ISS Nearly Clobbered By Space Debris 131
erice writes "A chuck of space debris came within 335 meters of the space station, forcing the crews to head to their escape capsules and prepare for emergency evacuation to Earth. '[NASA's] Associate Administrator for Space Operations, Bill Gerstenmaier, said it was the closest a debris object had ever come to the station. An analysis was now underway to try to understand its origin, he added.'"
A Chuck...? (Score:3, Funny)
What about a Bob or a John of space debris? Hmmmm?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.collider.com/wp-content/image-base/TV/C/Chuck_NBC/chuck_nbc_tv_show__1_.jpg [collider.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Good (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe now they will start to develop smarter technology to help prevent disasters such as this in space.
I bet you the answer is going to be "space is a bad and dangerous place, let's not go there anymore".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't do it. Too much junk. Too dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
Theres a dolphin with an implant that lets it talk and Roy Scheider *not* killing sharks!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You mean, "maybe now the Chinese will stop blowing up their own satellites as a show of strength"?
the debris cloud of Fengyun 1-C was only 17% of the trackable debris [nasa.gov] in Aug 2007 :)
Yeah, fat chance - it's not like China has any space station that might be at risk.
You are aware that China is building it's own station? And that in 2007 the country tried to become a partner of the ISS (with positive reactions from Russia and the ESA) but was not invited [space.com]?
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean, "maybe now the Chinese will stop blowing up their own satellites as a show of strength"?
the debris cloud of Fengyun 1-C was only 17% of the trackable debris [nasa.gov] in Aug 2007 :)
Only? Humans have been putting junk into earth orbit for half a century. That a one-time event now accounts for 17% of all trackable debris is actually kind of shocking.
Re: (Score:2)
how ironic that comments with an irony marker are taken completely serious....
btw, the NASA document is a quite interesting read - the debris statistic started in 1961, of the total of nearly 13k trackable objects are a little bit over 7k now either outside of GEO or dropped backed to earth. The amount is surprisingly low, I expected much more objects; even considering the difficulties identifying the pieces, the Kessler effect seems top be exaggerated.
otoh, a single Ariane 5 launch (costs ~ US$ 160m) could
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you serious? We've been getting stuff to space for 67 years (Germany's V-2 launch in 1944) and one even accounts for almost 1/5 of all trackabe debris?
And you call that *only*.
Unacceptable (Score:4, Funny)
Clearly we need astronauts who are better at playing Asteroids.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah the old man disabled it.
Re: (Score:1)
:D
Re: (Score:3)
There are too many options. Whose idea was it to use Eclipse as the UI for the ISS anyway?
Re: (Score:3)
Their only other choice was Windows 7, problem was last time they tried it they were locked out of doing anything until someone gave their credit card to a Russian website to start the cleaning process....
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
We need astronauts who read/watch Planetes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes
It is a story about people who collect space debris in the future.
How was it discovered? (Score:2)
I skimmed the article, but I don't see that they mention how they noticed the debris. How was that done? Because they crew went into the escape capsules, you'd think it was detected i advance. How long in advance? Otherwise, perhaps they just felt that after one piece had already passed them, others were likely to follow, motivating the emergency readyness.
Re:How was it discovered? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the info. Do you happen to know the relative velocity between the two in this near-miss?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
For reference, the collision of Iridium 33 and Kosmos-2251 [wikipedia.org] in 2009 was at a
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I understand that their "speed" will be similar, especially in LEO, but there's still a huge possible range in angle of attack, which would make a huge difference in the energy of an impact. I'm just curious what order of magnitude we're dealing with here. Are the two meeting at 500kph or 50,000kph? How big is this debris object... 0.5g or 500g?
If I were on the ISS at the time, I would be asking these questions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how NORAD has time to track everything, but at least they're damn good at finding that fat man in a red suit every December 24th.
Re: (Score:2)
it cleared the ISS at 0008GMT this morning
Sorry but in what way 8 minutes past midnight is 'morning'?
In the Hong Kong or Tokyo way (or pick some other country in a similar area of the world).
Re: (Score:2)
In hongkong or toyoko 0008GMT is the middle of the day.
Do you even know what GMT is? Greenwich Mean Time.... http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/what-is-gmt/ [greenwichmeantime.com]
Greenwich England... I.E. 0008GMT is 8 minutes past midnight in Greenwich England. NOT Tokyo or Hong Kong.
I strongly suggest you learn about time and how it's measured on this planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi there Mr. Troll,
Hong Kong is at GMT+8 hours, Tokyo is at GMT+9 hours. So at 0008GMT you're at eight minutes past eight or nine in the morning in Hong Kong or Tokyo, respectively. Certainly 'morning' by most people's understanding of the word. I might suggest that you 'learn about time and how it's measured on this planet.'
Cheers,
Sleazy Rider
PS: If you can learn to stop assuming that everyone else is an idiot, it will make it easier to avoid looking like one yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised if the ISS detected it on their own radar. I would have a pretty doppler signature.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have a pretty doppler signature.
Nothing personal, but I really doubt that.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have a pretty doppler signature.
Nothing personal, but I really doubt that.
