The poker game continues in the latest satillite shootdown

[SUBMAN1]

I guess it all comes down to what do you want to show your enemy - the possible secrets of your spy satillites? Or the fact that our Aegis SM Block 3 can leave the atmosphere no problem? Or the fact that this SM Block 3 can kill your sat too with only a minor software mod?

Seems the idea of not letting an enemy getting it's hands on our spy sat capability is a more important hand to play than to let the world know what the true capability of the SM Block 3 is.

Let the poker game continue. The US still has all the chips, though its potential rivals just picked up a few.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/21cnd-satellite.html?ref=science

-S

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/21/us/21sat.600.jpg

[geetrue]

You should rename your thread that they shot down the darn thing ... :lol:

I had to go to the link to find this out ...

Video of the unusual operation showed the missile leaving a bright trail as it streaked toward the satellite, and then a flash, a fireball, a plume and a cloud as the interceptor, at a minimum, appeared to have found its target, a satellite that went dead shortly after being launched in 2006.

All of this talk about shooting down a spy satellite and I didn't know it never even worked ... perhaps someone shot a laser weapon at it shortly after it was launched for all we know.

Didn't CIA lose like three of these things at the cost of a billion dollars each on the launch pad in California back in the late 90's ...

yep, I think so.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Or perhaps they just wanted to blow sumptin up! :lol:

[RickC Sniper]

You know they were drooling at the opportunity to test fire the missle at something.

[DeepIron]

Ironic that the Chinese shot one of their own down a last year and are now belly-aching about the US action...

The Russians think we're tryig to escalate a "space weapons" war...

Third rock from the Sun... Life goes on as usual...

[AVGWarhawk]

The US wanted to flex some muscle. It worked.

[DeepIron]

The US wanted to flex some muscle. It worked.
Perhaps. But to what advantage? "Don't even think about bullying the US"?

We flexed our muscle with the first Atomic Bomb, then ICBMs, then Blackbirds and U-2 overflights, spy satellites, stealth aircraft, etc...

Does anyone feel any safer?

[SUBMAN1]

The US wanted to flex some muscle. It worked.Hardly. Try the cats out of the bag. This was the lesser of two evils in their book. The US would rather keep things secret. They never want to flex their muscle.

-S

[Oberon]

All worries about escalations aside.

Bravo Zulu for a good kill, US :up:

[SUBMAN1]

Ironic that the Chinese shot one of their own down a last year and are now belly-aching about the US action...

The Russians think we're tryig to escalate a "space weapons" war...

Third rock from the Sun... Life goes on as usual...That is funny. The Chinese sat blast includes debris that will be in orbit as a space hazard to sats and shuttles for years to come. When the US did it, all the debris will fall to Earth within a week, which is why they waited so long to take the shot.

-S

[AVGWarhawk]

The US wanted to flex some muscle. It worked.Hardly. Try the cats out of the bag. This was the lesser of two evils in their book. The US would rather keep things secret. They never want to flex their muscle.

-S


This was untested. This was a perfect way to test the rocket all be it "the cat is out of bag" as it were. This was a risk they were willing to take. Once done, muscle was flexed.

[baggygreen]

I have no doubt it was a case of "see, this will happen to your satellites etc if we dont like you any more"

[SUBMAN1]

I have no doubt it was a case of "see, this will happen to your satellites etc if we dont like you any more"Hardly. They already know that we posses that capability with our ABM's station in AK and CA. What it does show is that even our SM3's have that capability too. That I was guessing was wanted to keep secret since Russia's stance on defeating this technology relied on a fast boost to orbit technology to get out of range quickly - problem is now they know that orbit is not out of reach of the SM3's, so I doubt Russia is too happy about this at all.

-S

[baggygreen]

Yeh ok, i wont argue too much with that.

