backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 67 comment(s) - last by joseph1110.. on Jan 30 at 6:52 PM

Spy satellite's fall from orbit will be second largest uncontrolled crash in history

Government officials on Saturday issued warnings that a spy satellite lost power and is descending towards the Earth's atmosphere.  It will begin its final plunge towards an Earth in February or March.  The officials warned that the debris from the crash may pose a safety hazard.

Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, says all options are on the table for dealing with the threat.  He said the event is really not that unusual and that, "Numerous satellites over the years have come out of orbit and fallen harmlessly." He added, "Appropriate government agencies are monitoring the situation."

John Pike, a defense and intelligence expert with Globalsecurity.org, says that the special thing about this satellite is its above average size.  The satellite is estimated to weigh 20,000 lbs and is the size of a small bus.  Still, it pales in size comparison to the 78-ton Skylab, which set the record as the largest manmade object to uncontrollably crash to Earth.  Skylab could have caused serious damage, but when it fell to Earth in 1979, most pieces fell into the Indian Ocean and on a remote part of Western Australia.

Pike stated that the crash of the spy satellite is most dangerous for possibly exposing U.S. secrets if it falls into the wrong hands.  Usually, satellites are controlled to descend into the ocean, both for safety reasons and more importantly to bury these secrets in the watery depths. 

How the satellite lost power and what exactly its function are remains classified and not accessible to the press or public.

Jeffrey Richelson, a senior fellow with the National Security Archive, speculated that the satellite is likely a photo reconnaissance satellite.  Such a satellite is an eye in the sky capable of tracking anything from terrorists to devastating hurricanes.  Further insider information pegs the satellite as being built by Lockheed Martin and launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California in December 2006 aboard a Delta II rocket.

Apparently, communication with the satellite was lost soon after launch.  Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and an analyst of various government space programs, states, "It’s not necessarily dead, but deaf."

The satellite uses Hydrazine for fuel, a toxic colorless liquid chemical, with an ammonia-like odor.  The chemical is very dangerous to the human body.  Exactly how much of the fuel will survive the atmospheric reentry and the subsequent impact remains to be seen, but this is among the main reasons why government officials are breaking silence to warn of this danger.

The best case scenario would be for the tank to rupture and burn, leaving fiery trail like a meteor. 

The satellite is currently in a decaying orbit approximately 275 km above the Earth's surface.  It has dropped 15 to 20 km in the last month, which indicates it’s approaching atmospheric reentry.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By tobrien on 1/28/2008 3:02:06 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm thinking too 'traditional' in terms of what hardware is used onboard that satellite, but wouldn't any data storage media be totally destroyed or beyond recovery after smashing into land (assuming it doesn't hit the ocean)?

also if it lands in say, China, or some place I can definitely see there being a "ransom" so to speak for the return of the pieces.

but also I'd imagine if it fell into some African country or a similar area that we'd have no problems because I'm sure you need some HIGHLY specialised equipment that would only be able to be found from certain countries to be able to have any chance of interfacing with the devices on that thing.




By Nik00117 on 1/28/2008 3:36:05 PM , Rating: 3
I want it land on the white house lawn, harmlessly that is I mean sure lets have a big ol' carter in the lawn but I just want it land right there. That'd be something and I want it recorded too.


By hubajube on 1/28/2008 4:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you but I wouldn't want any big ol' carter's on my lawn.


By TSS on 1/28/2008 7:11:23 PM , Rating: 5
even if it would make a perfect hit nigh intact it wouldn't matter. cockroaches aren't that easy to kill.


By FITCamaro on 1/28/2008 4:03:30 PM , Rating: 2
I think you'd be surprised at what would survive. And the resources those guys have.


By Adonlude on 1/28/2008 4:10:54 PM , Rating: 5
I will be very upset if it comes through my roof while I am sleeping. I will be even more upset if a scary looking 6' rabbit saves me from it.


By Armorize on 1/28/2008 4:22:43 PM , Rating: 5
well, your not seeing any wormholes yet are u? If your arent yet then I think you should be ok. Just remember not to make fun of that crazy old lady who lives down the street from you. =P


By Schadenfroh on 1/28/2008 5:56:06 PM , Rating: 2
Your in luck, that only happens with jet engines.


By Yawgm0th on 1/29/2008 12:05:40 AM , Rating: 3
6


By Regs on 1/29/2008 9:12:59 AM , Rating: 2
Scared of this one? Just imagine the hundreds more Russia or the USA stopped keeping track of that are "poluting" the stratasphere.


By Wagnbat on 1/28/2008 7:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe I'm thinking too 'traditional' in terms of what hardware is used onboard that satellite, but wouldn't any data storage media be totally destroyed or beyond recovery after smashing into land (assuming it doesn't hit the ocean)?


Like a black box on an airplane, one would hope that a certain level of protection was designed into the system to protect systems from disaster as much as possible. But at the same time, government cryptography and classified systems should also be destructible. Nearly all facilities which have crypto and or classified data have systems in place for destructions... Even if only an axe mounted next to a radio.


By ie5x on 1/29/2008 12:36:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
but wouldn't any data storage media be totally destroyed or beyond recovery after smashing into land (assuming it doesn't hit the ocean)


From that high, it doesn't matter where you land, it'd all be up in a big flash :).


Can't just shoot it out of the sky?
By Connoisseur on 1/28/2008 2:56:58 PM , Rating: 2
I remember the "international" community being up in arms when China shot it's satellite out of the sky. I'm wondering if the US can't do the same thing. Would guarantee destruction of both the toxic fuel and any military secrets.




RE: Can't just shoot it out of the sky?
By cubdukat on 1/28/2008 3:09:44 PM , Rating: 3
You would think that, wouldn't you?

I woulda thought that that would be the first recourse. It makes the most sense.

Naturally, that won't happen.


By Solandri on 1/28/2008 6:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Not gonna happen. The International community (really, just the spacefaring nations) were upset about China's missile test because it increased the amount of space junk in orbit by 20%. In other words, that one incident created as much space debris as 10 out of the last 50 years we've been shooting stuff into space. Blowing stuff up there is just incredibly stupid unless it's an end of the world type situation, or you deliberately want to trap us on the surface of the planet.


RE: Can't just shoot it out of the sky?
By jkresh on 1/28/2008 6:15:04 PM , Rating: 2
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but I don't think we have officially shot down a Satellite before. I would assume we have the capacity, but if we have not openly used it then it might be felt that allowing other countries to guess that we can do it (without knowing that we can) is more important then dealing with this particular satellite.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/28/2008 7:21:07 PM , Rating: 2
We did... more than once. In 1963 we destroyed our first satellite from a ground installation using a small nuclear warhead. The problem is ground installations would be noticed and Nuclear warheads not only cost more to produce but could screw up our satellites in the process.

In 1985 a smaller air launched ASAT (Anti-Satellite) missile was fired from an F-15 Eagle, desroying a target about 345 miles up.

So yea, while China did it, they are still rookies compared to us. Problem is debris is still a pain to deal with, takes years for that stuff to work its way down.


By h04x on 1/30/2008 2:14:19 AM , Rating: 2
Quoted from Wikipedia:
quote:
On 13 September 1985, Maj. Wilbert D. "Doug" Pearson, flying the "Celestial Eagle" F-15A 76-0084 launched an ASM-134 ASAT about 200 miles (322 km) west of Vandenberg Air Force Base and destroyed the Solwind P78-1 satellite flying at an altitude of 345 miles (555 km). Prior to the launch the F-15 flying at Mach 1.22 executed a 3.8g zoom climb at an angle of 65 degrees. The ASM-134 ASAT was automatically launched at 38,100 ft while the F-15 was flying at Mach .934.[7] The 30 lb (13.6 kg) pound MHV collided with the 2,000 lb (907 kg) pound Solwind P78-1 satellite at closing velocity of 15,000 mph (24, 140 km/h).


The ASTM-134 ASAT was developed for the purpose of destroying or disrupting enemy satellite capability in the event of war. We intended to use it to disable or destroy enemy communication and spy satellites as part of a first strike sortie package. The intent was to cause communication and information disruption to any threat nation in the event of hostilities, in effect "shutting down their eyes and ears" leaving them without the ability to conduct space based photo-reconnaissance and without broadband satellite communication capability.


RE: Can't just shoot it out of the sky?
By Amiga500 on 1/28/2008 3:22:25 PM , Rating: 4
In the spirit of international cooperation, they could even contract it out to the Chinese...

I'm sure they'd look forward to blowing up a US satellite :-D


By imperator3733 on 1/28/2008 4:54:45 PM , Rating: 2
The Chinese are probably already tracking the satellite, so all the government would have to do is send them a check.


