AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Russia tests anti-satellite weapon?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
story.

Notice that accidental collision of two satellites is improbable.

both satellites are military; Iridium is used by Norad, the Cosmos series (that goes back to 1960s) mostly contained of military satellites of various nature.
I bet on the glitch in the Soviet lunokhod left behind on the Moon.
quadrat Wrote:http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/spac...e-4_H1.jpg

S2 LOL

There are 6000 satellites around the Earth (800 in activity and 3000 operationals -go figure-) o the collision was not improbable.
The risk was very low, yet not null.

Any nation testing satellite blasting missile in the low orbital space would be totaly irresponsible since they would put their own satellite at risk.
If too many debris flies around due to satellite explosing there could be a snowball effect that renders the orbital space unexploitable after a decade.

Aparently China did such a test and blowed a unused staellite with a missile two years ago.
But China is not a responsible nation.
The FT today had a graphic showing the paths of the 2 satellites. They circumnavigated the globe and their paths crossed at right angles. Thus, it is highly unlikely that they would be in the same place at the same time; it would take high synchronization to make them collide.

These satellites were not in orbits filled with other satellites moving approximately in the same direction which would allow for a greater probability of collision.
Fredledingue Wrote:
quadrat Wrote:http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/spac...e-4_H1.jpg

S2 LOL

There are 6000 satellites around the Earth (800 in activity and 3000 operationals -go figure-) o the collision was not improbable.
The risk was very low, yet not null.

I understand that numbers in the thousands impress you, but you should also consider that they navigate in very vast space; and the positions of satellites are tracked.

and very low, yet not null is exactly what improbable means.

jt, yes, and there are more reasons to doubt this being an accident; it may well be a demo of strike capability. incidentally, collision is a technique historically favored by Russians, plain collisions kamikaze-style were common in WWII...
Anyway, unless proven otherwise, I see this as a well-written message from Putin to Hussein.
Here is a story I heard a few years ago. The pentagon ran a mock combat scenario for a world war. A few young commanders were pitted against the "establishment" commanders. The young ones knew they had not enough resources for a direct confrontation, so they put most of their energy into knocking out military communication satellites. They did, and they won the mock war.

If Russia has managed to knock out one or two satellites, it would be a "bargaining chip" of quite high value. A huge part of our military effectiveness is based on GPS, real time data analysis and communication.
yep, except that they probably need to knock out 10+, there is a high degree of redundancy in the system.
this incident may be a demo of their ability.
Before IF 1,our mock enemy commander used Mosques for communications instead of electronic means and ended up sinking a lot of our Navy,too. We're not nearly as smart as we think we are.

That would of course be true if he hadn't sunk any.
Well....
Imo, the notion that this is a Russian secret anti-satellite weapon test fades completely as soon as I consider that it was successful. First time too.









Me thinks the odds of collision are actually higher
Ahk
This collision surprised Irridium operators themselves. Not to the point to suspect a Russian operation. If the two objects were moving at 90° angles, it looks more like an accident. A test strike would have the projectile posted in the satellite trajectory, moving in the opposite direction. It's much easier to create a frontal collision than a 90° one.
Hundreds of satellites moving at the same altitude for years do have a probability to collide. They move within a huge space, but they also move very quickely and covering this huge space faster than we think.
Note that two plane colliding in the sky is also not very likely but it happens.

It would be also very stupid from a political point of view to do something like that.
For a technical view it's even more stupid since flying debris renders space navigation more dangerous for everybody.
If the Russians blowed all the communication and spy satellites of the west, their own satellites would be in jeopardy and we would see a chain reaction where many more satellites would blow up when they encounter parts moving at several miles per second.
No one ever offers how much of them old ovens fly around per, say, 100 cubicmiles of near earth space. I read somewhere that 18,000 satellites and pieces of junk are being tracked. I guess they cross paths quite frequently.
quadrat Wrote:No one ever offers how much of them old ovens fly around per, say, 100 cubicmiles of near earth space. I read somewhere that 18,000 satellites and pieces of junk are being tracked. I guess they cross paths quite frequently.

That's exact. The Nasa said they were tracking 18,000 items around the Earth. 500 more snce the last collision.
space consultant James Oberg told Wrote:"The collision offers a literally heaven-sent opportunity for the Obama administration to take forceful, visible and long-overdue measures to address a long-ignored issue of 'space debris,'"

I suggest that 20 billions form the stimulus package be invested in orbital traffic lights. 8)

Then I already hear JohnWho, JohnL, Warbycicle, sunsettomy and co screaming!
Obama wants to control the space! His action will make things worse! There is no need for regulation! It's a cabal etc
Fredledingue Wrote:I suggest that 20 billions form the stimulus package be invested in orbital traffic lights. 8)

Then I already hear JohnWho, JohnL, Warbycicle, sunsettomy and co screaming!

Nah, I'm OK with that -

as long as they have cameras to catch speeders!

:lol:
Quote:Nah, I'm OK with that -
Even if it's Obama (Barrack Hussein) who take the initiative? S5
Obama has to do something Kennedy-like, after having done something FDR-like. BHO will be known for putting stoplights in space, as a follow up to Kennedy's putting a man on the moon. The proportionality of BHO's acts will thus be maintained.
Pentagon officially avoids accusing Russia.
"We did not predict this collision," said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.
"There are limits on your ability to track and compute every piece of orbiting man made object," said Whitman.

I am curious how it might affect ISS orbit security, (I am not talking about Strategic Defensive Initiative BS).
Now, what's the probability of that?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090216/ap_o..._collision
Pages: 1 2