I think the timing may've [played a part too, tho. You've got news about india making their own slbms, the latest article this morning stating that iran may well be closer than people are happy to believe to having nukes, chinas continuing growth and russias resurgence..

i think the fact they chose to take it out now has a bit more to it than first appears.

feel free to put me back in my box :)

[DeepIron]

I have no doubt it was a case of "see, this will happen to your satellites etc if we dont like you any more"

"Fire at will."...

[RickC Sniper]

Typical USA. China whines about the missle shoot, so we offer them free technical data.

Why don't we just tell them to go to blazes instead?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23280280/

"Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday the United States is prepared to share with China some of the information it has about the U.S. shootdown of a spy satellite.
His comments came hours after Beijing complained the missile strike Wednesday could cause harm to security in outer space and some countries."

[SUBMAN1]

Well they did release video footage of the actual mission, so what more do they want?

Here is is if you care to watch:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=71c_1203596547&p=1

Is it me, or does an SM block 3 accelerate like a bat out of hell?

-S

[geetrue]

This shoot down only proves that a falling satellite can be shot down ...

not an orbiting satellite ... only James Bond movies can shoot down a real satellite.

[Ishmael]

What this shows me is the Navy having a cheaper, mobile ASAT weapon than the Air Force's fixed installations. It's also a note to let the Chinese know such a mobile system could take out Chinese sats in a Taiwan invasion scenario.

[SUBMAN1]

This shoot down only proves that a falling satellite can be shot down ...

not an orbiting satellite ... only James Bond movies can shoot down a real satellite.The sat is in a low Earth orbit! Duh! :D Not picking on you, but if you already achieve low Earth orbit, getting to a higher orbit is very easy. That is why the SHuttle uses those tiny engines rotates the nose away from earth and fires them briefly to increase its orbit. Total burn time if you watched the last launch for that manuver was a total of about a 30 second burn with very low thrust to weight ratio.

The short answer - this showed me that it doesn't matter where your sat is, it's vulnerable.

The reason for the low Earth orbit shot - this is so your debree field doesn't orbit for years on end creating a navigation hazard to other spacecraft - this is why everyone was ticked at China.

-S

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Actually, the Shuttle can use those little orbital thrusters because a large main rocket already made it reach orbital velocity. With a ABM, its own velocity is below orbital velocity, so getting to a higher altitude becomes much harder.
[quote]The reason for the low Earth orbit shot - this is so your debree field doesn't orbit for years on end creating a navigation hazard to other spacecraft - this is why everyone was ticked at China.
Not really. That satellite was de-orbiting for some time. It'll have made little difference - knocked further below its orbital speed, the satellite will be headed for Earth in very short order no matter what altitude of orbit it is in.
Two possibilities:
1) The shot altitude was chosen to fit the capabilities of the SM-3.
2) Of course, the possibility that can never be disproven: Deception by deliberately shooting under your capabilities.

[Brag]

U.S. Marine General Pointing at our Galaxy.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/21/us/21sat.600.jpg
__________________
If we spend enough money we will find Osama Bin Ladin somewhere here.

[AkbarGulag]

. It's also a note to let the Chinese know such a mobile system could take out Chinese sats in a Taiwan invasion scenario.

If a country thinks sending troops or lending tactical support to save Taiwan (in a hyperthetical invasion by the mainland) is a good idea, then it has collectively lost it's marbles. Especially with the Kosovo precedent making a move not only more likely, but possibly completely legal.

[SUBMAN1]

Not really. That satellite was de-orbiting for some time. It'll have made little difference - knocked further below its orbital speed, the satellite will be headed for Earth in very short order no matter what altitude of orbit it is in.
Two possibilities:
1) The shot altitude was chosen to fit the capabilities of the SM-3.
2) Of course, the possibility that can never be disproven: Deception by deliberately shooting under your capabilities.You are correct, but it was publically stated that the window was used because the debris would fall within a week later. The window extended till March 1st. As of March 1st, the sat would be skipping off the upper atmosphere making its plunge to Earth unpredictable and uncontrolled. This shot has apparently been ready since early Jan but the decision to wait was made to let the sat get into a position that would let its debris fall shortly after. Higher and you create hazard.

