US to shoot down its own spy satellite
 

First, I didn't know we had missiles with enough range to shoot down a satellite that were public knowledge.

Second, how the hell do you "shoot down" a broken satellite? If a satellite is in a failing orbit, isn't it already "shot down"? What's a missile going to do, make it crash into the earth twice?

My only guess is that they want to ensure it's destroyed completely and decide where and when it hits the earth just for security reasons.

Yeah, I thought anti-satellite missiles were a no-no from some treaty. But, it is pretty reasonable to want to shoot down the satellite for the reasons you mentioned Scott. It would be bad form to have it crash in Beijing.

Maybe they plan to blow it to smitherines?

Well the article says "shoot down". I don't know that we have the technology to just vaporize a satellite. Perhaps they could hit it hard enough to break it in to bits that will be small enough to burn up on reentry?

Or it could just be a good cover for an errant missile to hit Beijing.

That's what I was thinking since the article stated the want to shoot it down outside of the atmosphere.

I think that is the case. This is the satellite filled with some nasty juju and breaking it into small pieces should make it vaporize instead of impacting the earth somewhere like Beijing. ;)

Anti satellite missiles that can be fired from ships is something I hadn't heard of, but other than that, anti satellite missiles have been around for decades

I was in a Naval ROTC in HS and we had a chance to go on a Ballistic missile nuclear sub (SSBN). Each sub carries 12 missiles and each missile has 8 warheads, i believe, each capable of 10 times the power of Hiroshima. They work by shooting into the atmosphere and than breaking apart and they can direct each of the 8 warheads where to go with laser precision. So shooting into space isn't that far fetched.

Space is not the same as orbit or falling out there of. Geostationary satellites orbit at 35,785 km (22,236 miles) above the equator and even LEO (Low Earth orbit) satellites at between 500 and 2000km are 5-20 times higher than the edge of space. Ground based ICBMs stop thrust at or well below 400km and apogee at 1200KM, but are no longer under power at that point.

Thus, they have to modify a pretty big missile to "shoot down" even the lowest flying satellites, but the lowest are also the fastest and thus harder to hit, so it could be interesting considering their poor results shooting down "simulated" ICBMs while still "in space" in the past.

Didn't we have something in the 80's that could be launched from an F-15 that would do this job? Shouldn't be a big deal.....except that if they fail it will look real bad since China proved they could do it already.....

edit: yeah, MikeK got it in his link

Since that system is essentially air-to-air, and since the F15 can launch the missile at 60,000 ft and mach 2, shooting a satellite doesn't sound all that hard. It was the ship born launch of a "modified" SAM that struck me as something that would still be classified.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/14/p...spy-satellite/

One of these days, one of the millions of pieces of junk we're spreading around LEO will punch a nice baseball-sized hole through the space shuttle/station at 15,000mph, and boom (shake shake shake the room).. we'll have a bunch more dead astronauts.

Theres so much crap up there already, I doubt one satellite will make a big difference in the possibilities of stuff ruining the Space Station or Astronauts.

That's like saying that since Lake Erie was already on fire, why not dump more crap in it?

I agree, but more than likely most of the crap will end up in the atmosphere and burn up. There is so much stuff flying around up there it is a little ridiculous already.

Experts Scoff at Sat Shoot-Down Rationale calling it "comedic gold":
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/0...rationale.html

"Our veteran space security specialist believes there are several [real reasons for destroying the satellite]. To him, the satellite shot is a chance for the military to try out its missile defense capabilities; a way to keep secret material out of the wrong hands; and a warning to the Chinese, after they destroyed a satellite about a year ago."

Clearly no one believes this move is the US being good neighbor and cleaning up its broken down junk in space... we're only doing this for political and/or national security reasons.

I didn't say this particular pile of junk would be the one to do it. But it will happen eventually, it's just a matter of time.

Blown up, Sir!

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/0...-pentagon.html

That satellite had to be destroyed because it contained Jumanji and we all know what happened last time someone got a hold of that game!

WTF did you just say:?:

You're weird Joel...

Well, explosions in space are pretty cool. Totally worth the $60M that cost to get that on YouTube.

You were there, don't you remember? You grew a tail... big ass mosquitoes... did you forget everything?