Defunct Spy Satellite Falling From Orbit - AP

[Rusty_Barton]

Can anyone speak to additional details?

Defunct Spy Satellite Falling From Orbit - AP
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h7aoM2ii3QVBCAV8m2HtJSuPxPNwD8UDPFC80

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UDPGFO0&show_article=1

[GW_Simulations]

Probably L-21 (USA-193). Are we aware of anything else that isn't working? (besides TacSat, which isn't exactly big).

BTW, shouldn't this be in news.

[Jim]

GW_Simulations - 26/1/2008  4:28 PM

Probably L-21 (USA-193). Are we aware of anything else that isn't working? (besides TacSat, which isn't exactly big).

L-21 was a Delta II launch, therefore not large

[GW_Simulations]

Jim - 26/1/2008  9:33 PM
L-21 was a Delta II launch, therefore not large

I'd just realised that myself. Still, it depends on who is calling it large.

Best bet will be to watch http://www.reentrynews.com/upcoming.html

[kimmern123]

Norwegian media are now reporting this. As usual with a tone that suggests the end of the world is near and all that. Apparently the satellite will cause catastrophic damage to wherever location it impacts. Apparently some people want to fire missiles at the satelite. However, this would create a lot of orbital debris so I seriously doubt such an approach will be taken.

Let's just say that Norwegian media tends to blow the original AP-stories out of proportions. In other words they're just laughable.

[satcomuk]

I agree about it being USA 193 , which is now down to 285 km or so.

When I imaged it in September 2007 there was no sign of any solar panels. I estimated the size of the object to be 4-5 metres across

This was confirmed when I caught it again in December.

It may well have been intended to be "large" when fully deployed , but I suspect that telemetry was lost in the early stages and the panels were never extended.

This could turn out to be rather embarassing for the DoD.

Will they try and take it out with a passive ASAT strike I wonder ?
The last thing they want is for bits of this bird , no matter how small , to survive re-entry !!

John

[nathan.moeller]

I wouldn't think it would do much damage, if any, if it came down over a populated area.  Remember that Columbia caused only minor damage in a very small number of places in Texas and she was a 120 ft, 100 ton vehicle.  I apologize if that comparison comes across as insensitive.  That's not my intention.

[meiza]

A quick search points out to a 2006 launch. So it never functioned.

[GW_Simulations]

satcomuk - 26/1/2008  11:00 PM

Will they try and take it out with a passive ASAT strike I wonder ?
The last thing they want is for bits of this bird , no matter how small , to survive re-entry !!

It has been mentioned, but I think that it is unlikely, unless they discover that it is heading towards a major population centre, or somewhere else where it could do some damage.

[backspace]

Just curious, why are we thinking it's USA193, other than something else that may have lost contact more recently?

also do we know what size fairing was on the launch? I have noticed it was a 7920, meaning:
The most powerful of the two-stage Delta II 7000 Series rockets, designated Delta II 7920, employs nine GEM's and can carry an 11,330-pound payload to low-Earth orbit using the 9-foot, 6-inch payload fairing.

11,330 is pretty big, non?

Also, I was under the impression that the DoD payloads weren't subject to the debris mitigation controls used on other spacecraft re: survivability of mass...

[satcomuk]

Here's how it looked a couple of weeks back at a height over just over 300 km at a magnification of  approximately 500x.

[braddock]

satcomuk - 26/1/2008  6:00 PM
When I imaged it in September 2007 there was no sign of any solar panels. I estimated the size of the object to be 4-5 metres across

It never fails to amaze me when you casually mention these things....

[Jorge]

satcomuk - 26/1/2008  5:00 PM

Will they try and take it out with a passive ASAT strike I wonder ?

It's about as likely as them sending up a crew of aging ex-astronauts, one of whom just happened to be the designer of its control system, to try to reactivate it.

The last thing they want is for bits of this bird , no matter how small , to survive re-entry !!

The other last thing they want is to create a cloud of orbital debris like the Chinese did last year.

[GW_Simulations]

backspace - 26/1/2008  11:31 PM

Just curious, why are we thinking it's USA193, other than something else that may have lost contact more recently?

The only two satellites that we are aware of being out of control are USA-193, and TacSat-2. TacSat is tiny, so it is no problem, and isn't generally considered a spy satellite, more a technology demonstrator. 193 is also in a very low orbit (<300km), so is subject to more atmospheric friction, and will decay soon.

also do we know what size fairing was on the launch? I have noticed it was a 7920, meaning:
The most powerful of the two-stage Delta II 7000 Series rockets, designated Delta II 7920, employs nine GEM's and can carry an 11,330-pound payload to low-Earth orbit using the 9-foot, 6-inch payload fairing.

It used the extended 10-foot fairing, IIRC.

11,330 is pretty big, non?

Not by NRO standards

Also, I was under the impression that the DoD payloads weren't subject to the debris mitigation controls used on other spacecraft re: survivability of mass...

Not sure, but either way, it is undesirable to leave a cloud of debris in orbit, or to have a large satellite hit a population centre. In the case of NRO, a classified satellite landing near a reporter may also be undesirable.

[kevin-rf]

And who has a working ASAT to carry out such a defensive action?

Lets get real...