#51
|
|||
|
|||
Is ISS at risk?
On Jan 27, 9:49*am, bob haller wrote:
On Jan 26, 8:53*am, Jeff Findley wrote: In article 926a3ec7-3fa2-42a8-965a- , says... On Jan 25, 9:53*am, Jeff Findley wrote: In article 01c58d8c-d064-4614-8386- , says... doesnt matter for people who control sats for a living they could damage or destroy ISS if they wish... You're completely wrong. Based on your statements related to orbital mechanics, you have little to no knowledge of how orbital mechanics works. *Furthermore, it's been pointed out to you, by multiple people who *do* have the required domain knowledge, that ramming a satellite into ISS would actually be extremely difficult to impossible. Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it * up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " * *- tinker even a near miss would change space similiar to 9 11 changes. Possibly, but it's still going to be much harder than you think. In the past, satellites have been lost due to incorrect commands being sent to them. *The fix for that is to have all uploaded commands reviewed by a second set of eyes review it (and run it through test simulations to verify what the commands will do) before actually uploading commands to the satellite. *These same procedures would stop what you think is "easy". Heck, I work at a software company and I can't even put a single line of code into our product without the approval of others. *Direct hacking of files is not possible because everything is under source code control. Changes have to follow a very specific set of procedures in order to make it into the source code database. *On top of that, corrupting a file in a catastrophic way would very likely NOT pass our automated and interactive testing procedures. *Nothing is released to customers (i.e. the satellite in your scenario) without passing testing. you claim it would be hard.. but given the amount of space junk in orbit its more likely a piece of junk will take out or cripple ISS. terrorists woudnt be needed. Different topic. *Avoidance noted. just launch a sat with a small explosive charge with ball bearings straight up just before ISS is due to pass that area. Different topic. *Avoidance noted. Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it * up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " * *- tinker- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - probably easier for foreigners to hack a virus into ISS commanding it to tumble somed night at 3am...... a violent uncontrolled tumble. or send faulty commands to a resupply vehicle.... or well the list in endless- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - and do note my is ISS at risk topic was just a day before the news about a protector sat became public. see the other thread. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
where doesn't Ignatius risk all | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | August 14th 07 08:08 AM |
NYT on shuttle risk | [email protected] | Policy | 2 | July 27th 05 05:53 AM |
NYT on shuttle risk | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 2 | July 27th 05 05:53 AM |
2004 MN4 impact risk (Torino scale 2 risk) | George William Herbert | Policy | 102 | January 15th 05 04:09 PM |
2004 MN4 risk fades away. | George William Herbert | Policy | 13 | December 29th 04 12:17 AM |