- Related Blogs
-
Shooting down satellites with much China-U.S. consternation
February 19, 2008
The SM-3 missile was fired from the USS Lake Erie in the Pacific at about 7:26 PST and collided with the satellite about 130 miles above the ocean, the Pentagon said in a statement.
"Due to the relatively low altitude of the satellite at the time of the engagement, debris will begin to reenter the earth's atmosphere immediately," the statement said. "Nearly all of the debris will burn up on reentry within 24-48 hours and the remaining debris should reenter within 40 days."
"Confirmation that the fuel tank has been fragmented should be available within 24 hours," it added.
However, the Associated Press cited an unnamed defense official close to the situation who said officials monitoring the operation saw what appeared to be an explosion, apparently from the fuel tank.
The Pentagon announced last week that President Bush had decided the Navy would try to shoot down the satellite before it re-entered the Earth's atmosphere because its fuel tank contained approximately 1,000 pounds of hazardous hydrazine.
However, some countries had expressed doubts about the operation, with some such as Russia characterizing the operation as little more than a thinly veiled arms test.
See more CNET content tagged:
missile, debris, satellite, tank, operation
ALSO, THE GUT FEELING IS THAT THE US NAVY IS RUNNING OS/2 WARP LIKE THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DOES FOR THEIR SATELLITE LAUNCH PROGRAMS.
END OF TRANSMISSION.....
COMMANDER_SPOCK
are apparently running on Windows these days. An early version
of the software (Windows for Warships) crippled the USS
Yorktown to the point where it had to be towed back to harbor.
The next time you watch an old war movie like "Sink the
Bismark" think about our ships being "sunk" not by shells from
16 inch guns, but by a malicious email.
http://www.gcn.com/print/17_17/33727-1.html
Please END your transmissions, Commander Spock.
what Russia thinks about it.
hope they have migrated off of that by now as that was a good 10
years ago.
See: "(RUS) Astronauts Training Complex" and "(RUS) Program and firmware set for servicing of the carrier rockets" here:
http://en.ecomstation.ru/solutions/
- If it was too dangerous to allow for re-entry
- by The_Decider February 23, 2008 2:06 PM PST
- Then why in the hell did they launch it in the first place? Isn't that very irresponsible and reckless?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- Hey "The_Decider"!
- by Commander_Spock February 23, 2008 6:12 PM PST
- Would it not be even more "irresponsible and reckless" for the "shepherds to go to sleep" and not care too hoot if the "wolves" came at midnight and devoured the flocks. Did you happen to know anyone who worked at the WTC or at the Pentagon prior to 9/11?
- Like this View reply
Processing -
- not irresponsible
- by dmbyanks05 February 23, 2008 8:53 PM PST
- it was not irresponsible. that is the fuel that is used for sattelites and its was supposed to burn off while in orbit. But since it lost communication after launch it could not take orders on when to use its fuel.... therefor full fuel tank. it was not designed to reign down on people
- Like this View all 2 replies
Processing -
- here is an obvious question for you....
- by mikalg February 24, 2008 6:52 PM PST
- Why would they build the "twin towers" if it was going to be destroyed anyway? 'er trade perhaps?
- Like this
-
(52 Comments)What would have happened if an explosion during launch happened?
Why don't people ask the obvious questions?
Are you serious with your question/statement?
I am beginning to really dislike you and your posts. At least it isn't Anti-MS related!