USN cruiser to shoot down satellite

[Ex-Dragoon]

Where do you guys find these flunkies.....real people don't really believe that shit do they?  :

They find us unfortunately...although they tend not to last thank gawd.

 

[Privateer]

I recall reading articles from a while back about an effort by the USN to convince government that the land-based system of interceptor missiles (for strategic missile defence) was unnecessary, as the Navy could do the job.  Perhaps one factor in this OP was a desire to test that capability?

 

[Flanker]

This is a big one and the US is afraid that some of it could end up in the wrong hands.  It's not a GPS satelite or anything as pedestrian as that.  Secrets, secrets, secrets...

I doubt it.
Any spy satellite has built-in self-destruction mechanisms that are invoked automatically when the launch or mission goes wrong.
Pentagon has recently confirmed this.
The "toxic fuel" hypothesis is also ridiculous as its amount is really small and there have been tens and hudreds of incidents involving launchers and ships using this kind fuel in the past.

So, the only hypothesis left is that U.S. forces want to try its anti-satellite weapon.
It is possible that the "broken" satellite isn't broken at all. It was just a target from the beginning.

 

[Old Sweat]

Flanker, since this satellitte malfunctioned on launch in that contact was lost with it, it would seem possible that the self-destruct mechanism did not work. This negates part, but not all, of your argument. However, a large bit of space junk loaded with highly classified 'stuff' and carrying toxic fuel may well have provided an opportunity for a cover story for an unplanned weapons test. There are too many unanswered questions to state yes or no with any degree of certainty.

Watch and see what the tin foil hat brigade make of this.

 

[Flanker]

Flanker, since this satellitte malfunctioned on launch in that contact was lost with it, it would seem possible that the self-destruct mechanism did not work. This negates part, but not all, of your argument.

Self-destruct systems are autonomous and extremely reliable and they don`t need power nor communications with soil to work properly.
Pentagon is sure about that.
The US government has also denied claims that the main aim of the operation was to destroy secret components on USA 193.
Officials say classified parts would be burned up in the atmosphere and, in any case, that would not be a reason for shooting down the satellite.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7254540.stm

As for other flying debris that might serve as a target, you are right there are a lot of them. However, not all have the required orbits geometry, inclinations, sizes, IR visibility etc.

Do you remember the Columbia shuttle?
It had the same kind of fuel aboard while reentering.
Surprisingly, no concern was expressed.

 

[Flip]

So, the only hypothesis left is that U.S. forces want to try its anti-satellite weapon.

So what? The Chinese recently shot down one of their satellites.
It's ok if the "bad guys" do it but it's not ok if Uncle Sam does it?

 

[Flanker]

Nothing. It is a game.
It is just funny to see how US accused China of space arm escalation etc.
Then, several weeks later, they do just exactly the same thing.

 

[Mike Baker]

Then, several weeks later

You mean more like a year, and then some, right?

 

[Flanker]

You mean more like a year, and then some, right?

Exactly.

 

[NCRCrow]

Send up Clint Eastwood & Tommy Lee Jones like in the movie Space Cowboys to disable the satellite!

send the Algonquin in she could take her..Birds affirm..Birds away..!

 

[CrazyCanuck]

No matter what the motivation; it was still a good excuse to test their Missile Defence capabilities. Whether or not it was intentional or handed to them on a silver platter is besides the point.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Nothing. It is a game.
It is just funny to see how US accused China of space arm escalation etc.
Then, several weeks later, they do just exactly the same thing.

I am so happy you like to see potential adversaries have the same capability that we have. Well done!

Do you remember the Columbia shuttle?
It had the same kind of fuel aboard while reentering.
Surprisingly, no concern was expressed.

I think people were showing more compassion at the death of 7 astronauts.

So, the only hypothesis left is that U.S. forces want to try its anti-satellite weapon.
It is possible that the "broken" satellite isn't broken at all. It was just a target from the beginning.

You do know the primary role pf the SM3 Standard is not an anti satelite missile but that of anti missile defence right?

Flanker here is just the site for you:
http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/index.html

 

[tomahawk6]

The shot did tend to prove that ABM works shutting up some of the critics and reassuring others.

 

[Ender Wiggen]

With regards to American Hypocrisy:
The satellite the Chinese blew up was still in high orbit, meaning the resultant debris field is still a hazard to all other satellites in orbit. Whereas the American Satellite was in a decaying orbit, which means all debris created by the blast are not in a position to harm other traffic and will burn up relatively faster.

 

[DBA]

Also the Chinese did it without any warning and were not very forthcoming about details afterwords. The US informed the world well ahead of time and even released footage of the intercept.

While using some of the same Technology as NMD (National Missile Defence) the weapon used in the intercept is from a different system used for theatre defense and intercepts ballistic missiles during the terminal stage after they reenter the atmosphere. The NMD system intercepts in space well above the atmosphere.

 

[a_majoor]

The technology is now in general service on US ships as well as Japanese Self Defence Force ships. (Oddly, Senator Obama says he will cancell "unproven missile defense technology" if elected. I suppose he means new technologies other than land and sea based interceptor missiles  >)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_re_us/missile_defense_test

Military shoots down missile in test off Hawaii
By AUDREY McAVOY, Associated Press Writer
Fri Jun 6, 4:19 AM ET

The U.S. military intercepted a ballistic missile Thursday in the first such sea-based test since a Navy cruiser shot down an errant satellite earlier this year.

The military fired the target, a Scud-like missile with a range of a few hundred miles, from a decommissioned amphibious assault ship near Hawaii's island of Kauai.

The USS Lake Erie, based at Pearl Harbor, fired two interceptor missiles that shot down the target in its final seconds of flight about 12 miles above the Pacific Ocean.

The target was shot down about 100 miles northwest of Kauai about five minutes after it was fired.

The $40 million test showed Navy ships are capable of shooting down short-range targets in their last phase of flight using modified missiles the service already has, the military said.

The Navy and the Missile Defense Agency have already demonstrated that ships equipped with Aegis ballistic missile defense technology can intercept mid-range targets in midcourse of flight.

The Lake Erie in February shot down a U.S. spy satellite that had lost power and become uncontrollable. Military commanders worried the satellite would break up and spread debris over several hundred miles if it fell to Earth on its own.

The shootdown was the Aegis ballistic missile defense program's first real-world mission.

Rear Adm. Brad Hicks, the program's director, told reporters in a conference call after Thursday's test that the Lake Erie fired two interceptors to increase the probability of interception.

The Navy does that when a target is close to hitting the surface, he said.

Over the next 20 months, the military plans to install terminal-phase missile interception capability on all 18 Navy ships equipped with Aegis ballistic missile defenses, Hicks said.

He said the technology would give commanders more options to defend against missiles, particularly if the Patriot missile defense system — a land-based technology designed to shoot down missiles in their final phase of flight — was unavailable.

"If I don't have a Patriot nearby on a shore station to do a short-range threat, near the defended area, I have nothing," Hicks said. "The flexibility of having a ship to complement the Patriot, or to be there when it can't be, is very high on a warfighter priority."

In the last Aegis missile defense test, in November, the Lake Erie fired two interceptors to destroy two ballistic missile targets simultaneously in space.

That marked the first time the U.S. missile defense system shot down two ballistic missiles at once in space.

In December, a Japanese naval vessel equipped with the Aegis ballistic missile defense system shot down a missile target off Hawaii. Japan became the first U.S. ally to intercept a missile from a ship at sea in that test.

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.

 

[stegner]

I would say this is a proven missile defence technology no?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

True, but it's not surprising. US missile defence systems have been capable of this since the early 1960's.

 

[stegner]

Cool.  Does Canada have the capability to do this?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

No. I suppose it would be possible to refit a TRUMP to fire SM-3/PAC-3 but that would be pretty expensive and they'd need another ship to carry the targetting equipment.

Maybe with DRP.