By Polynikes on 1/28/2008 9:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm ignorant (probably the case, in this case) but wouldn't the satellite almost completely burn up upon reentry into the atmosphere, or do they make them out of adamantium nowadays? :P


By archdale on 1/29/2008 12:32:06 AM , Rating: 2
I remember from when I lived in New Mexico, hearing on the news that they were testing a laser to shoot satellites down at White Sands Missile Range. It was a success, even had video on the news.


Warranty
By Kougar on 1/28/2008 6:07:02 PM , Rating: 2
I hope the government still had a warranty on that satellite. It sounds expensive due to the above average size and moderm electronics and also unusually new, if launched in only 2006.




RE: Warranty
By grath on 1/28/2008 7:15:28 PM , Rating: 3
And we think we have a hard time exchanging bad computer parts... try getting an RMA from Lockheed Martin.


RE: Warranty
By fictisiousname on 1/29/2008 9:29:03 AM , Rating: 3
Even more difficult would be putting the RMA number on the outside so it's not rejected if it lands on their receiving dock ;-)


What if it hits the Bizzarro Earth?
By DOSGuy on 1/28/2008 3:23:11 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
It will begin its final plunge towards an Earth in February or March.


But the question is, which Earth? If it isn't this one, I really don't care.




By Min Jia on 1/28/2008 8:50:55 PM , Rating: 2
Coruscant.


And it's problably in a different orbit....
By Brazos on 1/28/2008 3:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
I believe that most spy satellites have a polar orbit so the earth revolves below them and they can cover the entire globe. The downside of launching from Vandenberg AFB (north or south bound) is that it takes more fuel since you don't have the earths rotation to help the acceleration (like the shuttle at the cape).
In other words don't be looking to the west for a rentry - it may pop you on the side of the head :)




By masher2 (blog) on 1/28/2008 4:20:52 PM , Rating: 3
> "The downside of launching from Vandenberg AFB (north or south bound) is that it takes more fuel since you don't have the earths rotation to help the acceleration "

Err, for a polar orbit you don't want that acceleration component; it actually adds to the delta V required to reach the proper orbit.


By rug47 on 1/28/2008 5:04:17 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the heads up!

***after applying several more layers of Reynolds HEAVY-DUTY foil,...readjusts foil hat for North/South trajectory***


Can we eEbay the parts?
By marco916 on 1/28/2008 4:23:06 PM , Rating: 3
If it falls in my yard, "can I keep it mom, can I keep it"
Do we leagally have to give the parts back to Nasa if it crash lands in my backyard.




RE: Can we eEbay the parts?
By Griswold on 1/28/2008 4:30:51 PM , Rating: 2
No, you wouldnt have to give it to Nasa. The virgina farmboys would be coming over to pick it up - its their piece junk after all. Maybe you could have them fined for littering your yard, though.


RE: Can we eEbay the parts?
By JonnyDough on 1/29/2008 6:06:22 PM , Rating: 1
I was taught that when you buy a piece of property (at least here in the US) you own everything below your property to the center of the earth. Why we don't own the sky to the ends of the universe is beyond me. Maybe it's just too hard to measure so we gave it to NASA and the FAA. I feel as though thats some form of governmental thievery though. I want my freakin' space back, and all the stars and planets that go in it. Now.


Remove the tinfoil hat....
By VahnTitrio on 1/28/2008 2:55:11 PM , Rating: 4
And put on the hard hat!




Bets are on!
By MrPoletski on 1/29/2008 2:30:50 AM , Rating: 2
Bets on terrorism being mentioned in the media when this thing is talked about on television in the USA. Bets on a reference to 9/11.




RE: Bets are on!
By Griswold on 1/29/2008 5:35:26 AM , Rating: 2
You should exclude Fox News, though. The outcome would be too obvious.


Insurance
By bribud on 1/28/2008 8:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if State Farm covers falling satellites in my homeowners insurance...




RE: Insurance
By JonnyDough on 1/29/2008 6:01:01 PM , Rating: 1
Very good question. It isn't a "natural disaster." It is someones fault. Can we sue for damages?


Call in Tommy Lee Jones
By kinnoch on 1/28/2008 4:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
We need some Space Cowboys to handle this.




Makes one wonder...
By aharris on 1/28/2008 4:44:43 PM , Rating: 2
...if China was able to blast their own satellite out of the sky, what're the odds they could do the same to one of ours?