It doesn't take rocket science (or maybe it does, but maybe I have a better understanding than I think) to figure out that if you can achieve Mach 10 in a pure ballistic profile (remember this is also a kinetic profile and I believe Mach 7 is the key if I remember my physics correctly) and break atmosphere while doing it (The space shuttle does not use a pure ballistic profile by the way since it is trying to achieve orbit), its a joke from that point on to reach almost any altitude that you dare want from that point on. You are basically above the majority of Earths gravitation pull. So don't fool yourself for a second that going higher is not possible. It is not only possible, much much higher is way more than possible to the point you can probably can even achieve an alt of pure geosynchronous orbit and kill a sat there if you wanted to and even go farther.

-S

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

You are correct, but it was publically stated that the window was used because the debris would fall within a week later. The window extended till March 1st. As of March 1st, the sat would be skipping off the upper atmosphere making its plunge to Earth unpredictable and uncontrolled. This shot has apparently been ready since early Jan but the decision to wait was made to let the sat get into a position that would let its debris fall shortly after. Higher and you create hazard.
Why would it? You'll still deorbit the hazard.
And if there was some valid reason to shoot it at the lowest altitude, why don't they shoot on say the 28th?
As for public statements, look at it through this lens. If this whole thing had been Russian instead of American, would you have been so generous?
It doesn't take rocket science (or maybe it does, but maybe I have a better understanding than I think) to figure out that if you can achieve Mach 10 in a pure ballistic profile (remember this is also a kinetic profile and I believe Mach 7 is the key if I remember my physics correctly) and break atmosphere while doing it (The space shuttle does not use a pure ballistic profile by the way since it is trying to achieve orbit), its a joke from that point on to reach almost any altitude that you dare want from that point on. You are basically above the majority of Earths gravitation pull. So don't fool yourself for a second that going higher is not possible. It is not only possible, much much higher is way more than possible to the point you can probably can even achieve an alt of pure geosynchronous orbit and kill a sat there if you wanted to and even go farthe
First, Mach 10 (and at SL) is about 3km/s, which is far below orbital velocity. In fact, a ballistic missile with that speed generally has a range of ~1000km. It will not achieve an orbit, let alone get higher.
Orbits are ultimately a form of ballistics that does not hit the ground. It is otherwise the same gravitationally influenced arc.
And you are NOT "above the majority of Earth's gravitation" in low orbit. The gravity in low orbit is actually almost as strong as on the Earth's surface. You just don't feel it in orbit because you are "falling" towards Earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_gravity#Altitude

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Double

[August]

Why would it? You'll still deorbit the hazard.

Yeah but isn't the issue over the time it would take for the pieces to fall into the earths atmosphere? Two weeks does sound a lot better than, say 10 years i'd think.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Why would it? You'll still deorbit the hazard.

Yeah but isn't the issue over the time it would take for the pieces to fall into the earths atmosphere? Two weeks does sound a lot better than, say 10 years i'd think.
What determines time before descent is mostly orbital stability, not the object's height above ground. By further disrupting orbital stability at high altitude, the drama would have been over a lot sooner.

[Oberon]

U.S. Marine General Pointing at our Galaxy.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/21/us/21sat.600.jpg
__________________
If we spend enough money we will find Osama Bin Ladin somewhere here.

We have reason to believe that this planet has weapons of mass destruction, capable of being launched within 45 lightyears.

[Dowly]

U.S. Marine General Pointing at our Galaxy.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/21/us/21sat.600.jpg
__________________
If we spend enough money we will find Osama Bin Ladin somewhere here.
We have reason to believe that this planet has weapons of mass destruction, capable of being launched within 45 lightyears.

:rotfl::rotfl: