GOCE Satellite Is Falling To Earth But Nobody Knows Where It Will Land 122
Virtucon writes "The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer or GOCE Satellite is expected to fall to Earth this weekend. It weighs over a ton and unfortunately the Scientists don't exactly know where it will land. You can track it here. It should re-enter sometime between Sunday night and Monday morning. Makr Hopkins, chair of the National Society's Executive Committee said: 'The satellite is one of the few satellites in a Polar Orbit. Consequently, it could land almost anywhere.' The GOCE mission was to create an accurate gravity map of the Earth."
The tracking website is down... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The tracking website is down... (Score:5, Funny)
And that's news? :)
Re:stereotype (Score:1)
You just had to, didn't you. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The difference this time is that the pizza guy is too scared to deliver
Re: (Score:1)
but that's where you always sleep.
Re: (Score:2)
Good plan. One-ton satellite at thousands of miles an hour... that extra floor oughtta do the trick. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, most of the damage from that recent event was windows shattering. Unless you have a dedicated blast shelter to go, to that's probably your best move.
BTW, when I see bright flashes in the sky, I've trained myself to get behind something to avoid my skin catching fire, and then run to some substantial cover in the interval between the flash and the blast wave. Very cool looking until your retinas dissolve.
Hmmm (Score:2)
Maybe the next one ought to create an accurate reentry map...
Use the map (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Use the map (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Whoever it lands on will certainly get the ultimate lesson in gravity.
Define "irony" (Score:1)
"A satellite used to map gravity being destroyed by its inability to resist gravity."
Re:Define "irony" (Score:5, Informative)
It's not gravity that's the problem - it's air resistance. Earth's atmosphere doesn't have a distinct edge, and you have to get pretty frelling far out before the particle count drops low enough not to matter to things going 10,000+mph. Certainly a lot farther than the measly few dozen miles to low Earth orbit.
Re:Define "irony" (Score:4, Funny)
It's not gravity that's the problem - it's air resistance. Earth's atmosphere doesn't have a distinct edge, and you have to get pretty frelling far out before the particle count drops low enough not to matter to things going 10,000+mph. Certainly a lot farther than the measly few dozen miles to low Earth orbit.
Well the orbital path does make large parts of the globe safe.
That is why Carly and I are flying my jet to Nova Scotia just to be safe.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that we know the final orbit path Nova Scotia
would have been the best place on North America to
see the satellite. Alaska might have been cool too.
Of interest there were no visual sightings of the final decent
(so far).
The more I think about the decent of large package satellites
the more reason there is to design for reentry perhaps non-reentry.
With autos the design strategy is layers designed to take a licking
shed energy and protect the internal occupant area. With satellites it makes
sense for th
Re: (Score:2)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=frelling [lmgtfy.com]
Re:Define "irony" (Score:5, Informative)
What Immerman said. A satellite deals with gravity just peachy, but air kills it.
No artificial satellite is completely outside the atmosphere. There are still traces of air even hundreds of miles out, and every time a satellite hits an air molecule it loses an eensy-teensy bit of energy. Each loss makes the orbit a little bit lower, and a little bit faster. (Yes, orbital mechanics is a curious realm where you can slow down by applying thrust and speed up by applying the brakes.) The lower it gets, the more often it hits a molecule, and the energy loss gradually begins to snowball.
You can't predict the precise impact point without precise knowledge of the air density the satellite is encountering, and we don't have that information because it varies with all manner of factors, like solar wind and terrestrial weather. The principal means of prediction is the change in the length of an orbit. When you start seeing a measurable time difference from one orbit to the next, things are starting to happen.At that point, you can predict the time of impact with a precision on the order of weeks, and as time goes on you can narrow it down further.
Right now, we know when GOCE will come in give or take a handful of hours -- and since it can circle the world a couple of times in that interval, we have very little idea of where it will hit. As time passes, the error factor shrinks...when Skylab came in, NASA knew it would hit "somewhere in Australia" three or four hours before it hit.
An intentional reentry is different, because you use a retro-rocket to dump a nice big packet of energy and skip right over the protracted decay time, and make it land where you want.
In the interest of perspective, keep in mind that Nature throws rocks at us from space all the time -- meteors big enough to survive the trip through the atmosphere hit the earth dozens of times per day. Yet there are only a handful of cases on record where a person was injured, or even saw one hit -- simply because you and I and all the other people cover a VERY tiny fraction of the earth's surface. We are little bitty spots on a great big dartboard.
Re: (Score:1)
No artificial satellite is completely outside the atmosphere.
What? Even geostationary satellites?
Re: (Score:2)
Even those, though their lifetimes are much longer.
Re: (Score:2)
No artificial satellite is completely outside the atmosphere.
And GOCE is deeper into the atmosphere the atmosphere than most. It has wings and an engine. During it's mission it wasn't really in orbit, it was flying. Now the fuel has run out.
Re: (Score:1)
Why?
Re: (Score:1)
Wasn't there all this hubbub when ROSAT and Phobos Grunt came down that satellites should have a final fuel supply left to do a controlled de-orbit? And here is GOCE which has engines and at the end of its lifespan was even lowered to make better science... and they let it de-orbit uncontrolled.
It's because there is science to be done.
-- Glados.
Re: (Score:2)
The engine on GOCE was a little ion engine. Not enough thrust to predictably de-orbit where you are aiming. And it was designed prior to the new guidelines that satellites should safely de-orbit, unfortunately.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely at this point it's safe to say Voyager 1 has completely left our atmosphere?
(yes, I know)
Re: (Score:3)
Whoever it lands on will certainly get the ultimate lesson in gravity.
Yes, it would be a grave situation.
If anyone seriously thinks this is a threat, buy a lottery ticket.
I saw a really weird shooting star once while traveling. It was shooting upwards, was a really bright green, and flashed as it went.
The next day I read in the paper that the Russians had thrown a very large old computer out of the MIR. This one ought to be a hell of a shooting star if it comes down at night anywhere where anyone can see it
Re: (Score:2)
I saw a really weird shooting star once while traveling. It was shooting upwards, was a really bright green, and flashed as it went.
It sounds like you might have witnessed upper-atmospheric lightning [wikipedia.org]. If you're unfamiliar with these phenomena, please see some of the rare* videos that have been captured. Although it might** have been MIR's jettisoned computer, (which might explain the green color (i.e., burning copper wire)), UAL would account for both the color and the upward trajectory.
* Although witnessed for decades by pilots, their stories had been dismissed. UAL has only recently been recognized as being "real," and research is in
Legal aspect (Score:2)
Re:Legal aspect (Score:5, Funny)
Well, it all depends.
If it lands in the US, it could be considered a lawsuit.
If it lands on South Korea, it could be construed as a blow from the Sacred Unicorn of the North.
If it lands in Russia, it will end up on You Tube for weeks.
If it lands anywhere else, it will be Obama's fault.
Re: Legal aspect (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
"If it lands anywhere else, it will be Jean-Jacques Dordain's [wikipedia.org] fault."
FTFY, and educated you while fixing it.
Re: (Score:1)
If it lands anywhere else, it will be Obama's fault.
I don't care who you blame, but you don't seem to know that this is a European satellite.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, he never claimed to know vere, I mean where, come down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTKn1aSOyOs [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
yeah..
manslaughter, involuntary(debatable if it's unplanned I suppose, since they knew it would land somewhere when they shot it up) homicide - but technically yes.
however, if you can't get them on trial for intentional killings done by bombs dropped from the sky on civilians - in a country with which they are not in war with, which doesn't have warzone status by any definition.. how the fuck could you get anyone on the hook for this? "it was just a bomb that was supposed to hit a terrorist but which unfor
Re: (Score:1)
If it lands on someone's head, would it not be, technically speaking, a homicide?
No, it would not be homicide; it would be ironic. As illustrated by Scott Adams (Dilbert Newsletter 49.0 @ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/972846/posts [freerepublic.com]):
I've also learned recently that "ironic" means anything you want it to mean. Example:
Me: "I heard that Bob was killed by a meteor."
Induhvidual: "Wow. That's ironic."
Me: "Why is it ironic? Was he an astronomer?"
Induhvidual: "No, it's ironic because, you know, what are the odds?"
Me: "So anything unlikely is automatically ironic?"
Induhvidual: "No, it also needs to be bad."
Me: "This conversation is ironic."
Looks like it's going up! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
fall to Earth (Score:2)
Won't it burn up on reentry?
Re:fall to Earth (Score:5, Insightful)
"The octagonal, 1100-kg satellite with a cross-sectional area of only 1m is configured to keep aerodynamic drag and torque to an absolute minimum. GOCE is symmetrical about its flight direction and two winglets provide additional aerodynamic stability. "
She might just penetrate like a spear, with the front burning away as she slows down. Sounds like she's built very solidly as well. So we should still have a nice big solid chunk of debris for impact. Possibly even salvageable for the museums!
But I'm afraid sleeping in your basement won't make a whole lot of difference.
Re: (Score:2)
She?
You see, in English language basically everything that can't run away and hide up on a tree on its own is considered female.
And this thing is even flying towards us, which qualifies double, especially for slashdotters.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly even salvageable for the museums!
Googled since I was curious:
There are no hazardous materials aboard like the hydrazine propellants used on many spacecraft. [bbc.co.uk]
So, have fun with your new mancave decoration.
Re: (Score:2)
Metal doesn't burn easy, and this is likely moving a *lot* slower than most iron meteors that manage to burn up anyway. Most likely any antennas and other large surfaces will be ripped off by the hot ionized plasma "wind" of reentry, and the main structure itself may be break up as well. But that'll be chaos in action, hard to predict beforehand.
Re: (Score:3)
Metal doesn't burn easy, and this is likely moving a *lot* slower than most iron meteors that manage to burn up anyway.
Really?
Here's what we send up: http://i.space.com/images/i/000/010/556/original/Sacriflight_AW.jpg?1309195668 [space.com]
Here's all we got back:
http://i.space.com/images/i/000/003/207/original/080228-cs-02.jpg?1292266925 [space.com]
Here's what it looked like coming back:
http://www.wfaa.com/video/featured-videos/RAW-VIDEO--189393891.html [wfaa.com]
Metal burns just fine, and light aluminum burns extremely well. I once saw a guy welding on the tongue of an airstream trailer, and the structure caught fire. Before the fire department could get
Re:fall to Earth (Score:5, Informative)
Re:fall to Earth (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Interesting how ESA bills this as "good test for debris monitoring systems and fragmentation models", but had a US satellite landed anywhere in the EU, they would be holding investigations, demanding reparations, and publicly chastising NASA for poor planning and reckless disregard of human safety.
Re:fall to Earth (Score:4, Interesting)
With its fins and aerodynamic shape, GOCE will maintain a stable position in orbit as it approaches entry.
Why don't they use the reaction wheels make it tumble before reentry? The higher in the atmosphere it breaks up, the more of the internal components will burn up before impacting.
Re: (Score:1)
With its fins and aerodynamic shape, GOCE will maintain a stable position in orbit as it approaches entry.
Why don't they use the reaction wheels make it tumble before reentry?
Because it doesn't have reaction wheels.
Krag said that GOCE components that are the typical suspects for surviving re-entry are a tank and magnetotorquers, as the spacecraft has no reaction wheels. "The rest of the components are âunrecognizableâ(TM) incomplete, irregular fragments," he added.
http://www.space.com/23171-european-gravity-satellite-falling-from-space.html [space.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Random chance of live/property destruction? (Score:2)
Time to up my karma..
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Schroedinger insurance: When you open to paperwork to check wither you are covered, an exclusion clause spontaneously appears.
Once the rocket is up, (Score:2)
who cares where it comes down...
I'm sure you all know the rest...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> who cares where it comes down...
> I'm sure you all know the rest...
Tom Lehrer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7me25aNtI [youtube.com] approx 50 seconds into the video
National Society's Executive Committe (Score:1)
Fine, I'll say it (Score:1)
If it was carefully mapping Earth's gravity, shouldn't they know where it's going to land?
cant they Shoot it down (Score:1)
would be a good test for those nice missiles they have, blow it up over the ocean!
hope they have insurance if it hits a city...
Quick! (Score:1)
Someone get Scott Manley to figure it out using KSP.
Excuse me? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
RE fuel: Not really; GOCE only has an ion engine which has nowhere near enough (instantaneous) thrust to effect a controlled re-entry (over realistic timescales)
RE prediction:Again, not really - there are too many variables; you can get a landing ellipse once re-entry has begun but before that, for a satellite this size, its really hard to get a handle on things more than a few days in advance.
Having said this, the initial article is a tad misleading, they'll be able to say pretty accurately soon if not now
Re: (Score:2)
What if it hits an airline?
Damn I wish people would learn about scale. Or, knowing they don't understand scale, not comment on space related issues.
Re: (Score:1)
I didn't mean to offend anyone, much less a f
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not privy to the details of their insurance. But do a back of the thumbnail estimate :
[1] number of airplanes that have been hit by falling space debris
divided by [2] the number of airplanes that have fallen out of the sky since 1957 (Sputnik)
multiplied by [3] Warsaw Convention limits on liability for an airline passenger (a couple of hundred th
Re: (Score:3)
What if it hits an airline?
Same thing that happens if a meteor hits it...only meteors are more common.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's Ryanair I'm sure they'll sting it for something.
NASA Satellite Falls On Car (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere was ever safe, any where at any time. Ever.
Have a nice day.
No fly zone (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
If 2 objects like that can collide in mid-air, you shouldn't be mad, that's amazing.
Re: (Score:1)
Life insurance pays off triple if you die on a business trip.
Sunday Night? (Score:1)
Which Sunday night would that be? Sunday night with respect to the ESA, Sunday night in Canada since it was a CBC article, or Sunday night where ever the satellite falls? Because Sunday night in Sydney, Australia is different than Sunday night in Seattle, Washington.
No problem (Score:2, Funny)
As long as it doesn't contain a toilet seat...
Timezone? (Score:2)
TFS mentions the times when this thing might come down, but bot the timezone those times apply to. Considering that there is a full 24 hours between extremes of timezone the window is pretty meaningless.
Re: (Score:2)
don't scientists use utc for these things ? if not, they definitely should :)
Reason to live (Score:4, Funny)
So you mean there's a chance it could come down on my mother-in-law's head?
Re: (Score:2)
I hadn't thought of it that way....how quick can we plot its impact and organize a get together for our In-Laws?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As long as it hits one of us, I'm OK.
Not the solution (Score:5, Funny)
There's probably a better way to research gravity than randomly throwing satellites at the earth...
Re: (Score:1)
I know you're probably being flippant, but prior to the whole re-entry shenanigans this thing was boss. The gyros alone contain the roundest thing ever built by humans (anecdotal, from my Prof). Ridiculously fine sensing apparatus
Re: (Score:2)
There's probably a better way to research gravity than randomly throwing satellites at the earth...
Yeah. We should clearly be throwing satellites at the earth in a systematic fashion!
Find out if you might get hit (Score:4, Informative)
Obvious impact point (Score:2)
My guess... (Score:2)
...is that it will land in the Philippines. Honestly, those poor suckers just can't seem to catch a break.
All of this has happened before (Score:2)
I guess most of you weren't around when Skylab fell back to Earth [history.com]. Skylab was a much bigger satellite, but its equatorial orbit somewhat narrowed down the possible landing site locations. Everyone said it would probably fall into the sea. When pressed why, they'd admit they had no idea where it would come down. It was just that the majority of the surface area of the swath of the earth covered by Skylab's orbital inclination was ocean.
Nowadays they try to maintain eno
Kind of appropriate ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe a water landing is referred to "CRASHING INTO THE OCEAN" George Carlin - on airlines and flying [youtube.com] RIP