DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Eye on China » Satellite Killer’s Big Impact

Satellite Killer’s Big Impact

There’s been imme­di­ate fall­out — both phys­i­cal and polit­i­cal — from China’s satel­lite killer test.
Debris from the orbital col­li­sion has already been spot­ted, the M-​​T Milcom blog notes. “As of this writ­ing NORAD has offi­cially cat­a­loged 32 objects… that now pol­lute a vital area of space (sun-​​synchronous polar orbit).” The pic­ture to the right is of a few of ‘em.
sat_orbits005.jpg“There are over 125 satel­lites that oper­ate in this por­tion of space,” the M-​​T blog observes. Those include recon­nais­sance satel­lites, like the Lacrosse and Advanced Keyhole orbiters, as well as weather-​​monitors, like the Defense Meteorological Satellites Program series. In other words, this test directly affects the American military’s abil­ity look for ter­ror­ist hide­outs, and sur­vey a poten­tial bat­tle­field. These are not small mat­ters. “Our space assets are the first asset on the scene,” GlobalSecurity.org’s John Pike tells the AP. “They are absolutely cen­tral to why we are a super­power — a sig­na­ture com­po­nent to America’s style of war­fare.“
Frequent Defense Tech com­menter Robot Economist, now with his own blog, warns that “this sit­u­a­tion has the poten­tial of becom­ing the next Katyusha rocket or IED prob­lem for the United States.” Even the International Space Station could be at risk. That said, RE reminds us that “it is unlikely that [China’s] suc­cess… trans­lates into any sort of imme­di­ately field­able capability.”

If the spotty record of our ground-​​based mis­sile inter­cep­tors demon­strate any­thing, it is the dif­fi­culty of inter­cept­ing even pre­dictable space tar­gets… [And] the Chinese had a pretty good hand­i­cap on this test. 

Robert Farley sees the anti-​​satellite trial as “first and fore­most… a deter­rent move aimed at the United States.”

The US mil­i­tary isn’t com­pletely depen­dent on spy satel­lites (in case of war, the Taiwan Straits would be over­flown by enough spy and com­mu­ni­ca­tions air­craft to make the satel­lites redun­dant), but destroy­ing them is a way of chip­ping away at US capa­bil­ity, and thus indi­cat­ing that China can inflict real costs in case of a US inter­ven­tion in a mil­i­ta­rized China-​​Taiwan dis­pute. The pub­lic way in which the Chinese have car­ried out this test, as well as ear­lier “blind­ing” tests, and the recent submarine-​​stalks-​​carrier deba­cle indi­cates to me that they’re as seri­ous as pos­si­ble about show­ing the US their capa­bil­i­ties, which is key to a deter­rent strat­egy. Also, Chinese anti-​​satellite capa­bil­i­ties don’t have to be tar­geted against US mil­i­tary satel­lites; the Chinese may threaten com­mer­cial satel­lites as well, which would help to metas­ta­size the costs of any US intervention.

No won­der, then, that gov­ern­ments around the world are protest­ing the move. With one excep­tion, appar­ently: Russia. Arms Control Wonk notes…

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov com­mented to reporters that he has heard reports of the Chinese test, but thinks that the rumors are quite abstract and are exag­ger­ated.
In an inter­view, vice-​​preseident of the Russian Academy of geopolit­cal affairs, General Leonid Ivashov, said that he thinks the Chinese used Russian devel­op­ments for mak­ing their anti­satel­lite mis­siles.

How do you think this is going to play out? Speak up!
ALSO:
* China Tests Satellite Killer?
* China Space Attack: Unstoppable
* Beijing’s Next-​​Gen Sat Strike
* Why Did China Smack the Sat?
* China Sat-​​Killer Not Yet Weapons Grade?
* Who Ordered the Satellite Strike?

Share |

January 19th, 2007 | Eye on China, Space | 340048 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/01/19/satellite-killers-big-impact/Satellite+Killer%27s+Big+Impact2007-01-19+17%3A07%3A55hambling You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Rapid Fire 01/​19/​07 | Inside the Mind Control Conspiracy, Part II » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Rob says:
    January 19, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    How many more ‘tests’ do they have to con­duct to suc­cess­fully block an orbit?

    Reply
  2. Eric Hundman says:
    January 19, 2007 at 12:35 pm

    Are any read­ers com­pe­tent to eval­u­ate how much a new clump of debris ups the like­li­hood of a col­li­sion with exist­ing satel­lites? I’d guess the like­li­hood is still pretty low, but I am no expert.

    Reply
  3. JH says:
    January 19, 2007 at 3:23 pm

    I say if some of this com­mie space trash dam­ages or even kills some­thing or some­one American (Sat, Shuttle, Astronaut,) we places some real sanc­tions on them.

    Reply
  4. MinorRipper says:
    January 19, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    Wait a minute, I thought we (the USA) were the only ones in the world allowed to do stuff like this??!! I thought space belonged to us?
    http://​www​.minor​-rip​per​.blogspot​.com

    Reply
  5. Stephen says:
    January 19, 2007 at 5:22 pm

    I unfor­tu­nately believe that these are small steps that will one day even­tu­ally lead us to go to war with china and also be a set up for the next world war.

    Reply
  6. Yeong says:
    January 19, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    Hey, just a high-​​tech war­fare! Just watch which side got a bet­ter research lab and brain!! I would not bid any money on China in the long run.

    Reply
  7. Sean Collins says:
    January 19, 2007 at 6:20 pm

    All our ene­mies are now step­pong for­ward. First it was North Korea fol­lowed by Iran with their nuclear pro­grams and now China. They con­sider the U.S. to be so bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan that we will be unable to stop them. This war against ter­ror­ism is fix­ing to expand into a world war.

    Reply
  8. Spaceman Spiff says:
    January 19, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    What if the real pur­pose of the weapon turns out to be fill­ing a much needed orbit with “test” debris, thus deny­ing the U.S. unob­structed usage for the near future. Showering American spy satel­lites with “acci­den­tal” test debris could be very hard to pin­point as an act of war.

    Reply
  9. Robot Economist says:
    January 19, 2007 at 8:02 pm

    Eric — In response to your ques­tion, I don’t think this test will make huge waves in low earth orbit.
    SPACETRACK has logged only 40 >10cm pieces so far, but the space geeks over at ACW have cal­cu­lated there could be up to 800 >10cm pieces. Given that there already is an esti­mate 10,000 pieces of debris that size already out there in LEO, even this worst case sce­nario only rep­re­sents an 8% increase in an already crowded sky.
    As for spe­cific sat sys­tems, FY-​​1C was in a pretty pop­u­lar orbit, but it was too low to have a sig­nif­i­cant impact on the U.S.‘s GPS or Lacrosse con­stel­la­tions. I’m not really sure where most of our key­hole and opti­cal imagery satel­lites are nowa­days though.

    Reply
  10. Lee Terry says:
    January 19, 2007 at 10:12 pm

    The best defen­sive move is an offen­sive move. Knock out all their works they’ve put up, and tell the coniv­ing theives to shut up..or put up.
    I’ve read offi­cial works from peo­ple in charge in China, what they plan to do with us within 5
    years.

    Reply
  11. no one in particular says:
    January 19, 2007 at 11:31 pm

    China’s mul­ti­ple pub­lic state­ments about “weaponiz­ing space”, and the lack of UN or inter­na­tional con­trols restrict­ing the use of mil­i­tary force in space makes this episode even more intrigu­ing. What if, for instance, the Chinese are seek­ing to prompt inter­na­tional atten­tion and gain inter­na­tional sup­port for restric­tions to be placed against the use of mil­i­tary force against objects in orbit?

    Reply
  12. no one in particular says:
    January 19, 2007 at 11:35 pm

    for more: http://​cns​.miis​.edu/​r​e​s​e​a​r​c​h​/​s​p​a​c​e​/​c​h​i​n​a​/​a​r​m​s​.​htm

    Reply
  13. frank says:
    January 19, 2007 at 11:40 pm

    well every­body that has a gps and any other gad­gets, bet­ter start rem­me­ber­ing how the old­fash­ion way.

    Reply
  14. Ken says:
    January 20, 2007 at 2:40 am

    JEFF: You are absolutely cor­rect. I think Klinton should be tried as a trai­tor, but he will not get a con­vic­tion in the press like he would have if he had been a Conservative Republican. The Klintons are left over dope smok­ing flower chil­dren from the 60’s who think shar­ing sen­si­tive info with our ene­mies lev­els the play­ing field, keep­ing our ene­mies from being inse­cure and thus more trig­ger happy. Sadly, this is the way many lib­er­als think. They don’t under­stand the con­cept of peace through supe­rior fire power. Klinton is a trai­tor egged on by his wild-​​eyed co-​​conspirator wife.

    Reply
  15. bob D. says:
    January 20, 2007 at 10:51 am

    I’m not sci­en­tif­i­cally astute enough to com­ment on the tech­no­log­i­cal or mil­i­tary ram­i­fi­ca­tions of this. I do know how­ever, that this threat­en­ing tech­nol­ogy was funded by the bil­lions of dol­lars worth of “trin­kets” the American con­sumer “junkies” buy from this very scary nation​.So Americans, keep buy­ing this unnec­ces­sary bric-​​a-​​brac and some­day you’ll be dig­ging through the rub­ble that was once your home look­ing for it.

    Reply
  16. dumb and dumber says:
    January 20, 2007 at 10:20 pm

    I do not think there will be any more tests from China. A suc­cess­ful one is enough to bring the Us back to the negi­o­ti­a­tion table for “restric­tions” on “weaponiz­ing space” (Bush has been refus­ing to coop­er­ate with the world on this mat­ter). In addi­tion, I do think that China is a future strate­gic part­ner of the US, not an enemy.