When Skylab fell...
By VoodooChicken on 1/28/2008 4:48:23 PM , Rating: 2
during Space Camp, we were taught Skylab crushed a bunny and Australia fined NASA $400 for littering. I believe this information is also on a plaque with some debris on display in Huntsville, Alabama (may travel to the Florida camp also I believe)




Reminds me of Northern Exposure
By MrHanson on 1/28/2008 5:32:36 PM , Rating: 2
"As a doctor, as a man of science, I can tell you there is no such thing as curses! Everything just happens as a question of probability. The statistical likelihood of a specific event. For instance, if a man falls asleep on a glacier, it is highly probable he will freeze to death. Likewise, if a man sits on a mountainside, there is some probability, albeit slight, that he will get hit by a satellite"

Joel from Northern Exposure




What Model?
By Felofasofa on 1/29/2008 5:42:27 AM , Rating: 2
I'm just curious as to what model this is, a KH-12 maybe? If so they cost a Billion to build and 400 million to launch, expensive hobby - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-12




Self Destruct
By shreddR on 1/30/2008 12:24:55 AM , Rating: 2
Surely this thing has a built in self destruct option. No need to use a missile to destroy it?




Loss of NRO (?) Asset (?)
By joseph1110 on 1/30/2008 6:52:09 PM , Rating: 2
I read, with not inconsiderable interest, the first
piece under the rubrique, "For the Record", TNYT, NE,
P. A2, 2008 Jan. 30 d, wherein appeared,
"An article . . . Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astro-physics who said
it was fairly common for satellites to drop out of orbit."
Well, now, it is NOT "fairly common" for NRO, et caetera,
recon birds to undergo such chaotic orbital decay, I believe!
How can you publish such rubbish - under "For the Record"
- please?!
Tempus fugit et ad augusta per angusta.




China?
By HighWing on 1/28/08, Rating: 0
crash
By Screwballl on 1/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: crash
By Mitch101 on 1/28/2008 3:00:35 PM , Rating: 3
Little insider info but its going to hit the Baldwin's house.


RE: crash
By Oregonian2 on 1/28/2008 3:07:07 PM , Rating: 5
Meteors usually don't spin around the earth in low orbit for months before entering. If they did, they'd probably be hard to predict as well. If it's coming straight in it's probably not hard to predict (even if only weather prediction accuracy) where it may land. The satellite's landing spot may change half a world away just depending on how the upper atmosphere weather is one particular day, changing the drag coefficients a bit.


RE: crash
By FITCamaro on 1/28/2008 4:02:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Sounds more like a coverup than a warning


Uh....do you see the stupidity of that statement. If they were trying to cover it up, they wouldn't say anything. They'd just track it where it crashes and dispatch a team to disappear it.

They're still likely to do that anyway though.


RE: crash
By hubajube on 1/28/2008 4:11:51 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
They'd just track it where it crashes and dispatch a team to disappear it.
Yeah, If you see a dump truck with a FedEx badge on the side, it's probably them.


RE: crash
By hiscross on 1/28/2008 4:58:31 PM , Rating: 2
Airboune Express has been contracted to pick up the pieces. Just makes better sense, doesn't it?


RE: crash
By Min Jia on 1/28/2008 8:59:47 PM , Rating: 2
There's no more Airboune Express, you mean DHL?


RE: crash
By GaryJohnson on 1/28/2008 10:27:18 PM , Rating: 2
I use DHL to pick up all my crashed spy satellites.


RE: crash
By Armorize on 1/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: crash
By Screwballl on 1/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: crash
By omnicronx on 1/28/2008 4:43:58 PM , Rating: 3
Even if they did know, its not like they would go around telling everyone about it. Not only is it full of government secrets, but if it does hit ground, it probably would not be a good idea for a bunch of people to be crowding around under it ;).

GOVERNMENT WARNING: PIECES OF METAL FALLING FROM SKY, PLEASE STAY AWAY FROM CO-ORDINATES: 51n 31se

HICK: HEY PAAAMM GET THE TRUCK AND THE KIDS!! WERE GONNA GET ENOUGH SCRAP METAL TO FEED THE WHOLE FAMILY TONIGHT!!


RE: crash
By MrPoletski on 1/29/2008 7:58:43 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, really it's a polaris missile they're using 'failed satellite' as a cover for dropping a nuke on Iran. Next line "It was a nuclear powered satellite!"


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments












botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki