|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
"the Chinese ASAT strike against the
FY-1C weather satellite is the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration, and every statistic proves it. As a result of that incident China became the biggest contributing nation to low orbit space debris. There are some 2,500 major pieces of space debris that will remain in earths low orbit until at least 2030, and an additional 100,000 smaller pieces of debris that will not fall into earths atmosphere until next century." See: http://www.informationdissemination....t-similar.html Compared to other incidents like the Challenger and Columbia disasters, and the Nedelin disaster, can the Chinese ASAT test really be called "the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
wrote in message ... http://www.informationdissemination....t-similar.html Compared to other incidents like the Challenger and Columbia disasters, and the Nedelin disaster, can the Chinese ASAT test really be called "the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"? The War on Terror has caused a change in US military posture that doesn't seem to be discussed as much as it should. Which is that the US has been charging militarily into space at a fever pitch. The need for accuracy and speed in responding means owning the high ground. But China showed us they can easily level the playing field in a war. I believe the ASAT test was a Chinese response to our aggressive military intentions with space. And this space race began with the ill-fated attempt to return to the Moon by Pres Bush. The Chinese can only conclude it was a cover for a military presence on the Moon. Since we seem to be returning for no good reason. Jonathan s |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
In article ,
"Jonathan" wrote: wrote in message ... http://www.informationdissemination....re-not-similar .html Compared to other incidents like the Challenger and Columbia disasters, and the Nedelin disaster, can the Chinese ASAT test really be called "the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"? The War on Terror has caused a change in US military posture that doesn't seem to be discussed as much as it should. Which is that the US has been charging militarily into space at a fever pitch. The need for accuracy and speed in responding means owning the high ground. But China showed us they can easily level the playing field in a war. I believe the ASAT test was a Chinese response to our aggressive military intentions with space. And this space race began with the ill-fated attempt to return to the Moon by Pres Bush. The Chinese can only conclude it was a cover for a military presence on the Moon. Since we seem to be returning for no good reason. Just what in hell is the military advantage of a base on the Moon? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
the biggest disaster in space will be ISS being hit by debris, very
likely from that chinese test....... with a big hole in the station, like a few inches , how long will it take the crew to get in the soyuz? how long can the station support a breach? will the station be controlable without atmosphere? we have a large vulnerable asset at high risk...... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
On 2/4/2011 7:39 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
Just what in hell is the military advantage of a base on the Moon? Hell, both the Army and Air Force wanted one in the early 1960's: http://www.astronautix.com/articles/prorizon.htm http://www.astronautix.com/articles/lunex.htm Didn't make any sense then, doesn't make any sense now...but that wouldn't stop the military from doing it if they could get it funded. Then we must crew it with purple-haired ladies, like on "UFO". Pat |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
On Feb 5, 5:18*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
" wrote: the biggest disaster in space will be ISS being hit by debris, very likely from that chinese test....... with a big hole in the station, like a few inches , how long will it take the crew to get in the soyuz? how long can the station support a breach? will the station be controlable without atmosphere? we have a large vulnerable asset at high risk...... Not to mention the damage from the spent fuel cooling pond on ISS... "The sky is falling! *The sky is falling!" Now run along, Chicken Little. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar *territory." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --G. Behn just wait as the out of control station tumbles breaking up all over its ground track. pieces / modules falling randomly. just who pays for the damage? let alone deaths. much of ISS is heavy enough to survive re entry... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
On Feb 5, 12:19*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
" wrote: On Feb 5, 5:18*am, Fred J. McCall wrote: " wrote: the biggest disaster in space will be ISS being hit by debris, very likely from that chinese test....... with a big hole in the station, like a few inches , how long will it take the crew to get in the soyuz? how long can the station support a breach? will the station be controlable without atmosphere? we have a large vulnerable asset at high risk...... Not to mention the damage from the spent fuel cooling pond on ISS... "The sky is falling! *The sky is falling!" Now run along, Chicken Little. just wait as the out of control station tumbles breaking up all over its ground track. pieces / modules falling randomly. And just how is it going to go 'out of control'? *You've been watching too many disaster movies. just who pays for the damage? let alone deaths. much of ISS is heavy enough to survive re entry... Cite for reentry survivability? *Betting you once again cannot be bothered to actually support your claims. Who pays for the damage is well established in law. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to * * live in the real world." * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - many ISS parts are heavy enough to survive re entry.remember parts of sklab survived, and skylab was very small in comparison to ISS. is that a adquate cite for you? the station needs atmosphere to cool control systems, lose atmosphere lose control.Plus a debris strike could take out anything and if the station tumbles dramatically the batteries will be depleted. No power is no communication, and thus no control. A out of control tumbling station dropping modules all over the globe, would cause panic and might just get a international prohibition against large stations in orbit. to avoid a reoccurence |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
On Feb 4, 10:39*pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote: In article , Just what in hell is the military advantage of a base on the Moon? A Lunar Garrison of 12 men on the moon provides an unassailable nuclear launch site to shoot missiles back at Earth. An IRBM class weapon on the moon strikes any point on Earth and the base is unreachable by ICBM. Interplanetary boosters from Earth would take between 9 hours and 4 days to arrive at the vicinity of the moon, and are easily tracked and destroyed. http://www.history.army.mil/faq/horizon/Horizon_V1.pdf http://www.history.army.mil/faq/horizon/Horizon_V2.pdf Project Horizon was a study to determine the feasibility of constructing a military base on the Moon. On 8 June 1959, a group at the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) produced for the U.S. Department of the Army a report entitled Project Horizon, Declassified plans are given above. Additionally the Horizon lunar outpost was said to be necessary to protect United States interests on the Moon, to conduct Moon-based surveillance of the Earth and space, to act as a communications relay, and to serve as a base for exploration of the Moon. The permanent outpost would cost $6 billion and become operational in December 1966 with 12 soldiers. Wernher von Braun, head of ABMA, appointed Heinz-Hermann Koelle to head the project team at Redstone Arsenal. A lunar landing-and-return vehicle would have shuttled up to 16 astronauts at a time to the base and back. Rocket vehicle energy requirements would limit the base location to an area of 20 deg latitude/longitude on the Moon, from ~20° N, ~20° W to ~20º S, ~20º E. Within this area, the project selected three sites of interest; * northern part of Sinus Aestuum, near the Eratosthenes crater * southern part of Sinus Aestuum near Sinus Medii * southwest coast of Mare Imbrium, just north of the Montes Apenninus mountains. This would be erected by; * 1964: 40 Saturn launches. * January 1965: Cargo delivery to the moon would begin. * April 1965: The first manned landing by two men. * November 1966: Outpost manned by a task force of 12 men. This program required a total of 61 Saturn I and 88 Saturn II launches up to November 1966. During this period some 220 tonnes of useful cargo would be transported to the Moon * December 1966 through 1967: First operational year of the lunar outpost. A total of 64 launches were scheduled. These would result in an additional 120 tons of useful cargo. The base is defended against Soviet overland attack by man-fired weapons: * unguided Davy Crockett rockets with low-yield nuclear warheads * conventional Claymore mines modified to puncture pressure suits The basic building block for the outpost would be cylindrical metal tanks, 3.05 m in diameter and 6.10 m in length. Two nuclear reactors are located in pits to provide shielding and provide power for the operation of the preliminary quarters and for the equipment used in the construction of the permanent facility. Empty cargo and propellant containers are assembled and used for storage of bulk supplies, weapons, and life essentials. Two types of surface vehicles are used, one for lifting, digging, and scraping, another for more extended distance trips needed for hauling, reconnaissance and rescue. A lightweight parabolic antenna erected near the main quarters provide communications with Earth. At the conclusion of the construction phase the original construction camp quarters are converted to a bio- science and physics-science laboratory. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"the biggest disaster in the history of space exploration"?
As usual, Fred is clueless.
Watch this video of the debris orbits, and the orbit of ISS by comparison. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmdgmBJGw2I A collision with significant debris would cause destruction of the station. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
just THREE YEARS AFTER my "CREWLESS Space Shuttle" article, theNSF """experts""" discover the idea of an unmanned Shuttle to fill the2010-2016 cargo-to-ISS (six+ years) GAP | gaetanomarano | Policy | 3 | September 15th 08 04:47 PM |
The world trade center "official story" is the biggest lie since "The Holocaust" | Michael Gray | Misc | 0 | April 18th 06 04:18 AM |
The world trade center "official story" is the biggest lie since "The Holocaust" | Michael Gray | Misc | 0 | April 17th 06 11:58 AM |