As reported in the press, a Navy Aegis missile cruiser in the Pacific Ocean will try an unprecedented shoot-down of the out-of-control, school-bus-size U.S. spy satellite loaded with a toxic fuel as it begins its plunge to Earth. Marine General James E. Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the Navy missile will be fired as the satellite re-enters the atmosphere and “has a reasonably high opportunity for success.” The Navy has been developing — and has successfully tested — a ballistic missile intercept capability aboard several of its Aegis cruisers and destroyers.
Aegis is an advanced radar/fire-control system that was originally developed to destroy incoming anti-ship cruise missiles. The Navy has 22 cruisers and some 60 destroyers with the Aegis system and between 90 and 122 vertical-launch cells for surface-to-air and Tomahawk land-attack missiles. The Navy is upgrading several of these ships for the ballistic missile defense role.
The three previous spy satellites that fell to earth with nuclear reactors on board were Soviet Radar Ocean Reconnaissance Satellites (RORSAT). The RORSAT was part of the world’s first satellite system orbited for ocean surveillance to detect warships on the high seas. The Soviet Union began tests of the system in 1967 and the first operational RORSATs went into orbit in 1974.
Two types of satellites were used in tandem: Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) satellites that were “passive” and sought to “lock on” to electronic signals emanating from ships, especially radar transmissions. The 18,400-pound EINT satellites became operational about 1970. Pairs of ELINT satellites were coordinated with a single RORSAT, guiding the latter to a suspected target ship. The 10,000-pound RORSAT could then use active radar to precisely locate and target Western warships. Later RORSAT satellites could send targeting data directly to missile-armed ships, surface ships, and submarines as well as to ground stations (as did the early RORSATs).
The power requirements for the RORSAT’s radar was provided by a small nuclear reactor that carried some 110 pounds of enriched uranium (U235) to produce up to ten kilowatts of power for some 90 to 120 days in space. When the service life of these Kosmos-series RORSATs was complete the reactor section carrying the radioactive fuel and weighing about one ton was designed to be boosted into higher orbits — more than 550 miles — where they would circle the earth for more than 500 years and then cause no danger when they did come down and burn in the atmosphere. (They normally orbited at an altitude of about 130 miles.)
But three reactor sections malfunctioned and plunged into the atmosphere: Kosmos 954 in January 1978, with portions of the craft landing in Canada; Kosmos 1402 in February 1983, which fell into the Indian Ocean; and Kosmos 1990 in February 1989. Apparently no significant pieces of the last survived reentering the atmosphere.
No attempt was made to intercept those SPYSAT reactor sections when they plunged to earth.
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
“No attempt was made to intercept those SPYSAT reactor sections when they plunged to earth”
No attempts could’ve been made at the time
This is the most bizarre argument I’ve seen against testing yet.
Posted by: Nessuno at February 19, 2008 05:53 PM
and now my friend?
for some reason, I think a highly combustible substance that will burn up in descent is a better target than a lump of radioactive matter that will be shot into millions of pieces and land god knows where. Plus, you don’t have to pay for the health insurance…
God Evening Folks,
Whats so hard to understand here it called follow the money. The Navy last week place an order with Raytheon for $1.4 Billion for 75 more Standard SM-3 Block IV’s and 27 for Japan.
The Navy is asking for 19 CG(N)2000′s, Missile Defense is the largest single item in the budget.
This will demonstrate to the Russians and Chinese that on call now we can intercept an ICBM in orbit before it re-enters and dispenses its warheads. This could put bach Russian and Chinese ICBM and SSBN misslile development a generation or more.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
To the poster Mr. Byron Skinner: You said:
1) “The Navy last week place an order with Raytheon for $1.4 Billion for 75 more Standard SM-3 Block IV’s and 27 for Japan
2) This will demonstrate to the Russians and Chinese that on call now we can intercept an ICBM in orbit before it re-enters and dispenses its warheads. This could put bach Russian and Chinese ICBM and SSBN missile development a generation or more.”
Uh… is that so? Thanks to a mere “75 + 22 Standard SM-3 Block IV’s” ?
