On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:28:58 GMT, matt weber
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:38:53 +0900, Stealth Pilot
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:53:50 +1100, Sylvia Else
wrote:

BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 26, 4:24 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...116226-5001028,...

What's clearly required is something that can snare it and apply a
controlled de-orbit burn to bring it down somewhere safe, but developing
such technology is not going to be on anyone's priority list until after
the first city takes a hit.

Anyone know what kind of orbit a spy satellite would be in? Would they
always be polar, or might Sydney be safe?

if you can catch it why not refuel it and push it back into a stable
orbit?

You are talking about an object that probably weighs 10-15 tonnes,
and if you got a good look at it, probably bears striking resembelence
to the Hubble Space Telescope. From what's been said publicly, it is
almost certainly a KH10 or KH11.

The bind with catching is that depending upon exactly what has gone
wrong, it may not be catchable. For example if the communication link
has gone out, it may still be catchable, because the stabilization
system is probably still operation. If it truly is a complete power
failure, what you have is 15 tonnes turning at an unknown rate
probably about all 3 axes.

And if you do catch it, the problem with refuelling it is that it pretty
much doesn't have a refuelling port. The fuel and pressurant tanks were
designed to be filled *once*, in the factory or assembly building, and
never again. They probably weren't actually have been welded shut after
that first fill, but they might as well have been.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *