US spy satellite falling to earth

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001028,00.html

"“We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause,” he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

Sylvia Else wrote:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001028,00.html


"“We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause,” he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Knowing this administration and their competence - prayer.

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

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

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

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.

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,...

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.

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

On Jan 27, 7:38 am, 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,...

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.

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

There is nothing capable of catching in two months. Anyways, it is
still going to come down sometime

wrote:
On Jan 27, 7:38 am, 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,...
""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."
I wonder what options they might be.
Sylvia.
I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth
It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.
Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.
On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.
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?
Sylvia.
if you can catch it why not refuel it and push it back into a stable
orbit?

There is nothing capable of catching in two months. Anyways, it is
still going to come down sometime

Oh, come on. We could always launch a shuttle crew of retired
astronauts, one of whom just happened to be the designer of the
satellite's control system, to go reactivate it. Maybe send it to the moon.

"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...
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,...

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.

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

1 - it's dead
2 - it is already full of fuel

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,...

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.

I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth

It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.

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.

The problem with simply blowing it up, is the fact that you
converted 1 piece of junk in several thousand with a total mass of
perhaps 15 tonnes. Major hazard to navigation! If you are going to
blow up, do so from above and in front so that the bits de-orbit
promptly.

However even it comes down over a populated area, the chances of it
doing much damage are surprsingly small. The Space Shuttle was a lot
larger, and failed to hit anything of signifcance as it came down over
the US.

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,...

""We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage
this satellite may cause," he said."

I wonder what options they might be.

Sylvia.
I think China could help, or possibly our ABLs.
- Brad Guth
It's not clear to me that blowing it to pieces is a good idea. I think
all the debris would soon re-enter, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there's a clear risk that you'll end up with a large piece
intact which then lands where it can do a lot of damage, and people will
say it should have been left alone.

On balance, I suspect attempting to shoot it down is a bad idea.

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?

Sylvia.
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.

I envisaged something like a scoop shaped net. As the satellite enters
the net, the mouth would be closed. If the satellite is tumbling then
the net, control and reaction systems start tumbling with it. All that's
then required is to cancel the rotation, and perform the de-orbit burn.

The net doesn't have to be very strong, because the most significant
forces acting on it will be the acceleration of the control and reaction
systems during capture. In particular, the mass of the satellite being
captured is irrelevant to the strength of the net, though it obviously
affects the amount of reaction mass to be carried.

But I can imagine that getting this to work reliably would involve some
considerable development effort. Also the existence of the technology
would worry other nations because of the scope for using it militarily.

Sylvia.