No more all-out launches then?
Great: We’re safe!
Did I read this correctly? I was thinking that this was a redaction from a longer article as the “three previous spy satellites” phrase seems to beg a predicate.
Perhaps Mr. Polmar will amplify?
I must disagree with Vash’s assertion. Anti-satellite capability has existed since the 1960s or so. As a practical matter, the Gemini program could be viewed as demonstrative of this; the difference between a rendezvous and a kill is but a few meters-per-second.
The Air Force worked on several programs throughout the 60s and 70s. In the 80s they successfully tested ASAT (ASM-135) destroying a defunct satellite. The program, being successful, was diddled by Congress and cancelled in 87.
It does concern me that whacking satellites creates a debris hazard for everything else who’s orbit crosses it. The CHICOMs have made a bloody mess of things with their test last year. One need only imagine a stray bolt or nut zipping through the space shuttle or the ISS to understand the problem.
What we need to develop is some sort of tug that can de-orbit the dead bird without fouling the orbit. Or perhaps an onboard failsafe that would quickly de-orbit in the event of loss of comms/control from the ground. Also perhaps a way of blasting itself as it entered the atmosphere to reduce the 1:1,000,000,000,000 chance that little Johnny, Hadji, or Kwong will be whacked by an errant hydrazine tank.
In any event, this will be good experience for the SM3 guys.
Cheers,
Chief B.
Good Morning freefallingbomb,
Lets see, the Chinese have naybey 20 warheads for land based ICBM’s that are currently detached from a missile and in long term storage, last fall the Russians reduced there underground silos from 44 to 39 and there next generation ICBM by Putin’s own admission won’t come on line till around 2020 and it doubtful that the Russians at this time have any operational warheads. Oh and did I mention that neither Russia or China has an operational SSBN. All of these numbers are varafiable on several web sites.
Any ICBM’s from North Korea, Iran or any other non friendly is in the purely myth.
I would say that 75 Standard Missiles dedicated to missile defense is more then plenty. It’s time to shut down the land based interceptors and cut the corporate/defense welfare to Boeing.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
“a) It contravenes the “Outer Space Treaty” (not that U.S. American politicians give a wet damn about any “treaties”…),”
No, it doesn’t. The “Outer Space Treaty” only bans placing nuclear weapons in orbit. This is a common misconception about the treaty.
“b) the debris from successful hits spreads out and becomes harder to track, while also presenting a hazard to other satellites and spacecraft,”
This can be a problem, but breaking up the satellite apparently will accelerate the orbital decay of most components by changing the mass:drag ratio. Stuff kicked into a higher orbit by the impact is another story, of course.
“c) the net result of a hit would be that you still had the same amount of mass at exactly the same speed going in roughly the same direction, but after one or two (or centuries of…) orbits it would all be coming down in lots of different places, depending on the drag coefficient of each fragment.”
Again, your physics are off slightly. The objective here is to break up the structure so that the hydrazine disperses and combusts on re-entry. Breaking up the structure is also going to make most of it re-enter faster by increasing the drag:mass ratio of the components.
My apologies for spelling and grammer due to not enough time and a desire to post before this test.
This is a dual purpose test which will btw succeed. This is based upon a very successful comprehensive BMD system (development program).
Mr Skinner made a valid point. There was a paper put out last year which describes how the system as is, degrades offensive nukes. With the US precision strike capability (if used first) coupled with the low grade (exageration) BMD has made nuclear war unfeasible for enemies (sorry friends who steal and contribute actively to our demise using Walmart and Oil) I know – no politics.
Should this succeed and my bet based on the past is that it will.
btw:The US developed systems for F-15/F-16 for this AS purpose. With the SM3 great. I can’t wait to be able to talk about what is coming in this technology and what strides have been made.
Have a great evening. Do you think the Pentagon caused the Lunar Eclipse?
To “Chief B”: You wrote:
1) “It does concern me that whacking satellites creates a debris hazard for everything else who’s orbit crosses it. The CHICOMs have made a bloody mess of things with their test last year. One need only imagine a stray bolt or nut zipping through the space shuttle or the ISS to understand the problem.”
There are already 600.000 MAN-MADE pieces of debris larger than 1 centimeter orbiting around Earth, threatening all Space travel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_debris
But how many of these were made in China, by the “CHICOMs”? Blaming the foreigners and (YAAAWN !) the “Commies” again for everything from a slumping dollar to Global Warming and now even for “Space pollution”, U.S. American?
2) “What we need to develop is some sort of tug that can de-orbit the dead bird without fouling the orbit.”
Maybe something with the contours of an underused “Space Shuttle” that forces each nation that litters Near Space with car uh… spacecraft wreckages to pick them up again and to stuff them for example into the Sun, to keep our Solar System tidy? (Would alternatively cheap, sunlight-seeking strap-on boosters not solve the problem?)
To the poster Greg: You said: “For those of you who say if we miss that we are behind china, did you consider that the chinese launched a 3 stage rocket that is designed to lift a payload to space and can’t redibly be erected, while we are launching a missile from a ship which is always ready and easily pre-positioned…
Do you guys get my point?”
1) No, I don’t. The “S.M.-3 Standard Missile” has a ceiling of between 160 kilometers and 240 kilometers, depending on your sources. The Chinese however shot down their own weather satellite at 865 kilometers altitude:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test (third line from above)
Are you sure you aren’t comparing the incomparable?
Plus: Since when does size matter in the Military, except perhaps for Roman catapults? Why on Earth should the Chinese or anyone else build “sea-worthy A.S.A.T. systems”?? Are they out to besiege someone? What truly matters is that the VERY FIRST Chinese A.S.A.T. test in History was successful – let’s see about the next (yes, and nth…) U.S. American test.
And land-based A.S.A.T. and A.B.M. systems, especially when stationed deep inside the Asian land mass, are INFINITELY better protected against any conventional attacks than those U.S. SURFACE (!) vessels, upon whose shoulders part of the U.S. American anti-missile-shield also rests! (But maybe U.S. American destroyers are unsinkable too)
2) “I think the point is more that if you mess with our satellites with your hard to set up rocket which coincidentally would be probably picked up by satellite anyways, we are saying that we can reach out and touch their satellites with no for warning”
a) “Hard to set up rocket”, huh?! I could swear that all the U.S. “Intelligence” agencies including the satellite operators snorted loud and chomped in their sleep while the Chinese successfully destroyed their first satellite! (Do that a lot of times)
b) Count slowly together with me: I think that at the Present it will take the U.S. Americans one… two… THREE (!!!) warships to knock down one dead U.S. American satellite.
c) It seems that the U.S. Americans still belong to the stupid minority of people who really believe that the “Reds” are out there to EAT them… (sigh)
d) Shoot down a Russian or Chinese satellite yourself and be prepared to fend off their entire nuclear arsenal, inside the atmosphere, outside it, above the ground, above the water and below it, and all of it arriving together!
(Hey: Maybe you win!!)
Good Evening Folks,
Well it worked (22:46 EST) and the world didn’t come to an end. One aspect of the use of the Standard 3 is that it will soon be able to be fire from U.S. Virginia Class attack submarines. Alreadt successful intercepts have been made from the vertical launch tubes of Sidewinder and Sparrow AA missiles, the Standard is due to be tested this year.
The Ages problem is dealt with by slaving off from sea and land based systems to the underwater launch platform. This will give a new deminision to ABM defense. The surface ships can bee seen but it’s a whole new game with the subs.
I don’t think this is the begaining of nuclear disarmenment but rises the bar for Russia and China. I’ll drink to that.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Looks like a good kill for the Navy! Waiting to see the details…
For our colleague freefallingbomb:
My dear naive young friend, your ignorance is a refreshing! Not the first inkling of how orbital mechanics work, no understanding of how many “deck scrubbing” Sailors are involved in a missile shoot (or how quickly Charlie Noble gets out the scuttlebutt on what the ship is doing), not a thimble-full of understanding of the size of the U.S. economy nor of how small the Defense budget is vis-as-vis social welfare programs, and a stunning ignorance of world history and Communism’s bloody part in it.
But who am I to argue against the wisdom of university academics who’ve never done a damned thing but go to school? Surely by now they’ve managed to completely revise the history of the purges, pogroms, re-education camps, gulags, and mass graves. Surely by now Stalin, Mao, and Uncle Ho have been thoroughly rehabilitated. I imagine that they now toil ceaselessly to reveal Sadam Hussein as a great thinker, benevolent leader, and victim of U.S. aggression.
The trillions we’ve “wasted” on the military over the last century has ensured that you can sit there in front of your computer, use the internet, and bad mouth America.
I’d try to explain this a bit further but you strike me as an arrogant little sod and you likely already know everything.
Please forgive me if I’ve hurt your feelings, undermined your human worth, or have otherwise tortured or scarred you for life.
Cheers,
Chief B.
Re: freefallingbum
As a European, you have Americans to thank for your freedom to natter away here in peace. No thanks necessary. Our fathers and grandfathers fought to save your fathers and grandfathers because it was the right thing to do. For the most part, your elders were at least grateful for the American blood shed for them.
Rest assured that we’ll do it again for your sorry asses should the need again arise. We’re just a little nostalgic and loyal that way. And, besides, we like a good Donnybrook now and again. Younger Europeans, on the other hand, like to stir the pot, talk shit, and complain.
That you’d come here to stir that pot, talk a lot of (ill-informed, ignorant) shit, and complain is expected.
Kilo mike alpha, out.
Chief B.
I thought they had already tested this system… I’m sure I heard an anit-ballistic missile weapon was launched last year.
To my knowledge it’s the same thing, anti-sat and anti-ICBM, at least in the apogee and re-entry targeting phases.
You still need the same manouvering/control capability (very little atmosphere at this altitude) and the speeds are similar.
At these speeds you actually also enter general relativity effects (bending of space-time). Designing control and sensor systems for stuff like this is very challenging.
Anyway.. we drop a JDAM on our downed aircraft… why not do it with our satellites too. Keeps prying eyes away! (since as it is well known, the Chinese can’t think of anything new themselves… ie. buying Russian carriers etc.)
Re: vstress
There are a few cardinal differences between the ASAT and ABM missions:
The ABM mission in an operational environment will always be a hurry up game. The ABM shooter must be cued to the launch, detect the missile or reentry body, figure out the firing solution, and get the ABM bird(s) in the air within a rather narrow launch window.
The ASAT mission has the luxury of targeting something whose orbit is very predictable and a good deal larger than the reentry body of a ballistic missile. US193 was like the size of a school bus whereas an ICBM reentry body is roughly a man-sized cone. Moreover, the ICBM might deploy decoys or other devious tricks to throw off the ABM shooter.
Not to make light of what the Raytheon and Aegis fellas have done here. This was something for which they had precious little time for which to plan and execute. (NB: This ought to be a lesson for the naybobs and numbskulls who think that every defense program should be buggered for a decade. The Kelly Johnson approach of “give me your requirements and my budget and then leave me the hell alone for a little while.”)
Aegis and Standard were neither designed nor intended to shoot satellites. These fellas had to rewrite, test, test again, and then upload to the ship the software that allowed SPY to acquire, track, and shoot the satellite. Not to mention reconfiguring the birds.
This is a very significant achievement indeed!
Cheers,
Chief B.
Good Morning freefallingbomb,
It appears freefallingbomb that you have droped another dud, thud. I always know when I get right when folks who lack the guts to us there own name come out with a such reactions as yours.
So go back in your hole and wait for the next post. maybe you will come closer to getting it right.
Sierra Alpha Tango.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
I heard today that the satellite was successfully destroyed by a missile.
That reminds me so much of a science fiction book that was published last year called Moon over Key Biscayne. – A light novel that gets into satellites and objects on a collision course with Earth.
Therefore, I diligently practiced the level to promote, only then promote only then can help me to save many cheap 2moons gold.
I have seen level 100 players do it. Life is not fair and not everyone is mean the maple mesos.