Blasting the spy satellite: The secret’s out
- February 19, 2008 7:59 AM |
- By Quirks
By Bob McDonald, host of the CBC science radio program Quirks & Quarks.
The U.S. military will soon shoot down one of its own spy satellites, before it falls uncontrollably back to Earth. Pentagon officials say the interception of the wayward satellite is for safety reasons, but it’s also an opportunity to test their controversial missile defense system.
According to the military’s internal newsletter, the errant spy satellite was launched in Dec 2006 and immediately lost communication and control from the ground. Since then, the bus-sized instrument has been tumbling uselessly through space, a very expensive piece of space junk.
Of course, there are no specific details on the satellite because it is, after all, for spy purposes. But it is big, with a mass of seven or eight metric tonnes. The biggest problem, officials say, is the fuel tank, which is still full of rather nasty stuff called Hydrazine.
More importantly, there is the hazard posed by the fact that this uncontrollable piece of military hardware could come down anywhere in the world.
Spy satellites tend to follow polar orbits, which carry them around the Earth in a north-south direction, passing over each pole on every orbit. While the satellite maintains this orientation, the Earth turns under it; so every 24 hours, the satellite sees the entire surface of the planet. That’s great for spying because no part of the Earth is out of sight.
The satellites are also on very low orbits, usually just a few hundred kilometers up, so their cameras can get the best resolution images of enemy bases, training camps or any other place the military finds interesting.
Normally, dead satellites are driven into the Pacific Ocean where any debris that doesn’t burn up in the atmosphere falls into uninhabited waters. But this satellite is completely out of control, which means it could come down anywhere on the planet, and no one can predict where it will hit until its final orbit. The satellite will be brought down by friction with the Earth’s atmosphere, but an un-aerodynamic shape tumbling into an atmosphere that changes daily has a huge uncertainty factor. In other words, ground zero won’t be known until about an hour before impact.
By the way, the impact of this satellite won’t involve a flaming fireball that shoots down from the sky, wiping out a city, as depicted in Hollywood movies. Most of it will burn up high in the atmosphere. But some of the hardier pieces, including the fuel tank, could make it to the ground as a rain of debris. Think of throwing a bunch of car parts off a very tall building. While not as dramatic, it’s still not something you want landing on your head as you walk down the street.
And of course, some of that debris may contain some highly sensitive spy technology, which the U.S. wouldn’t want to fall into the wrong hands.
Shooting down a dead satellite isn’t an easy matter, for two reasons. First, you’re not allowed to blow it up because of international space treaties; and second, just trying to hit it is really hard. Actually, sending up a high-explosive warhead to destroy the satellite would be somewhat easy because when it comes to bombs, close counts. But the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which the U.S. has signed, prohibits placing weapons of mass destruction in space.
So, to get around that treaty the clever folks at The Pentagon have designed the Missile Defense System to send up something that simply collides with another satellite at high speed. And in space, speed is no problem. Satellites in low orbit are moving more than 30,000 kilometres per hour, or 10 times the speed of a rifle bullet.
But hitting something moving that fast with another high-speed object is like trying to hit a bullet with a bullet. There is absolutely no room for error.
Satellites have been knocked out of orbit before. Last year, the Chinese blew away an old weather satellite, an act that was highly criticized by the U.S.
The U.S. claimed that the destruction was a violation of Weapons In Space Agreements and the debris produced by the destroyed satellite posed a hazard to other spacecraft, including the International Space Station and the Space Shuttle. On that last point, they were right. The Chinese satellite was in a much higher orbit and its debris will remain in space for years. This current one will be struck just before it enters the atmosphere and is expected to be completely down in less than a week.
But now the U.S. has to eat some crow by admitting that it, too, has anti-satellite technology - even if it doesn’t involve high explosives. And while the officials right up to the White House are saying it’s being done for safety reasons, there are surely people in the Pentagon rubbing their hands together with glee over the opportunity to put their space weapons to a real test.
Is this the new space race?
