Call In the Military To Blast Rogue Satellite? 243
coondoggie submitted a follow-up to the tale of the wandering satellite that might collide with other stuff in orbit. He asks "Will the military need to be called in to blow up the rogue Intelsat satellite meandering through Earth's orbit? Or maybe a NASA Space Shuttle could swing by and grab it? You may recall that in 2008, rather than risk that a large piece of a failing spy satellite would fall on populated areas, the government blasted it out of the sky. The physics of such a shot were complicated and the Navy had a less than 10-second window to hit the satellite as it passed over its ships in the Pacific Ocean. But it worked. Now word comes that a five-year-old Intelsat TV satellite is meandering in orbit and attempts to control it have proven futile. At issue now is that the satellite could smash into other satellites or ramble into other satellite orbits and abscond with their signals."
No, and no (Score:5, Informative)
As was clearly stated the last time we had this exact discussion:
- far too high for the space shuttle
- most assuredly too high for most anti-sat missiles
Space shuttle (Score:3, Informative)
1 big bit vs many many little bits (Score:4, Informative)
Stuff does not deorbit like a syfy movie.
I would think the tightly contained 1 big bit of a satellite is much safer than the thousands of little tiny parts in all sorts of orbits you are going to get if you try and destroy the one big bit.
They can't (Score:5, Informative)
The US doesn't appear to have a system capable of destroying something at that orbit.
Now the first paragraph in the article is just full of ignorance.
"Will the military need to be called in to blow up the rogue Intelsat satellite meandering through Earth's orbit? Or maybe a NASA Space Shuttle could swing by and grab it?"
Again, the military hasn't demonstrated the ability to hit things in that orbit. The Shuttle can't go that high.
The F-15 launched ASM-135 ASAT - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-135_ASAT [wikipedia.org] - could go up to 350 miles.
USA-193 was destroyed at 130 miles
Galaxy 15 is at 22,230 miles
Geosync orbit too high (Score:2, Informative)
The wayward satellite is in (or near) geosychronous orbit (23+K miles up). The shuttle cannot
reach that orbit, being limited to a couple of hundred miles altitude. Similarly, the anti-satellite
weapons are only designed for low orbit satellites (spy satellites and other military targets).
Now, if we had ever gone ahead and build the interorbit taxi/transport as an adjunct to
the space station (either robotic or manned), we would have a solution to the problem.
Right now we are stuck.
Re:1 big bit vs many many little bits (Score:3, Informative)
short answer? No. (Score:3, Informative)
Long answer? No. And this is why.
This satellite is in geosynchronous orbit. A shuttle mission is not an option, the orbit is to high. Retasking an ICBM or other missile to intercept is not an option, the orbit is to high.
Lasers could be an option, if one existed with the right power and accuracy. This thing is thousands of miles farther than any destructive laser has ever been targeted. Then you have to deal with not just a meandering satellite but possibly a cloud of debris capable of knocking out other satellites in geosynchronous orbit.
Re:When China does it... (Score:5, Informative)
When China does it, the world protests. [bbc.co.uk] all the space junk created. However, when the US does it, it's to save other satellites.
The US did it before China and people were very critical [csmonitor.com]:
The official explanation – that the US wanted to prevent the toxic contents of the spacecraft's fuel tank from hitting the ground – seems a bit thin, according to James Lewis, director of the technology and public policy program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Thus critics from around the world have speculated about ulterior motives, ranging from a desire to test US ballistic missile defenses to poking China in the eye.
It's a sort of anti-satellite arms race and status thing between two super power. Or in playground terms, the two assholes are having a dick measuring contest [theonion.com].
Re:When China does it... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, the two shots were Apples and Oranges.
USA-193 was in a decaying orbit at 130 miles and most of the debris de orbited within a couple weeks. It was hit by a small SM-3 surface to air missile, 21 feet long, 3,000 pounds
FY-1C was in a stable polar orbit at 537 miles and it's destruction increased the amount of space debris by 12%. The missile that hit it was a DF-21, 35 feet long, 30,000 pounds
Re:Shuttle? (Score:2, Informative)
Shuttle makes it to LEO just fine, there's no "barely" about it.
Re:1 big bit vs many many little bits (Score:3, Informative)
#3: would cause huge amount of debris (Score:3, Informative)
Very, verrrrrrry bad idea (Score:4, Informative)
In case you don't remember, stuff traveling at orbital velocities is positively lethal to spacecraft. The extreme energies involved in these kinds of impacts is enough to send very high velocity fragments in all directions. Sure, some of it will de-orbit, but most will end up in fairly stable orbits that will EVENTUALLY intersect all the other satellites up there. So blowing up one rogue satellite makes one very annoying but eminently predictable problem into a thousand lethal and unpredictable problems.
Last February, a Russian satellite hit a commercial Iridium satellite, and the resulting debris cloud (estimated near 600 pieces in various orbits) has been a HUGE headache for everyone in similar orbital altitudes.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123438921888374497.html [wsj.com]
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29147679/ [msn.com]
In 2008, the US got criticized around the world for blowing up a falling satellite because of the health threats of hydrazine if it landed in a populated area. Aside from complaints about military showboating, there were many scientists who complained about the resulting orbital debris; however, in reality it was a very low-altitude explosion and the debris cloud did de-orbit very quickly (unlike a geosynchronous orbit explosion, which would leave practically permanent debris due to the orbit well above any appreciable atmospheric drag).
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6712/is_35_237/ai_n29417848/ [findarticles.com]
Read here for some details on the general problems with orbital debris.
http://illuminations.nctm.org/LessonDetail.aspx?id=L376 [nctm.org]
So no more helpful suggestions like this, please.
Re:No, and no and NO and N! O! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:1 big bit vs many many little bits (Score:3, Informative)
That's pretty much what is done with failed GEO satellites - the problem with this one is that navigation and control failed but the payload is still active and they can't turn it off.
Re:U.S. Air Force to the rescue! (Score:5, Informative)
Obligatory XKCD: Gravity Wells (Score:5, Informative)
In particular, look at the panel of Earth, which is under Uranus and Neptune, lower right.
Geez, XKCD should win the Pulitzer Prize for this graphic. If a picture is worth a KiloWord, this is worth a MegaWord of explanation. This should be required viewing in all 8th Grade science classes.
Re:U.S. Air Force to the rescue! (Score:3, Informative)
Makes sense to try to change orbit of the satellite, but given that it's in geostationary orbit it will sooner or later drift by itself into satellite graveyard area. There are locations in geostationary orbit that do attract satellites.
Blowing up a satellite is one of the stupid ideas since it will cause a shitload of debris that can damage other satellites and be a problem for placing other satellites in orbit.
How getting to GEO works... (Score:2, Informative)
The best way to deal with this rogue satellite would be to send out another one to very gently attach itself to the rogue and then push it into a disposal orbit (which for GEO is typically just a higher orbit outside GEO). Blowing up the rogue would only create a huge amount of debris that would then cause problems for basically everyone in GEO, since it couldn't all be tracked or controlled.
Re:U.S. Air Force to the rescue! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:U.S. Air Force to the rescue! (Score:3, Informative)
and with a small amount of C4 and some copper plates, you could add several shaped charges throughout the satelite to make any capturing vehicle look like swiss cheese once it closes its payload-bay doors.
As for TFS, why the hell does it mention the shuttle? are there any /. editors ignorant enough to think the shuttle has the ability to reach GEO? Also the 10 second window mentioned for the 2008 takedown suggests a satelite in LEO, roughly 300 miles high, tops. Good luck shooting down anything at 22000 miles high with your navy destroyer..