LaMa on the Evening News

Now I just feel special for being Dutch and understanding every word 😛

My guess, based upon my experience in the military, is that the satellite - an admitted spy satellite - contains classified equipment that might survive the re-entry intact enough that it might be discovered and analyzed by someone who shouldn't be doing it. The toxic fuel that is the stated reason for the shoot-down will probably burn up and be destroyed in the atmosphere. The idea that it is a test for an anti-satellite weapons program is possible but I don't think probable. Slightly more likely is to demonstrate an anti-missile capability as a warning to Iran, North Korea, or others. But I think the classified equipment idea is the most likely.

I agree, the missile shootdown is probably to destroy classified spy equipment. Also found it interesting that FEMA has been mobilized to help if anything goes wrong (i.e. recover any intact pieces that may survive reentry)

That argument of the danger of the fuel tank with hydrazine is bogus. neither do I believe it is about destroying classified equipment. Only very sturdy material (usually parts of the rocket engine) normally survive a re-entry.

The real reasons are probably a combination of things:

- an ideal opportunity to test their anti-satellite and anti-ICBM weaponry under "real life" conditions;

- sending a message to China in answer to last year's succesful Chinese ASAT test on Fengyun 1C (plus a message to the homefront: "no worry, we can too so if they try..."). A bit of cold-war tactics.

See also my detailed account (in English) at:
http://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2008/01/usa-193-imminent-decay-in-news.html

A source which also had a lot of US government-related visitors lately by the way (including IP's from the State Department, DoD and a short visit by the NSA)

By the way: latest news is that they indeed shot it to pieces last night.

Amateur observers from the Canadian west coast report a spectaculair show of fragments burning up in the atmosphere

By the way, just got of the hook of the phone twice. I did a short interview from the 8 am radio news, and now have been booked for tonight's edition of NOVA, a widely watched news backgrounds program on Dutch TV. They are coming to film me again for it this afternoon.

And all just because I like to watch satellites...

Because the thing is infested with evil, life-sucking aliens, of course.

The URL has changed, it is now at:
http://www.nos.nl/nosjournaal/artikelen/2008/2/20/index_av.html

(select the 22:00 record)

He looks so cute. 😉

And I had no idea Dutch would sound so odd to my ears. It's very unlike what I had expected it to sound, though it is interesting how certain words (satellite, for one) pop out clear because they're more or less the same.

Way to go Marco!

LaMa, because of the still classified nature of the capability of the drone, I cannot give any specific details. However, in 1971 I was working on an experimental reconnaissance drone, the AQM-91A. During one of the tests, at a classified altitude, part of the navigation system failed. The drone believed it was upside down and began climbing to regain the proper altitude. Naturally because of the navigation failure this caused the drone to dive. The more it tried to climb, the steeper it dived. It plowed into the desert from an extremely high altitude. Much of the equipment had parts that survived. It was mainly circut boards that survived, we tested them but had to destroy them even though they worked. More fragile pieces such as vacuum tubes and rigid coax that was destroyed and most of the casings were dented, torn or otherwise worse for wear. I believe even the engine did not take enough damage to destroy it but that was out of my field so I only heard rumor on that. So, yes, I believe that the equipment on board this spy satellite could survive. Remember, this satellite is publicly stated to be as big as a bus. Size alone will help prevent destruction during re-entry.

"...FEMA has been mobilized to help if anything goes wrong (i.e. recover any intact pieces that may survive reentry)..."

Based on FEMA's record so far in the Bush administration, we can count on intact pieces remaining scattered around the world for the next few centuries.

Its orbit has been steadily degrading and it was going to fall to earth possibly endangering populated areas. Small debris is less dangerous than huge hunks.

The problem is that there is a veritable belt of space debris as it is circling the planet... a junkyard.

Huli: yes it was falling (the observing group I partake in documented that nicely with our orbit determinations). But even then there would have been no real danger. Rocket boosters and satellites fall out of the sky several times a year.

Big Gary: this is NOT like the Chinese test on a satellite on higher altitude. All of the USA 193 debris is at low altitude and will decay in hours to (at most) a few weeks. So certainly no debris circling for centuries

By the way: the Pentagon released this cool footage of the ASAT attack last night:

Okay, retry of that Pentagon footage URL:

http://pentagontv.feedroom.com/?skin=oneclip&fr_story=e453220d8ff9ae6ebb181c56793de7ca66e9de69&rf=ev&autoplay=true

Thanks for sharing the Pentagon link LaMa

My second TV-interview for the news backgrounds program NOVA has just been broadcast and is now on-line too:

http://www.novatv.nl/index.cfm?ln=nl&fuseaction=archief.zoekopdatum&datum=21-2-2008

Choose the item titled: "Amerikaanse marine vernietigt spionagesatelliet"

It is a much longer item with several minutes interview. Again, all in Dutch, sorry :p

I can say that Hydrazine itself is actually fairly dangerous. (MSDS) As seen in the MSDS, they recommend a full protective suit with respirator when handling the stuff.

Now, as to the questions of wether that's the fuel used, or wether the fuel tank would survive re-entry or crack open on impact and possibly explode... I have no idea. It's not my area of expertise. The prospect of it getting shot down due to classified components on board is plausible. That's in consideration of the fact that the US doesn't want its spy toys getting exposed to the public, preventing any risk of opposing organizations getting a better idea how to escape that brand of surveillance. If that were the case, however, a better solution might have been to use the missile to knock it /out/ of Earth orbit, and ensure that /none/ of it comes back.