    Reply
  17. S1to7 says:
    January 21, 2007 at 8:27 am

    See, full of Jealeous and Prejudice and self­ish
    “say if some of this com­mie space trash dam­ages or even kills some­thing or some­one American (Sat, Shuttle, Astronaut,) we places some real sanc­tions on them“
    “How many more ‘tests’ do they have to con­duct to suc­cess­fully block an orbit?”——Why don’t you ask the US gov­ern­ment 20 years ago when they first carry out the satel­lite killing scheme.
    “Wait a minute, I thought we (the USA) were the only ones in the world allowed to do stuff like this??!! I thought space belonged to us?”———American think they are supe­rior, and oth­ers only Apes.
    “I unfor­tu­nately believe that these are small steps that will one day even­tu­ally lead us to go to war with china and also be a set up for the next world war”——What makes you think China will start war? In the past, the European start WWI, Germen Italy and Japan Start WWII, now only US Start War. China, NEVER.
    .……
    .……
    .……
    .…… etc
    Please THINK!!

    Reply
  18. lh9 says:
    January 21, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    Our sys­tem is noth­ing after this test of China.
    The best thing we can do is work with China and don’t involve in the issue related with TainWan.

    Reply
  19. Sam's Club says:
    January 22, 2007 at 3:05 pm

    Hi Men, calm down. Nothing will hap­pen and it is just a test—still at the low level. We, America, did much more than that.……

    Reply
  20. Luckynumber13 says:
    January 24, 2007 at 2:42 pm

    This is all very ridicu­lous. I enjoy brows­ing through news and read­ing the var­i­ous sleght of hand delu­sions that we are fed through the media, but if any decently ratio­nal human being con­sid­ers either China or America or their mate­r­ial wealth(ie satel­lites, weapons) our pri­mary con­cern is sadly “dis­il­lu­sioned”.
    On the first note, American mil­i­tary tech­nol­ogy ren­ders our gov­ern­ment the abil­ity to manip­u­late and con­trol any satel­lite in the sky. If China knocks out ours, we can sim­ply take over theirs or any other for that mat­ter. In fact, some of our most valu­able “extrater­res­trial” assets belong to other nations.
    Secondly, as described in the arti­cle, while our cur­rent active sys­tems rely on satel­lites, our sec­ondary sys­tems are well designed to func­tion in the absense of our cur­rent satel­lite sys­tem.
    Thirdly, our mil­itry and even “non­mil­i­tary” satel­lites pos­sess active weapon sys­tems to tar­get and elim­i­nate any stray debris that might threaten other satel­lites in orbit. The very fact that CHinas mis­sils hit any­thing at all is evi­dence that the US Government allowed it to hap­pen. Don’t for­get that we excer­sise dom­i­nate power in almost every poten­tial the­atre of mod­ern war­fare. Nothing enters or leaves space with­out out our expressed per­mis­sion or our “look­ing the other way.” IF the destroyed satel­lite DOES BY CHANCE bring down an AMerican satel­lite, then it will be a direct result of American accep­ti­bilty.
    Fourth. Our entire global infra­struc­ture is set up entirely con­trary to what we are allowed to see. Our rela­tion­ships with China, Russia, N. Korea, Europe, Iraq/​middleeast, etc. have absolutely noth­ing to do with com­mu­nism, Islamic fas­cism, or national fac­tions fight­ing for global supre­mecy. This is strictly the con­clusin of 100 years of reg­u­lated propaganda…a fact that can be proven thou­sands of times over in a thou­sand dif­fer­ent are­nas. Wake up world. The facts are crys­tal clear and writ­ten upon every aspect of our mod­ern exis­tence. Quit believ­ing what they tell you and start believ­ing what actu­ally makes sense!!!
    Please feel free to email me or to either com­pare opin­ions or to fur­ther seek out the truth. I don’t have all the answers, but I damn sure don’t waste my time with all of the Lies.
    Remember the num­bers 13, 12, 10,9, 11, 32, 33, 96, 666 and 18. You will see alot more of them in the future

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Keep it Simple
      Dear Big Daddy; Your last post is a laugh. You carried 100 lbs for 20 miles?...
      Zandor
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      All the Muslims in the USA should be immediately rounded up and shot. We...
      Zandor
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
      Yeah, and every president since Reagan has proposed a Mars...
      jmatt
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
      Awesome. Now to be a *real* military contract we have to spend $40...
      jmatt
    • Keep it Simple
      Anybody who went to basic training will never forget about weight. Like...
      Big Daddy
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
      It had been a while since I came by the site- and now I...
      Mod
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      In DTI this article is credited to Sharon...
      Wembley
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Jews wasn't a threat for anyone, that's why this was a tragedie
      A.g.
    • Quick-Deploy 120mm Mortar
      The 120 is mounted in the back of a mortar track and...
      SSG Knapp 11C3O
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I am a New Yorker, and have seen the holes in the ground where...
      Sam
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage