QuickBird1 Is A Loss

daveg writes: "Earthwatch of Longmont CO has lost their second commercial high resolution imaging satellite. The first loss was EarlyBird1 in December 1997. EarlyBird1 went silent after 4 days, it was capable of 3m resolution. QuickBird1 was capable of 1m resolution from a Kodak sensor system. The launch from Russia's Plesetsk Cosmodome was first thought to have not achieved orbit but now appears to have reached orbit then disappeared from the visibility zone of Russian radio equipment and since has not responded to the signals sent by Russian ground stations. QuickBird1 rode on a converted ICBM design, first launched in 1967, with a record of 398 successful orbital flights out of 420 launches."

I wonder why

[sanemind]

What a shame. I wonder if any covert governmental types may have used some sort of classified anti-satellite weapon to prevent this level of detail being available to the public market.

I remember that the other private imaging satelite [with, if I recall, 10 or 15 meter resolution] was only allowed to be lauched due to the companies consent to pre-censoring of certain areas by the Feds.

Were they perhaps trying to get around such restraints by lauching in europe and avoiding US oversight? Beats me; sorry to add anything more to the conspiracy fodder supply.


---
man sig

Bad karma?

[the_crowbar]

Maybe space exploration is just having some bad karma.
NASA losses a Mars lander and now, EarthWatch losses its second satellite.
Glad I haven't invested in them. :)

the_crowbar

Re:I wonder why

[Captain Abstract]

seems like the most plausible theory, what with such an experienced delivery mechanism. i would guess that a laser weapon would be most well suited to destroying a satellite in orbit. i recall that there was such a weapon in development my the US army. there was even an issue of popular science devoted to the concept of a such a laser weapon, and in it they stated that it could have anti-satellite uses; moreover, they said that there were tests currently under way, and this was in '95 or '96. ... hey i just checked out the popular science website and lo and behold if you go to there [popsci.com], and search through their article resource finder with the term 'laser weapon' you will get some results with said laser weapon. i honestly believe that it is a real possibility that the US military has shot down both of those satellites. after all, let's say that you were the commander able to make such a decision, wouldn't you shoot it down if it were a real threat to national security?

Re:I wonder why

[Captain Abstract]

so why exactly is my post moderated down? because my email address says 'i.am.troll.hear.me.roar'? what bullshit. so much for moderation based on the content of posts. my theory that the satellite was shot down is perfectly valid, just as valid as any other theory. i even point out some evidence for my theory. i'll bet someone who had a subscription to the magazine in 1994-95 could confirm this. the moderation system is truly pathetic.

It's been hacked...

[Jotham]

It's been hacked. To find it again just calculate the orbit trajectory that passes directly over Natalie Portmans trailer on Episode 2 and the Playboy mansion.

Re:I wonder why

[Captain Abstract]

true, true.

Excellent Paper - A must read if you're interested

[Mad Hughagi]

I just finished looking over the following paper [af.mil], it was written by an officer of the USAF. It goes into all the considerations with imaging satellites as well as US policy and whatnot. It seems as though the US government would actually prefer to have these commercial satellites exist, as long as they are controlled from the US with governmental influence.

From the paper: President Bill Clinton made history as the first US president to use the line-item veto, targeting three ASAT programs with his pen, including the Army's Kinetic Energy Antisatellite Program. According to Robert Bell, special assistant to the president and senior director for defense policy and arms control on the National Security Council (NSC), although the administration recognizes the need for space control, it "doesn't necessarily believe at this time that the Army program is the appropriate solution." The White House would rather forgo attacking the satellites themselves, and instead find ways to destroy or disrupt the information downlinked by the satellites.

I think that pretty much sums up the conspiracy. It makes sense though - why waste time and money making anti-satellite weapons when you can shut down their control centres here on the ground through some veil of 'national defence interests' by employing a handful of federal agents or whatever.

10-15m??

[TA]

Is this other satellite your'e thinking of the Ikonos satellite? If so, the resolution of Ikonos isn't 10-15 meters, it's 1 meter. Too bad with quickbird though. There has been a lot of investment in the ground segment for that one.
TA

Re:I wonder why

[the_Upsetter]

Not to discount the possibility of government interferance, but there is already one commercial satelite operating (Ikonos 2) with 1m (panchromatic) resolution. There is info at www.spaceimaging.com that details the relationship between the govt. and the operators of this platform... Pretty interesting. Aparantly space imaging is given pretty much a free run of available imaging possiblities with the govt. retaining the ability to shut the platform down (temporarily or permanently) in the event that natl. security is breached or threatend. http://www.spaceimaging.com/aboutus/corpFAQ.htm