| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: US Spy Satellite to be shot down at 12:30 pm Korea time? |
 |
|
http://news.smh.com.au/spy-satellite-could-be-shot-down/20080221-1tju.html
| Quote: |
The US military has opened a window beginning at 1030 Wednesday(1430 AEDT Thursday) to launch a missile to shoot down a failed spy satellite, a military source says.
The Navy plans to launch a missile from a cruiser near Hawaii to destroy the satellite carrying fuel that defence officials believe could be hazardous to humans. A senior defence official said the window of opportunity to launch the missile is "tens of seconds".
The satellite is in low orbit and estimates show it will re-enter the Earth's atmosphere by the first week of March. The Pentagon hopes to destroy the fuel tank before re-entry to minimise the possibility the fuel, called hydrazine, can harm people.
Pentagon officials had said that poor weather and rough waters in the Pacific might have forced a delay in carrying out the strike and there was still no guarantee the launch would go forward.
The Pentagon has estimated that it has until the end of February to carry out a successful launch. The senior defence official said once the satellite begins re-entry it will be impossible to track.
The Navy plans to launch a Standard Missile-3 from the USS Lake Erie stationed off Hawaii using the same system that forms the backbone of the sea-based missile-defence system, prompting speculation that the real reason for conducting the shoot-down was test the adaptability of missile defence for taking out enemy satellites.
President George W Bush's decision to proceed with the intercept has prompted complaints from China and Russia, who worry it marks a step toward the weaponisation of space.
China last year used a missile to shoot down one of its old weather satellites that was in much deeper orbit than the US satellite, generating strong international criticism, including from the United States.
Thousands of pieces of debris from the destroyed Chinese satellite remain in orbit and have to be monitored. The US military hopes that by hitting its satellite in low orbit will send most of the debris to burn up while falling into the atmosphere. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hope this is a resounding success. I don't want flaming toxic poison to rain down on my head, and this is a great opportunity (excuse) to answer China's actions of a year ago.
China has been spying, government computer system hacking, and slyly being aggressive towards the U.S. while generally getting a pass from the international community.
I don't want to see any escalation between the two, but China needs to be kept in its place (and cognizant of where it stands). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lets hope it is successful the US is going to need such a capability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| According to CNN it was shot down over the Pacific Ocean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
In 1989, a U.S. fighter jet destroyed a U.S. satellite by firing a modified air-to-air missile into space from an altitude of 80,000 feet. That adds to evidence that the U.S. acted Wednesday strictly to guard against the prospect of a potential disaster, said Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| At approximately 10:26 p.m. EST today, a U.S. Navy AEGIS warship, the USS Lake Erie, fired a single modified tactical Standard Missile-3, hitting the satellite approximately 247 kilometers (133 nautical miles) over the Pacific Ocean as it traveled in space at more than 17,000 mph. |
Nice shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Next up
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| As if we haven't thrown enough money away on hair brained Republican military schemes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Depends if you want to see Iran out of the strategic picture or not.
If the US has such stuff then it really doesn't matter too much if Iran has nuclear weapons or not. If the the US has them and invests in alternative energy then the US will find negotiating with Iran a lot easier. In fact it would be easy.
Negotiations are easier when you have good cards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matthews_world
Joined: 15 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Next up
|
To be shot up or shot down? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Deployed is the answer.
Shot down?
By who?
Not by Iran.
If China and Russia want to go that way ( I guess they could ) it will take very large investments on their part against something that really doesn't much of a difference in their strategic equation with the US. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Depends if you want to see Iran out of the strategic picture or not.
If the US has such stuff then it really doesn't matter too much if Iran has nuclear weapons or not. If the the US has them and invests in alternative energy then the US will find negotiating with Iran a lot easier. In fact it would be easy.
Negotiations are easier when you have good cards. |
What possible relevance does space-based weaponry have to Iran's possession of nukes? It's not like they have ICBMs, you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Deployed is the answer.
Shot down?
By who?
Not by Iran.
If China and Russia want to go that way ( I guess they could ) it will take very large investments on their part against something that really doesn't much of a difference in their strategic equation with the US. |
Of course it makes a difference to them. That's why they're complaining about it. (And why we complain about it when they start to deploy space-based weapons.)
The obvious concern among nuclear superpowers is that one of them will find a way to launch an uncounterable first strike. That's what China and Russia are worried about -- that the US will develop a way to shoot down their missiles, thereby unbalancing the deterrence equation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Depends if you want to see Iran out of the strategic picture or not.
If the US has such stuff then it really doesn't matter too much if Iran has nuclear weapons or not. If the the US has them and invests in alternative energy then the US will find negotiating with Iran a lot easier. In fact it would be easy.
Negotiations are easier when you have good cards. |
What possible relevance does space-based weaponry have to Iran's possession of nukes? It's not like they have ICBMs, you know. |
Iran will not be able to use the threat of nuclear weapons to shield itself from the consequences of terror.
Iran Iran is big enough for nuclear weapons then they are big enough for this rule. They do a terror attack the US crashes such a weapon right into their nuclear facilities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
