tex
How the hell should I know? If you read my two statements you will see
I did not state one way or other, but implied (heard that word?) that
if the missile had hit the bird there would not have been all those big
pieces around. I estimate closing speed on these two objects to be
around 35,000 miles per hour. Work out how much energy is expended when
two objects collide, one at 4000 pounds and the other at 1600.
Assume the satellite will travel the equivalent of the circumference
of each orbit, approximately 38,850 miles. in 102 minutes, therefore
speed is something around 22k mph, the missile is at least 10k mph and
possibly more, and is not closing from behind.
Nothing to do with the topic ... but ... since this is being x-posted to
the
space shuttle group, Jack, do you have any idea of future shuttle
launching
dates?
And could the Chinese shoot down a space shuttle if they wanted? ..%)
- nil
launch dates at
http://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/launches/scheduleStatus.asp
March 16 on this but I heard it may slide up.
Hmmm ... it seems that in the past couple of years, shuttle launches have
become more frequent that they are barely newsworthy anymore.
Quote:
Given that the shuttle is at 166 nm, 17k mph and passes over China
several times a day a similar shot is possible. Some of the background
on Gen. Hackett's WWIII books had a 1980s era laser blinding the
shuttle pilots.
Yes, a laser would be just as effective, cheaper and more reliable .....
- nilita |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
news:1169295867.757957.17720@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
As opposed to a "near miss"?
Really it's the old hitting a bullet with a bullet
problem that the most advanced US ABM
systems have problems with.
Other than the "bullet" we're hitting was in a known orbit, tracked for days
if not weeks, had no counter-measures, etc.
It's about on-par with some of our own ABM tests. Useful, but not
necessarily saying an operational ABM system where the above factors are the
opposite is financially worthwhile.
Quote:
The Chinese have created a
lot of ill will by polluting an orbital area with this debris.
It'll be ironic if the next space-walking chinkonaut
gets a piece of space debris stuck in his bum, ouch!
The Chinese offered to duplicate the "no weapons in space" treaty and
the U.S. was the only nation to vote against it. We have been
supporting the military-industrial complex and their search for new
markets for new products by taking stances like that.
It's not that simple.
Ken
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bill Baker |
| Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:48 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2007-01-20 03:37:03 -0800, "Jack Linthicum"
<jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> said:
Quote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
[...]
Quote:
Could it be possible China remotely detonated
that old satellite? Only a few ounzes of TNT
would be necessary. Haven't quite read of a
precise radar confirmation of an interception.
A direct hit is an awesome achievement, I
doubt China can do it.
Ken
We apparently tracked the launch, thank someone for that.
But was the US intelligence apparatus alerted with sufficient lead time
to collect a real-time radar track on the ASAT launch and supposed KKV
track conjunction with the satellite? What about telemetry intercepts
to/from the target satellite? My impression, from the information
publically disclosed, is the answer to all these questions is no. We
apparently have enough tracking data from routine orbital monitoring to
make a before-and-after conclusion of a probable ASAT intercept, but I
doubt we have the telemetry intercepts to rule out the scenario that
Ken posits. It would be one heckuva high-cost, long lead-time feint
for the Chinese to have lofted a boobytrapped weather satellite for
eventual exploitation as an ersatz ASAT target, but it seems that we
didn't collect the ELINT to rule that out.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| D |
| Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:21 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"George" <george@yourservice.com> wrote in message
news:o0_rh.3444$To.1839@bigfe9...
Quote:
"john" <@global.net> wrote in message
news:QjUrh.1094$j26.508@newsfe03.lga...
David E. Powell wrote:
Thought folks might want to know about this one.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1188
Chinese Test Anti-Satellite Weapon
By Craig Covault, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Cape Canaveral
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
snip
Shouldn't be a problem since Globalist George and his Buds said we can do
business with them.
Americans are paying for the Communist Chinese advances in Military
capabilities.
I wonder if they will demand we turn over America to them to redeem all
those Dollars they hold or if they will demand the surrender of America
for the Communist cause?
Not to worry. Since they've tied their economy to our markets (yes, they
are still our markets), the first time they take out one of our
staellites, their economy will go belly up. And I don't think the Chinese
are that stupid.
With the cessation of trade between our two countries, Wal-Mart goes belly
up.
Good bye small town America :-/
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| dott.Piergiorgio |
| Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Bill Baker ha scritto:
Quote: But was the US intelligence apparatus alerted with sufficient lead time
to collect a real-time radar track on the ASAT launch and supposed KKV
track conjunction with the satellite?
AFAIK there's a treaty whose estabilish prior warning of ICBM tests and
space launches. No one wants to get ballistic (literally!) and start
global nuclear exchange for a mere test of ballistic missiles. Someone
at NORAD or equivalent Russian air defence system need to know that the
launch in date X at hour Y is a mere test and not the start of WW III...
Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 4 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:00 pm
|
|