Yeah, doppler isn't a adjective.
Origin? (Score:4, Funny)
An analysis was now underway to try to understand its origin.
A small planet called Krypton.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, don't blame baby Superman, he didn't have any parents to teach him not to litter!
Re: (Score:1)
Is he like the Menendez Brothers? You have to feel sorry for him/them because they are orphens?
Re:Shielding Technology Need (Score:4, Insightful)
Even Low-Earth orbit that the ISS flies in isn't safe without it.
Actually, I would guess that LEO is the most dangerous places to be, debris-wise. All debris has to pass through LEO eventually as it enters the atmosphere, and it has the smallest volume of space, so statistically speaking, I'd think the chances of getting hit are by far the highest in LEO.
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't LEO be safer because the drag there is much higher, so debris will quickly pass through and fall down to Earth? Unlike GEOish-orbits where I got the impression it'd be circling for a very long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Up in GEO the debris are much more organized, they roam the area looking for targets and pillage... If we are lucky they will kill us first...
Re: (Score:3)
Problem is the HOW. E.g. a plasma cloud wouldn't really help much against high speed debris as they'd just punch through it with their sheer force, even if they do get vaporized they'd likely still hit the hull in that extremely hot state and cause a lot of damage (there's a concept for combining electric reactive armor with a strong magnetic field for tanks so projectiles are turned into plasma and the magnets assist with the deflection but I'm not sure that would stop a modern AP shell and I'm not sure ho
Re: (Score:2)
A rail gun might work.
Re: (Score:1)
This probably isn't even near the top of the list of things to worry about.
Re: (Score:2)
It's because it is a concern and they take steps to mitigate it. There's a reason the Shuttles have so many layers of redundancy, and it's not just for internal equipment failures.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's origin... (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe it was an excess apostrophe.
A probable source of debris (Score:1)
Debris From Satellites' Collision Said to Pose Small Risk to Space Station [washingtonpost.com]
It seems like the risk isn't that small after all.
Re: (Score:2)
The term "risk" is generally considered to include not only severity of an incident but also it's probability. In the case of an on-orbit collision, while the severity of an impact can be extremely high, the probability of it actually occurring is vanishingly low.
Of course, there's no reason to take chances with life-or-death situations, so risk-management policies in place require the crew to take shelter when objects do come near the station.
I get that space is big and all... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
But how is just over one third of a kilometer considered a near miss?
Near miss? Good God... TF title says "clobbered" - I thought many pieces of debris battered ISS for long hours.
Re:I get that space is big and all... (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly! It should be called a near hit!!!!! (George Carlin)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I get that space is big and all... (Score:5, Informative)
In the vastness of our skies, two airplanes coming within a mile of each other is close. Now imagine being ~170mi above the Earth.
On the Discovery Channel, they showed a picture of what a 1/2 inch flake of paint can do at those speeds. It left a 3 inch crater about 1/4 deep in the aluminum wing of the Shuttle.
Wiki has a nice pic of what a 7gram object can do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SDIO_KEW_Lexan_projectile.jpg [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sorry, something about "General Motors" and "Weapons Testing Facility" just doesn't make me warm and fuzzy inside.
I can see the similarities though... the only thing their cars are good for are going fast in a straight line, and crashing.
Re: (Score:1)
Sorry, mis-quoted wiki... in any case, weapons are being tested at General Motors (?).
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on what they needed for test equipment and room to work, it might have fit the needs without needing to make a more expensive trip out to the desert somewhere.
Also, I think I want one of those "light gas guns" and a supply of those lexan projectiles. It looks like it would make short work of the occasional wannabe thugmobile that "cruises" the neighborhood to wake people up at 3 am with really crappy bass.
Re: (Score:2)
I always love it when you hear the bass kicking immediately followed by the rattle of their license plate. It makes me laugh at the stupidity of it.
Re: (Score:1)
the only thing their cars are good for are going fast in a straight line, and crashing.
That's not entirely true. The Corvette is also good for turning, stopping, treating midlife crises, and making gas, brakes and tires disappear in the blink of an eye :-P
Re: (Score:2)
But how is just over one third of a kilometer considered a near miss?
Because space junk is hard to detect, which makes it hard to predict its path. In other words, the debris was within their margins of error. That's why they thought it was prudent to put the astronauts into their escape pods.
That said, you're not wrong that the headline was sensationalist. Even NASA said this was never an emergency in their books. Just a precaution.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't have said 1/3 km, I would have said "about 350 meters or 1100 feet." Sounds a lot closer.
Re: (Score:2)
1.1 kilofeet away.
Re: (Score:2)
You get a warning that a car 90 miles away is heading straight for you at 45mph and two hours later it misses you by just one yard. Near miss or not?
I love to nitpick. Actually to follow your example, the car would have to miss you by 2.25 miles, using the same proportions of your first example. I wouldn't consider that a "near miss" by any means. In fact considering I live about 1500m from a highway, I get these sorts of "near misses" all the time.
Re: (Score:1)
If you watch any car chases on TV, they frequently talk about the "near miss" of people on the sidewalk. I've heard it when the car was on an inner lane and the pedestrians were on the outer limit of the sidewalk.
