3.5 Ton Satellite to Crash Back to Earth 323
DeadBugs writes "CNN is reporting that the NASA Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer could crash back to earth in a matter of days. It's estimated that up to 9 large pieces (4-100 lbs.) of the Satellite could survive re-entry. Unlike the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory that was guided in, this Satellite will be uncontrolled. The EUVE has only been up there since 1992.... I wonder when this sort of thing will start to be a more common event."
first post (Score:3, Interesting)
The *what* Ultraviolet Explorer? (Score:3, Interesting)
Meanwhile, on board... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is amusing in that car-wreck sort of way. Who wants to bet that when this crashes on Mrs. Tingle's Rose Garden in Bummsville, Idaho and there's a lot of media attention, that the government is gonna spend lots of money to go up there and give these things emergency navigation systems so that they can easily fall on unsuspecting sea mammals instead of J. Random Human?
Auto destruct sequence? (Score:2, Interesting)
There REALLY should be a way to contoll the destruction better, instead of just letting it drop. Granted making it drop might be better, but this thing will still have some pretty good chunks hitting the ground. Why not design them to break up or be broken up more thoroughly. Somewhat similar to what an Indy Car does when hitting a wall.
Putting explosives and the like would be somewhat risky, and designing weaknesses into the stucture might weaken it. But, having a 200lb chunk nail my house at mach 6 wouldn't be the best either
Re:Insurance? (Score:5, Interesting)
LV
Food for thought (Score:4, Interesting)
Could you design a sattelite in such a way that it could be destroyed remotely, ie. blown into small chunks that pose no danger to other spacecraft (are "blasted" towards Earth and therefore certain disintegration), while maintaining stability during launch/operation and not adding too much to the total weight?
Devil's advocate:
Who'd enforce it? Corporations won't pay extra for a very unlikely liability problem (until such a time that we're lobbing dozens of big things into space daily)
What circumstances (other than system failure) would cause you to push the button - and if it had failed, who's to say it's pointed the right way and you won't shoot your comsat into the ISS?
Sorry - just thinking out loud...IANARS
Re:Considering there are 7000 objects in orbit (Score:4, Interesting)
They should make a law! (Score:4, Interesting)
If they could control this thing and bring it down when and where they wanted they could potentially do some interesting stuff. Like having it streak over the opening ceremonies at the Olympics. Or if the had REALLY fine control they could light the olynpic calderon with it instead of using the torch. That would be even better than the flaming arrow. Or they could drop it on Bin Laden's head. Ok, now I am getting silly.
ps I am bitter because I submitted this exact article and had it rejected several hours before it appeared.
Re:Auto destruct sequence? (Score:1, Interesting)
A particle the size of a pea colliding with an object in orbit (e.g. the International Space Station) would release a *huge* amount of energy - enough to destroy it.
If you exploded a satellite you would create thousands or millions of such particles with absolutely no control over their direction. Sure, some would be propelled into the earth where hopefully they should burn up, and others would hopefully be propelled out of orbit, but the remainder would end up in ever-decreasing elliptical orbits around the earth and would one day come back to haunt Space Agencies everywhere.
The only real solution is that the satellites get designed to burn up better upon re-entry, using a combination of deliberately weakened structures, and possibly explosive bolts (similar to those on jet fighters' canopies) that allow the satellite to disintegrate into smaller pieces before burn up.
Re:Considering there are 7000 objects in orbit (Score:5, Interesting)
In November 1954 a housewife in Alabama was struck by a 3-lb (1.4 kg) meteor that smashed through her roof, bounced off some furniture, and struck her in the hip as she lay sleeping. She received a large bruise but no other harm.
In October 1992 a 26-lb (12 kg) meteor punched clear through the trunk of an automobile in Peekskill, New York, wrecking the aged Chevrolet (but also turning it into an instant collector's item that sold for over $20,000).
In June 1994 a man driving near Madrid, Spain suffered a broken finger when a 3-lb (1.4 kg) meteor crashed through his car's windshield and smashed the steering wheel, ending up in the back seat.
or here [branchmeteorites.com].
Unfortunately I couldn't find the link to the central park jogger that got nailed a few years ago. Although all it did was bounce off him. It made many major newspapers though. Anyone got a reference?
Ya know, it's too bad they can't just harvest it (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, my closet is full of old computer parts, so you see how I think.
This already is common. (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy
Some perspective (Score:2, Interesting)
up thousands and thousands of weatherbaloons
in the sky, every day. And you dont hear them
killing people left and right?
That is metal intstruments that weights a few
pounds. Hitting the ground in 200-300km/h
that is more then enough to kill a man or
destroy a car etc. etc.
So, I guess it wont be such a big problem.
Now, or in the future.
afaik. there has been one or two incidents in
30 years in sweden of thoose landing in urban
areas.
Re:Odds (Score:3, Interesting)