- Bob McDonald
Categories
All News blogs
Most Commented
Most Recommended
Quirks and Quarks
Most Commented
Most Recommended
Recent Entries
- Chris Hadfield's fall from space
- The final segment of Canadian Astronaut Chris Hadfield's mission, the return to Earth on Monday evening, will be the most difficult of all. As he plunges into the atmosphere, he will transform from a free floating body to a heavy prisoner of gravity. Continue reading this post
- Glimmer of hope even as planet hits CO2 climate milestone
- A new record level of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere has been recorded at the Mauna Loa observatory on the island of Hawaii, the world's premier atmospheric monitoring station. Continue reading this post
- Celebrating 60 years of DNA
- A ceremony at Cambridge University in England this week unveiled a memorial to Dr. Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the structure of the DNA molecule. His co-author, Dr. James Watson, now 85, attended the ceremony for a discovery many consider to be as important as Darwin's theory of evolution and Einstein's theory of relativity. Continue reading this post
Comments (17)
It is difficult to read the military mind. But I've no doubt that this contingency was planned for long before the launch of the satellite. And I wouldn't be surprised, given the timing so quickly after the Chinese shoot-down of their satellite, that this is an engineered opportunity for the USA to go even one better than the Chinese.
I recall reading somewhere after the Chinese success that even a handful of Ball Bearings shot into an opposing orbit would destroy an errant satellite quite thoroughly.
It will be interesting to see the images of that satellite being brought down. Safely.
Riddle me this: If the satellite was not shot down but broke into large pieces that landed on a school yard that killed innocent children (this scenario is not unlikely), then what would be the world reaction? They would scream bloody murder. In my opinion this is a loose-loose situation when it comes to public relations. Some officer(s) in the Pentagon might find this as an opportunity, but where just guessing, are we not? I know Canadians will find this impossible to rap their brains around but not everything the USA does has an ulterior motive.
I was in the air force during the first iteration of the "Star Wars" missile shield. At that time two things were evident to most of us: first, it was insanity to trust a system you could never fully test to protect you from a nuclear holocost; and second, that the real game in space was being able to eliminate enemy "triple C" - Communications, Command, and Control. During the 80's and 90's, both sides in the Cold War saw that satellites were the valuable and vulnerable key to intelligence gathering, communication, and global force management abilities. The players have changed somewhat, but I suspect that in the event of a war - or as a really good threat - you still want to be able to reach out and turn off the lights in your enemy's camp.
This is a case of "damed if you do and damed if you don't". If the shoot it down to prevent it crashing in som populated area and causing large amouts of damage then they are just doing it to show the workd they can and are adding to the arms race. However, if the don't and it does land in a populated area causing casualties then they will be accused of just letting it happen so that 1) they don't show potential enemies their capability or 2) that they don't want every one to know it was a waste of money and it does not work.
For the military it is a no win scenerio.
Well if their anti-ballistic missile system can't take out this thing, they may as well fold their tents. I appreciate it's not easy to shoot down something moving this fast, but that's always been a core StarWars/NMD problem.
This thing is very big. They have a pretty good idea where it is and where it's heading. It may even be emitting signals that help them track it (like most of the other targets in "successful" test intercepts). There is only one of them, and it is taking no evasive action.
Their principal successes have been with point-defence systems where missiles were launched from Aegis ships, and this sounds like a variation.
If is succeeds expect the Pentagon to argue this is "proof" that NMD works. If it fails, expect them to claim they did their best to protect the world, but the target was just to tough.
I am VERY concerned that shooting down this satellite will not be as easy or safe as we are lead to believe. How safe is shrapnel that may or may not burn up? Is there going to be remnants "floating" in orbit at 30,000kms/hr? I would assume the answer is yes & that this will cause even more risks for astronauts & perhaps to conventional flights too. How well do "they" think a conventional aircraft would do if it was hit by debris from space.
Keep your eye on the sky people...
This is a big thing, out of control satellite, toxic cargo, blow it up in space = space debris that will affect something ie shuttle, another salellite, fall to earth at in predicable time and so on, so billions of dollars possible damage, satellites aren't cheap. Or they blow it up on entry so it burns up or they miss and it causes all kinds of problems from toxic to disaster by hitting populated area and by the way expected to be Canada or USA this time. So SHOULDN'T our press people, governments be all over the news, headlines pushing for answers, communicating potential debris hit zones...you know it can be done. But no that's not really happening, instead they're saying you've got a 1 in 2 billion chance of being hit, which is not a correct calculation at all, fact is depending on when it's hit or missed, on entry, you might have a 1 in 1000 chance of being hit, that's news, not what Britney is wearing or doing. So when exactly is the press and government going to start acting responsibly and change what the public hears and thinks about??? It's way overdue, important issues are never front page, but do something crazy and you will make it. sad really
It should come as no surprise that humans will bring war to space.
Even a quick look at our history and our current state clearly shows us that our technology evolves faster than our enlightenment.
War has always been with us, even before technology. First it was claws, then fists and feet, then clubs, then knives, then spears and arrows.
Fast forward 100,000 years and we're still at it.
War will come to space. We humans will bring it with us because our technology has always been ahead of our enlightenment. We have had no choice. Because if we don't, the other will.
It has always been that way.
We are stuck.
Even when we reach for, and attain the heavens.
Bob,
I like your articles - especially your analysis of the US 193 satellite shoot-down.
Thought you might want to consider a couple of technical facts...
US 193 is not in a polar orbit, contrary to the generalization in your article. According to Heavens Above (www.heavens-above.com), a space object tracking service, the satelite's orbit is 245 x 258 km, 58.5° (Epoch Feb 19) which simply means its orbit is nearly circular and was about 251 km above the earth's surface on Tuesday, and inclined at 58.5° to the equator. This particular satellite would have covered the surface of the earth between the Arctic and Antarctic Circles - very close to the orbit of the just landed space shuttle (STS 122) and the International Space Station which maintains an orbit of about 338 km (as of 20 Feb 2008).
Secondly a fairly common 30 calibre rifle bullet travels (typically) at 1000 metres a second give or take 10 percent depending on the many internal balistic factors and differences between rifle designs. This means a typical rifle bullet travels (for at least the instant when it leaves the muzzle) at a speed of 3,600 km/hr (1 km/sec x 60 secs x 60 mins).
Pat Warner
space enthusiast
Not so sure what the Russians are worried about. They have to wait for the perfect weather before they attempt to do this. Seems the system is only a threat during good weather.
A war between China or Russia and the west would leave a legacy of billions of ultrafast moving objects surrounding the planet. For a long time after it will be almost impossible to use space craft or satellites because getting through this "asteroid field" of debris without getting pulverized will be almost impossible.
The worst part is that once it has happened no amount of blame or recrimination from the people that did it will reverse the fact that we will all be thoroughly screwed for decades if not centuries.
Bob!
Do you have to mimic everyone else at the CBC, by casting dispersions on American motives. The brainwashing techniques by HR @ the CBC must be incredible! Not a divergent thought amoung all and every employee.
This lock-step anti-Americanism makes reading and watching the CBC tedious. I want my money back!
It was over 22 years ago that the U.S. first destroyed a satellite (P78-1 Solwind - which was in a 555 km orbit) with a missile (ASM-135 ASAT). That missile was launched from a modified F-15 Eagle traveling at Mach 1.2. The missile scored a direct hit and the satellite was destroyed by the kinetic energy of the impact. The U.S. has absolutely nothing to prove in doing this - it should be like shooting fish in a barrel. Blowing one up on re-entry with an SM-3 launched from the USS Lake Erie? This will be a zero defect event. Maybe they really are just doing it for safety, as boring as that sounds...
I don't like conspiracy theories as they usually require a degree of (a) intelligence, (b) coordination, and (c) quietness, for which evidence is thin, particularly in government circles. Nevertheless, it appears there is an untested assumption in all of the submissions by the corespondents: to whit, the object was actually a spy satellite and not just a bus-sized object tarted up. Go for it----but watch the press releases and new budget line-items.
The sad part for me is that all of the comments can be simply read by their slant. We as Canadians do have a jaded opinion of the American motives. The CBC is read by slightly more educated people and we do gloat slightly about our lack of involvement in the cause/cure/cause/cure of the worlds problems. This near miss/strike depending in your partisan beliefs will be a difinitive example of why or why not to have Missle defence. Out of fairness both extreme views will be aired. Middle ground is a lonely and silent place.
While I agree that knee-jerk anti Americanism is a waste of time, on this one I thin it is obvious. Just as the Chinese had no need to destroy the weather satellite, I highly doubt that the Americans just happened to, one year later, need to destroy one of their own. This is military diplomacy, and it has to do with showing the Chinese that their satellites can also be shot down. Regardless of the rationality behind it, the pentagon believes their next great foe will be the Chinese. Read “weapons in Space” By Wesley Wong (University of Manitoba Press) and the recent Gwynn Dyer column on the US budget for further background.
THis works against ballistic missiles, but most modern ones are cruise missiles against which this system will NOT work.
Also, now we have a whole bunch of space junk, some of it likely to be large pieces, which will now come down over the whole planet.