CHICOM ASAT test?

Rand Simberg wrote:

How do you know it didn't take them two, or three, or a dozen tries to
get it right? Perhaps we only heard about this one because it was a
success. The others could have been plausibly labeled sounding
rocket tests.

That's a very interesting question, and I hope that the Competent
Organs are going to go back and take a very careful look at PRC rocket
firings over the past several years.

I think, or at least certainly hope, we'd have noticed if rockets flew
very near actual satellites or other orbital objects, like upper
stages. But if the tests were against a "point in space" -- a notional
satellite -- then they might have gone unrecognized

Allen, do we know which medium range missiles have been tested out of
Xichang?

I.e., what pads do they have there?

Jim Oberg wrote:
Allen, do we know which medium range missiles have been tested out of
Xichang?

I.e., what pads do they have there?

Sorry, I'm trying to figure this stuff out too.

FWIW, based on "the rule of 1/2", we seem to be talking about missiles
that could carry the ASAT payload to a range of 2000 km or greater.
But we don't know what the ASAT payload was, and it could have included
significant propulsive capability that the parent missile's warhead
doesn't have.

Lots of analysis to be done here.

Can we say that this intercept occurred at the highest-ever altitude for a
satellite kill?

Derek Lyons wrote:
I suspect direct ascent hit-to-kill for a satellite is a much easier
problem than is often assumed. Unlike intercepting an incoming
warhead - the orbital bird is going to be in a predictable location,
and you have from days to months to observe and verify its orbit. Nor
do you have the problem of _having_ to hit is *NOW*.


Our reconsats have had the ability for decades to change their orbital
paths and velocity to some minor degree to avoid being perfectly
predictable, which means the KKV is going to have to have the ability to
maneuver and home on its target.

Pat

On 18 Jan 2007 12:01:21 -0800, in a place far, far away, "Allen
Thomson" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:


Jim Oberg wrote:
Allen, do we know which medium range missiles have been tested out of
Xichang?

I.e., what pads do they have there?

Sorry, I'm trying to figure this stuff out too.

FWIW, based on "the rule of 1/2", we seem to be talking about missiles
that could carry the ASAT payload to a range of 2000 km or greater.

Do we have a trajectory? Was it a vertical launch, or was there a
significant downrange component?

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:16:31 -0600, in a place far, far away, "Jim
Oberg" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:


Can we say that this intercept occurred at the highest-ever altitude for a
satellite kill?

Perhaps for a known one.

"Allen Thomson" wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:

I suspect direct ascent hit-to-kill for a satellite is a much easier
problem than is often assumed. Unlike intercepting an incoming
warhead - the orbital bird is going to be in a predictable location,
and you have from days to months to observe and verify its orbit. Nor
do you have the problem of _having_ to hit is *NOW*.

I agree, but still would have thought that it might take them two or
three tries to get it right. Apparently I was wrong.

As others have pointed out - from the sources available we do not know
whether this was the 1st test, or the nth.

(And I could spend a long time telling you how many times I've heard
well-qualified people dismiss direct ascent HTK ASAT as a threat
because of its extreme technical difficulty -- something only the
superest of superpowers could do. I didn't believe it then, and I don't
believe it now.)

Preaching to the choir Allen.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Pat Flannery wrote:

Our reconsats have had the ability for decades to change their orbital
paths and velocity to some minor degree to avoid being perfectly
predictable, which means the KKV is going to have to have the ability to
maneuver and home on its target.

Yahbut...

Some decades of observation demonstrate that they don't ordinarily use
their propulsive capability to avoid predictability. They use it
infrequently (every few months) to keep their orbits tweaked up to
ensure optimum coverage.

But they do have that capability and it could be used to dodge a
direct-ascent ASAT if:

- There were sufficiently advanced warning. Like a half-hour if from
DSP detection of ASAT launch.

- The spysat controllers could figure out what was happening in that
half-hour and push the EVADE button.

- And the satellite could get outside the ASATs engagement envelope in
the time available.

- And it hadn't had to do this too many times before, because
satellites have a finite fuel reserve and need it for other purposes
(orbital maintenance) too.

Jim Oberg wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote

Here's mo http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1359/chinese-test-asat
According to this, it's apparently a direct ascent weapon.



Thanks for the primo link, Pat --


There's still not much new on it as of yet in the news.
The Chinese are as tight-lipped as the Soviets used to be regarding the
specifics of their military space systems (although they were very
specific about how the waste disposal system on Shenzhou worked, to the
point you could figure out average Chinese penis size) so I think it's
going to be a while before we get the straight poop on what the
interceptor was like.
Defense Tech is going bonkers over it at the moment:
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003183.html
Of course, if Oriental cunning is a work here, then this isn't a test of
a operational system, but simply a one-off to freak us out and make us
spend a fortune on developing ways to counter it.
If that sounds a little familiar, this is the same thing we did to the
Soviet Union with our Star Wars program.
That worked like a charm...the USSR went bankrupt from excessive
military spending, and getting into a dead-end war in Afghanistan....hmm...

Pat