It depends on how much excitement the reporter wants to achieve in his audience, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
You left out one other critical item:
-None of the astronauts were carrying their insurance cards in their wallets when they left earth.
Re: (Score:2)
Why?
why cant they push a button and fire the station keeping jets to move it? I dont understand why it takes 2 fricking days to get around to pushing a freaking button. Yes I know the ISS is a wierd shape and the computer needs to fire ALL the station keeping jets at the same time and at the correct impulse, but honestly they cant figure that out ahead of time and have one ready on the big red "OH CRAP!" button?
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe rocket scientists are completely oblivious to all the easy answers pontificated by armchair astronauts that know absolutely nothing about flying space stations.
Re: (Score:2)
The TWO oh crap buttons that are set to push it in TWO different directions. I am guessing up and down (towards and away from the planet) would be highly safe bets.
Honestly, you can pick 64 vector directions and have them all pre-programmed so that a decision can be made and action taken in a few minutes to react.
But it's not as cool as the Big red button
Re: (Score:2)
The "oh shit button" would increase or decrease the orbital velocity of the station, which eventually lifts the station to a higher orbit or drops the station to a lower orbit. Apparently, it takes a couple days to compute the new orbit and verify that it is safer than the current one, as well as time for the station to actually move into the higher orbit. The button would likely just end up decelerating or accelerating the impact with the object in as short a time as 2 hours.
Surprised ISS has lasted this long... (Score:2)
...without getting clobbered by space debris, or more accurately, our own space junk.
Statistics I had heard years ago spoke of some 8,000 objects that NORAD tracks in our orbit. I'm certain that number has grown significantly since then, but I wonder how much of that we have been responsible for putting up there? Seems our habits in space tend to mirror our (bad) habits on earth.
shields? Laser? Tractor Beam? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't the Daedalus have just moved in-between and caught the projectile in their shields? What do we fund SG1 for if not to protect space?
Its origin??? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing disastrous happens unless it is cause by those evil humans.
"... the crews to head to their escape capsules" (Score:2)
Yes, I'm glad they weren't actually hit. But in a world where we have PEOPLE! IN! SPACE! and 99.9999% of the population doesn't know their names (me included), a little drama once in awhile isn't such a bad thing.
.
Lasers (Score:2)
It's time they add lasers to the ISS, to shoot away that kind of stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
It's time they add lasers to the ISS, to shoot away that kind of stuff.
For the thousandth time, sharks don't do well in space.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Let's try a laser experiment. Have someone chuck a baseball at you head as hard as they can. Now, point a flashlight beam at it to deflect it. Once your head quits ringing, consider that space rocks travel a lot faster than baseballs, and a laser would have to be very powerful and very accurate to deflect it while it is within its range.
Take the most powerful laser pointer you can get, and try to move a small ball bearing with its light. Use several pointers if necessary. How many watts would it take to def
Bigelow (Score:2)
Origin obvious (Score:2, Troll)
[NASA's] Associate Administrator for Space Operations, Bill Gerstenmaier, said it was the closest a debris object had ever come to the station. An analysis was now underway to try to understand its origin, he added.
My understanding is that the station mostly originated in the US and Russia, with help from about sixteen other countries. NASA's Associate Administrator for Space Operations should really know this, or at least be able to look this up on Wikipedia.
I doubt it (Score:1)
Space warfare methods (Score:2)
So how long will it be before some pariah-state with primitive space capability, in yet another fit of childish Beloved Leader temper-tantrum-class behavior, launches a canister of one-inch aluminum bearings into crowded orbits to create orbital minefields to destroy satellites and otherwise be a pain in the ass?
Yes, that would be without question an act of war, just like mining sea lanes in international waters would be. Does anyone think that would stop a Beloved Leader from doing it if he could use the
Re: (Score:1)
Satellites are mostly built of light-weight, non magnetic materials such as aluminium.
Magnets suffer from inverse square law problems: the largest magnets on earth have an operating range of inches, maybe a few feet.
Because everything in orbit is travelling at high relative speeds, the amount of time any bit of debris spent within the "capture region" of a magnet would be milliseconds at best, not lone enough to match energies.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
But gravity would do that, right? So let's just hold a huge mass sufficiently close to those objects to change their flight path... Maybe in circles around our huge mass.
Re:Magnetize! (Score:4, Funny)
A South monopole or a North monopole would get pulled towards the earth's North or South pole. If we want it to keep going around in orbit we better make it an East or West monopole :)
-
Re: (Score:2)
The module on Mir which was holed in a collision was a write off, so I think it is likely the ISS would be as well. Probably a lot of gear inside the station would be written off by exposure to vacuum. The lack of cooling would destroy electronics, for example, but the same gear would be kept running for a long as possible to aid in the escape. I think repopulating the ISS would be very expensive, difficult and dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
Its compartmentalized, so if one module is lost the others can be sealed off and continue being used. If all modules are punctured in one event, then yes, total loss is probable.
Re: (Score:2)
Was the debris traveling several times the speed of sound (in air...) relative to your car? If so, I would recommend avoiding the ghetto when driving to work...